Re: [CR]1983 (then comes 1984, 85,86 ,87............. 2003)


Example: Racing:Roger de Vlaeminck

To: bhorton@brickerhaven.com
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 08:04:51 -0400
Subject: Re: [CR]1983 (then comes 1984, 85,86 ,87............. 2003)
From: Richard M Sachs <richardsachs@juno.com>
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

snipped: <bhorton@brickerhaven.com> writes: "While many may cherish the notion that elegance is wrapped in a fine steel bike from the early 1970's..."

elegance is wrapped in a fine steel bike from early 2003!!!!!!!!!! e-RICHIE chester, ct

On Mon, 2 Jun 2003 21:16:16 -0700 (PDT) Brett Horton <bhorton@brickerhaven.com> writes:
> IMHO, 20 years distance is an adequate time margin to begin accessing
> the relative historical merits of a given bike or component: Close
> enough in time to have direct attachment, long enough to form
> perspective. By freezing the timeline of this lists focus to
> pre-1983 I can't help but parallel the notion of a group of the
> ruling elite in the 1700's thumping down an edict saying all the
> worlds great art was created before 1650 and anything subsequent was
> rubbish.
>
> In looking at the normal flow of posts to this list, one could
> surmise the whole vintage world is between 1963 and (now) 1983.
> Sure, there is the occasional tangent discussion about bikes from
> the 1950's. However, meaningful discussions about bikes from the
> 1910's through the 1940's are far and few between. Why aren't there
> discussions from this time period? (Aside from the fact that most
> people who actively rode during this period are either not hooked up
> to the internet or are now dead.) Why? Because by and large we are
> all collectively strolling down are own memory lanes from our
> teenage years. Guess what? We are all going to get older and the
> next generation of kids will be strolling down their own memory
> lanes replete with early generation index shifting and carbon fiber
> epoxy wonder bikes. Don't believe me? Try reading some of the French
> periodicals from the early 1960's harking back to the more
> "romantic", "real" cycling times before the war, "before
> derailleurs."
>
> How about acknowledging the wonderful evolution in the road bike
> that we have all had the opportunity to witness first hand? Look at
> how frame materials and nearly every component on the bike has
> morphed. It seems like every few months there is a new gimmick,
> sometimes driven by hype, other times by quality design. (Quite
> similar to the late 1800's/early 1900's) While many may cherish the
> notion that elegance is wrapped in a fine steel bike from the early
> 1970's, I dare say this notion will have moved a bit by 2023. I can
> assure you just as many people presently on this list drooled as
> teenagers about the new shiny 1970 Colnago, kids today are wetting
> themselves over the newest latest and greatest wonder ride and will
> want it NOS 20 years from now.
>
> Cycling is evolving and thank heaven for the evolution and the
> innovations. Given the short production life of todays bikes and
> components, just think what hell kids of today are going to have
> when they decide in 25 years that they want to repurchase the bike
> of their teenage dreams. Imagine the wild discussions on this list
> 20 years from now as the kids of today try to sort out what
> components, tires, saddles, etc were on XX brand bike "back in
> 2003."
>
> Perhaps keep in mind that its better to have the evolving history
> preserved, even if the history occurs after you are dead. "Vintage"
> is a relative term.
>
>
> Brett Horton
> San Francisco, CA