Mark,
Well this looks like a good spot to jump in. I've been busy today (imagine that) and I haven't had time to digest the topic until now. I just finished my evening errands; just bought two dozen Krispy Kreme donuts (1 doz. glazed, 1 doz. assorted) for a birthday party tomorrow and now I've got a few minutes before I shave my legs for the first time in about 10 years. Something strange must be going on since normally I don't ride enough to go through the trouble. I'm kinda the opposite of Richie in that I'm a framebuilder that happens to ride.
In responce to your wondering what one such as myself is thinking while reading the exchanges on classic or not classic; I would expect each one of us to have a different reaction. At the "artist level" so to speak, we are all different. We're doing different things and for different reasons. As time passes I realize more each day that what I'm doing here is not the same thing as what others may be doing elsewhere. I also feel that my situation is somewhat unique, just like me.
So for starters, I'm at the point where it doesn't matter to me in the least wheather my current (or even my past work for that matter) is considered "classic" or "classic inspired". They're just words to me. I believe I know pretty much where my work fits in and wheather it is art or not. To me it is art. A bicycle frame is in fact a metal sculpture; but it has a function as well. That precise thing is why I (just by accident) happen to be here. In the early 70's when as fledgling framebuilders we Americans began to learn what we are now calling "classic framebuilding methods", we were inspired and/or trained to do things mostly by hand and with a certain amount of "style" and level of workmanship. At that time that is what it took to produce a frame that we now consider classic.
Naturally, the industy had to "progress" or die, in that in order for companies to continue to exist they had to keep the market expanding and the bicycle "evloving" to have customers. 99.999% of the bicycle industry is business. What "art" was in the bicycle industry rapidly faded away after the introduction of the investment cast lug. That is not to say that artistic frames can not be made with investment cast lugs; they most certainly can and the new Pacenti lugs are helping that cause. As a small framebuilder, one has to somewhat keep pace with "modern trends" if one must sell a certain number of frames per year to survive. The smaller your production numbers the more likely one can survive and not have to chase trends that you do not agree with. In my case painting has been a lifesaver (and a curse at times) because it allowed me to survive during the early years of alternative materials when it wasn't all that easy to sell expensive steel frames. During those times and other times in the past I still made it through even though there were some years that saw only one or two frames (and I mean that literally; 1984 2 frames, 1999 1 frame. I've built 40 frames since the beginning of 1995). Now, for the same reason, I have been able to resist building frames with extended head tubes because I feel first they are not neccessary and second they are offensive to my eye. Since I'm an artist and not a businessman, I afford myself that luxury because it pleases me. Extended head tubes are not "classic" either; not that it matters to me beyond I have decided a while ago that for the rest of my career I'm going to build frames in the "classic" style because that is what I do best. That is what makes me an individual and from a business standpoint it is a niche that isn't occupied by many; perhaps no others. The replica idea is a "bad business" plan but in terms of what will come of it I suspect the bikes will be "interesting". If the bikes are interesting then my life is interesting. It's that simple on this end.
So the bottom line on what my opinion of what is classic and what isn't or what is "classic" or "classic inspired" I cannot nor will not say. In addition, whatever you all settle on is fine with me. Call a Rivendell a classic, include it on the list, it dosen't bother or offend me in any way. Leave them out if you want to, I will not argue or have hurt feelings. I know what I like and what is classic to me and I'm not concerned enough about it to debate it. In so far as how one classifies my current work; again that's their business. I'm building them exactly the way they were built in my days at Wizard Cycles only with an additional 28 years experience. I'm using the same lugs, dropouts, crowns, and BB shells that we were using in those days except I now have a MUCH bigger collection of goodies. I'm using early 70's Reynolds and Columbus tubing, mitering by hand, making hand made seat stay caps, using Easy-Flo 45 silverbraze, and working off of full scale drawings just like I always have. Still using real Imron too. Very little has changed. I don't know how to classify that. Other than the workmanship, it might as well have been made in 1973. So what do you call it? Answer; who cares? Call it whatever you want; doesn't bother me. I know what it is, that's all that matters on this end.
I appreciate your pitch for us old timers Mark, but I'm not too worried about where things fall in. They're just bike frames at this point. Throw some parts at them and jam it between your legs. Doesn't matter to me how to label it.
Crap! It's late.......and I've got a date with a razor!
Brian Baylis
La Mesa, CA