You realize that in addition to requesting subjective assessments with minimal guidance, you are taking multiple characteristics (collectability, quality of construction, performance, etc.) and requesting a grouped rating. This would, in many cases need to be evaluated not only maker by maker, but model by model.
I'll speak my peace on my own humble beasts and step aside to admire the fine storm it looks like you're kicking up. I'd like to think the Raleigh Super Course (my pride and joy) would sneak into the 3 category. The Grand Prix, Follis 072, and Dunelt Racer stand defiantly as 4's with a little bit of attitude.
Toiling vainly in the mediocrity of 3rd class (on a good day) citizenry,
> Often times we get on the subject of a really
> bike (Hetchins, Masi, Peugeot, etc) and have very
> in-depth exchanges of information that add to our
> knowledge of these bicycles.
> I know there are "Rolls Royce" cycles such as Rene
> Herse and Alex Singer that are, for the most part,
> of one's consideration when purchasing a vintage
> due to the hefty price tag that they bare.
> There are so many quality bicycles from all over the
> world. But it appears the "big four" are: France,
> Great Britain, Italy, and the U.S.
> Now if we were to take the bicycles researched and
> discussed on CR as well as the hundreds of builders
> that appear on the CR website, and put them into
> "tiers" how would they stack up?
> I know every single person on the list would have a
> different order and it would be incredibly time
> consuming to try to do this. But I think it would
> provide us with a general consensus of what the CR
> list members consider "top tier" as well as "no
> comment" classic cycles.
> The other thing I would like to see out of these
> is where Masi would fit in. Why Masi specifically?
> Because it seems to be the most discussed bicycle on
> the list.
> So here are your tiers:
> 1. TOP TIER: An absolute classic in every way; a
> total rarity; a machine constructed to the highest
> possible standards. One of the most desirable
> to collectors as well as curators.
> 2. UPPER TIER: A well constructed machine; very
> a collector's bike, but not as rare as TIER 1.
> 3. MID TIER: A classic bicycle with some defining
> features, but mid-level components.
> 4. LOWER TIER: A bicycle within the time line of
> group with low-end components and worth mainly what
> is worth to the owner.
> I know this is a "tall order" to fill, but where
> the bikes we discuss fit in and for what reasons?
> Ted Baer
> Palo Alto, CA
> Classicrendezvous mailing list
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.