Would a vintage bike be practical

outfox

I've managed to convince myself that there's an opening in the fleet for another bike. n+1 etc. Thinking of getting an 80s vintage steel racer. Or 90s. I have a few queries, and would appreciate any advice.

1. Are the gears, brakes etc. reliable on such bikes, and as smooth/effective as modern ones?
2. In the event that gears, brakes, BB, wheels, forks, etc. needed to be replaced, do modern parts fit?
3. How practical would it be to use such a bike on club spins, what with the shifters being on the down tube?

I've heard that a steel frame gives a good ride, so I'm not really worried about the frame. More the moving parts. Any advice appreciated.

eeeee

I have 4 that work. Sometimes :rolleyes:

1. The brakes, gears and such are not anywhere near as smooth as a modern bike. I do about 200k per week in winter and 300k in summer on a 70's steel Peugeot. Modern bike is a lot more comfortable. On said Peugeot is a 5 speed freewheel, 22 to 11 with a 54 big 39 small in front. It's 16kg weight. Which is fine for flat spins but murder to climb on. I always thought I was a **** climber until I tried 11sp Ultegra on a carbon frame. Modern bike was orders of magnitude more comfortable, smoother, faster and just better at that. I flew up hills, well flew for me! I got to the top about mid group where on old steel bike (Henri) I am pretty sure I would have to get off and walk. But it's good training though right?!! Modern bikes feel like pushing air to me though which is deadly.

2. Do modern parts fit? Sometimes, depends on age. My 70's machines have centre pull brakes and French threaded Hubs on 27" wheels which do not fit modern parts. They are pretty but stainless steel wheels do not brake in the wet. I wore the soles out of my shoes stopping. Also if you want to put a 10 sp cassette on you will need to widen the rear triangle and change your chainrings as the chain on the 5 speeds is thicker than a modern one, they look a lot like track chains. Unless the down tube shifters are indexed you an accommodate more gears if there's a good range in them. My 80's/90's frame is more accommodating on threading f the freewheel. 700cc wheels look a bit small in the frame though. But practically give you way more tyre options. In 27" you have conti ultra sports or schwalbe marathons pretty much. And some slick Michelins. So no puncture protection but faster rolling and no tan sidewall or bulletproof. Also cotter pins are a pain in the hole. It will rattle. Pretty much all the time from somewhere non lethally (That could be more to do with my maintenance skills than anything else though :pac:).

3. I am very used to downtube shifters as every bike I rode for the last 10 years+ have them and you get an instinct for where your shifter should be. However the modern machine is a million times easier, but practice will sort you there.

My steel bikes are A LOT less comfortable to the carbon one I borrow and an ali frame with a carbon fork and seat stays I tried. They are heavier and slower. A lot slower depending on the bike.

Now none of my bikes are decent tubing so the above may not be a fair reflection of steel-y goodness. The are so, so tough. I got hit by a car in one. The aluminum back wheel disintegrated and the derallieur/outer bits were mashed but the frame is millimeter perfect. they can carry a lot of weight. I'm 60kg and I have carried up to 4 and a half stone with it on the steelies and they're fine. Steel wheels though. One out of true never true again. My lovely stainless steel 37 year old back wheel has been through 3 LBS and are untrue-able so I have to have the (pretty useless) brakes fairly open to stop rub, which is a pain when I put new pads in.

They look absolutely beautiful though, are super easy to maintain or do anything with (greasing big bearings is about it bar regular bike stuff). They're kind of indestructible unless rust gets in on them.

Although all the above could be negated by getting a real, proper performance old frame. None of mine are high end, and I think that's the biggest end of it.

Ultimately they're lovely and I will always love Henri, Rosalind, Benny, Rosa and Daisy :pac: .

ETA on the down tube shifters, they're grand in all situations except, I suspect rollers. Got given a winter rollers program and terrified of the gear changing when I get to it :eek: But with practice I'm sure it'll be fine……I hope :eek:

Eamonnator

I have a late eighties steel frame. I put all modern components on it, including carbon forks. There are a couple of problems. Old bikes have 1 inch headsets, modern forks can sometimes be hard to source, at reasonable price. Old steel bikes have a different spacing at the rear dropout, can be rectified, without much hassle.

Eamonnator

My steel bike is really comfortable and nice to ride, but I think the carbon forks help in that respect.

eeeee

Mine are steel forks and not comfy. I upgraded from cotton tape to gel though and that's made a big difference.

Another thing that's awkward is moving your saddle around, It's awkward on the old pugs I have and if you need a seat post good luck! They're an awkward size and impossible to get reasonably. But unless it's an old Peugeot you'll have more options I think.

Wishbone Ash

outfox wrote: »

...3. How practical would it be to use such a bike on club spins, what with the shifters being on the down tube?....

Your club mates would consider it ultra cool old skool stylel! One of the great things about watching pro racing coverage in the old days was seeing riders changing gear.

gadetra wrote: »

...22 to 11 with a 54 big 39 small in front. It's 16kg weight. Which is fine for flat spins but murder to climb on...

:eek: I'd say the 39/22 has more to do with the difficulty in climbing than the weight!

Seweryn

gadetra wrote: »

I have 4 that work. Sometimes :rolleyes:

1. The brakes, gears and such are not anywhere near as smooth as a modern bike.


Although all the above could be negated by getting a real, proper performance old frame. None of mine are high end, and I think that's the biggest end of it.

