Our vintage stuff is heavier and, sniff, doesn't shift or stop as well. (Group hug?) Who brought this up again?
But older stuff works *nearly* as well and for much longer with cheaper spare parts. Also our purty old junk isn't depreciating.
For actual advantages I think 25+ yr old touring bikes are more robust and easier to fix, with a more comfy ride - some clear advantages in their round, small-diameter steel tubes and simple components. With racing bikes I know that 70s bikes often had lighter rims and tires: Fiamme ergals w/ Clement Criterium Setas are lighter than today's $2000 carbon wheels. Also some of the other parts from the 70s and early 80s were the lightest ever (Jubilee ders, Kronos levers, Hi-E hubs....) Old school steel frames w/ 1" top tubes -- sometimes more compliant and comfortable for long distances. What else? Toe clips - more secure for trackies. Q-factor - lower back then. Steel forks - sometimes more compliant than carbon and sometimes they track better at the limit.
For retro races I say look no further than the very strict UCI hour record. Even Eddy's bike in '72 BARELY qualifies. Those obsolete spoked wheel/drop bar bikes that are eligible today clearly have at least a 5 kph disadvantage.
Jack Bissell, wary of anyone in bikedom with too strong an opinion in Tucson, Az
On Tuesday, May 11, 2004, at 10:49 AM, Chuck Schmidt wrote:
> This morning riding my Draisienne on the bike path I passed all these
> young pups on their 16 pound plastic fantastic wonder bikes and their
> circus clothes. Blew them all into the weeds. When I stopped at the
> liquor store all these guys said how kewl my bike was. Must have been
> the hand rubbed oak glistening in the morning sun!!!
> Draisiennes RULE!!!!
> Chuck Schmidt
> South Pasadena, Southern California
> ps Found out last night while watching the Antiques Road Show that I
> ruined the collector value of my Draisienne by removing the ugly black
> original finish from the oak. Drattts!
> Richard M Sachs wrote:
>> there have been two tons of improvements.
>> as long as the masses avail themselves of it,
>> the playing field is even. that's why no one who
>> earns a living in the (any) sport uses dated tech-
>> chester, ct
>> Chuck-issimo queried:
>> So there has been _no_ improvement in the bike and its
>> Out for a ride on my draisienne then...
>> Chuck Schmidt
>> South Pasadena, Southern California
>> Curt Goodrich wrote:
>>> (cut) In my opinion, using
>>> what pro riders ride as a barometer of progress is misguided. It's
>>> stated all too many times. Riders ride what they are paid to ride.
>>> Manufacturers make things to sell. Manufacturers sponsor riders to
>> sell the
>>> stuff they make. Are we still together here?