Also agree with John that the analogy between vintage bikes and vintage skis is more aesthetic and breaks down in performance terms.
There is just much less performance difference in bikes from 1973 and 2008, 35 years. Certainly the lower weight of current wonder bikes allow faster climbing to a degree that is noticeable in racing. And current aero wheels can allow slightly higher cruising speeds in in fast flat riding at speed, possibly noticeable even in a bunch if you spend any time on the front. And it's true that current STI/Ergo shifting will allow a rider more quick adjustments to help stay with an intense paceline.
But I have to say that in my own canyon climbing I don't notice going slower than my fast friends next to me on their current production lightweights at 5 pounds less--and when I can't keep up on climbs that's not the reason. I also notice that when I join a fast group ride among friends with low spoke count wheels and STI/Ergo, I'm not off the back because I'm shiting N.R. on the down tube, and I stay with the group just fine taking my turns at front. My vintage equipment doesn't prevent me from doing what I want to do and whatever the others are doing on their current equipment.
However, if I took my vintage (still in wide use in 1973?) Head Standards with Cubco bindings out for a ski day with friends at the resort, I know there are places I couldn't follow them and things I couldn't do because of the skis themselves. This is true even for an expert skiing with intermediate skiers of less skill. And like John says, I'd be taking a much bigger risk with my knees because of the bindings limitations. This is not to say that vintage skis aren't fun in their own way. I've had a couple fun runs on my late 1930s Austrian/Vermont wood skis with screwed on steel edges, and Dovre cable bindings, and vintage boots lace up leather boots designed for the skis. But boy was it like driving a Model T. This doesn't mean that there isn't some skier out there who could shred on these skis and keep up with me on current models, but just that any given skier will give up huge measures of performance on vintage skis. This is true of Nordic skis too--I don't take out my Asnes tur-langrenn skis because I don't want to break of the tips (as wood skis are wont to do) but also because pine tar bases aren't fast enough for me anymore.
But vintage skiing has become important in indirect ways. Telemark skiing re-emerged in the late 20th C. and you could see folks at Alta and Crested Butte bending their knees on freeheel bindings and skinny skis that were considered out-moded at the time (70s). That's when I took up Telemark skiing at Alta, and despite how fun it was then on Asolo Snowfield boots, three pin bindings, and stiff narrow Rossi mountaineering skis, there is no question that every innovation in Telemark gear since then has allowed skiers to do different things than they could before. Whereas current race bikes don't allow you to do different things than old race bikes, but allow small margins of improvement in certain aspects of cycling.
For a time when I couldn't afford buckle up leather Telemark boots, I skied on vintage leather Alpine ski boots which were tall and stiff. I used a bench vice to teach the thick boot sole to bend in the right place and they made great Telemark boots and fit the 75mm cable bindings I used then. When I replaced them with plastic T2 Telemark ski boots in 1997, I admit I didn't not feel a huge difference in performance--they didn't allow me to do different things than I was doing on the 30 year old boots. (Although the new ones were warmer, and my fingers no longer cracked from hauling on laces to get them tight enough.) Skis are a different from boots altogether, and new shaped skis since the 90s have created fundamental changes in ski technique, Telemark and Alpine.
But even then, the newest skis aren't always my favorites. I have a dumpster find pair of skis from the 90s that were nothing special and seem narrow and low tech by todays standards but I prefer them for powder and trees, and even enjoy them even on ice and at speed, resort or backcountry. So newer fancier skis sit in the garage.
Then too I routinely ski with decades-old thrift-shop ski-poles. Current offerings have all the advantages but I don't notice the difference in use.
Mitch Harris Little Rock Canyon, UT
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:22 PM, dan kasha <dankasha@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have been meaning to ask this question for a long
> time. I have a few vintage bikes that I really like
> riding. I also have many sets of vintage skis and
> bindings that I also enjoy using. The question to the
> list is this. What makes bikes so desired, but other
> sports less so?
>
> An old Marker Simplex releasing toe I think is as
> interesting as an old campy record derailleur. The
> feel of an old ski is much like an old bike. Not
> likely to win the TdF, but can be a hoot to ski and
> can keep up with the best - it is about the skier as
> much or more than the ski, just as with the bikes.
>
> But bike stuff really has a following and a
> desireability. But other sports, beautiful NOS
> equipment sometimes goes unsold. Why? Is it the age
> of the sport, is it the large diversity of components?
> Is it the world wide access to the sport? Oh, yeah,
> safety. But an old bike has issues too, and those old
> bindings, some of them, were great.
>
> Other sports that don't get much interest must be out
> there too.
>
> Anyway, just been wondering, and I hope this is not a
> stretch of the subject.
> Dan Kasha
> Seattle Wa
> PS Last night was a great night skiing on old Olin
> Mark IV's with Look 77 bindings and straps.
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/