Regarding the operation of the brakes, I see nothing wrong with my old steel bike. They actually work better than on my everyday "modern" bike. The main reason may be the fact that the modern machine gets hammered all the time and the cables are not as smooth, etc.

The gears also work very well, can't fault them in any way. It is an 8-speed Shimano system with down tube shifters.

And I like the comfortable ride on the bike as well. It possibly depends on the bike, but I see nothing worse than on my modern bike...

Handling - still, I would say very good. The modern bike may be stiffer in places, but if you are not a pro, you will never notice. And the bike feels like it wants to go faster than you can push it, and I never though I would be any slower on my steel bike than on the modern one.

I would say a lot depends on the condition of the bike and the components. If you take an old bike in as new condition technically, you will find nothing wrong with it. Get used to it and ride it, that is all.

I can't comment regarding the club rides, as I don't do any. I ride that bike with friends very occasionally (and they would be on old steel bikes as well).

eeeee

Seweryn wrote: »

Regarding the operation of the brakes, I see nothing wrong with my old steel bike. They actually work better than on my everyday "modern" bike. The main reason may be the fact that the modern machine gets hammered all the time and the cables are not as smooth, etc.

The gears also work very well, can't fault them in any way. It is an 8-speed Shimano system with down tube shifters.

And I like the comfortable ride on the bike as well. It possibly depends on the bike, but I see nothing worse than on my modern bike...

Handling - still, I would say very good. The modern bike may be stiffer in places, but if you are not a pro, you will never notice. And the bike feels like it wants to go faster than you can push it, and I never though I would be any slower on my steel bike than on the modern one.

I would say a lot depends on the condition of the bike and the components. If you take an old bike in as new condition technically, you will find nothing wrong with it. Get used to it and ride it, that is all.

I can't comment regarding the club rides, as I don't do any. I ride that bike with friends very occasionally (and they would be on old steel bikes as well).

The brakes depend on the Rim Too, pretty steel wheels are useless for braking.

The old steelie I use the most was never owned by anyone before me and in brand new immaculate condition, albeit 37 years old. It's all also the oldest and suffers from all of the problems I outlined above.

I think the tubing you go for is key, get good stuff.

Wishbone ash would the 22 On the back be the issue? I haven't got a modern bike to compare it to so I don't know what they go up to ( well the one I borrow I just great straight out on. No counting of cogs at the back). Feel better now!

Seweryn your bike is beautiful.

tomasrojo

It's hard to get decent parts for three-piece bottom brackets, I found. I guess most people now install sealed units on vintage bikes?

Seweryn

tomasrojo wrote: »

It's hard to get decent parts for three-piece bottom brackets, I found. I guess most people now install sealed units on vintage bikes?

I have installed a sealed bottom bracket on my bike. It does the job well and it was rather cheap, but still solid and well made.

Lumen

Outfox, I'm looking to sell my 1993 Raleigh for the square root of bugger all, if you're interested.

I haven't advertised it yet, but I bought it from Mr Illogical:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056955668

It needs some love - recabling and BB maintenance.

Downtube shifters are awesome.

CramCycle

outfox wrote: »

1. Are the gears, brakes etc. reliable on such bikes, and as smooth/effective as modern ones?

Once you get a feel for them they are, I ran my old bike with non indexed shifters, it meant that I could swap out for any wheel with a 6/7/8 speed cassette. Modern ones are nice as there is no feel, it eiter shifts right or you need to adjust them, old school non indexed, if you shift wrong, just move them a bit till they sound right.

2. In the event that gears, brakes, BB, wheels, forks, etc. needed to be replaced, do modern parts fit?

Most do, most of the stuff I have put on my old bike was new bar the biopace rings (I like them)

3. How practical would it be to use such a bike on club spins, what with the shifters being on the down tube?

On a club spin, should be fine, you can also get regular modern shifters and put them on with little difficulty. I put bar end shifters on my drop bars and they were great for me.

Seaswimmer

Lumen wrote: »

Outfox, I'm looking to sell my 1993 Raleigh for the square root of bugger all, if you're interested.

I haven't advertised it yet, but I bought it from Mr Illogical:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056955668

It needs some love - recabling and BB maintenance.

Downtube shifters are awesome.

Couldnt agree more. I have 10 speed Dura Ace downtube shifters on an old Rossin bike but the big advantage is that it keeps the bar area cable free for a bar bag for light touring.

outfox

Thanks for all the replies. Gadetra spent a lot of time on this - appreciated! I agree with Wishbone - your gearing sounds like it would be difficult even for Quintana.
It looks like Project Retro could be a runner, but really only if the frame itself is originally good, and with fairly modern running gear.
Seweryn - that Bianchi is gorgeous. That's the kind of thing I have in mind. But they all seemed to be snapped up very fast. Probably by Taxman judging by what I've read here.
Lumen - that Elan looks nice. Do you have a couple of more photos? It might be a bit tall though. I'm 5' 9". I think I met you on the Orwell Randonee earlier this year (were you the guy struggling with cable breakages?), and if I recall, you were a few inches taller than me.

Lumen

outfox wrote: »

Lumen - that Elan looks nice. Do you have a couple of more photos? It might be a bit tall though. I'm 5' 9". I think I met you on the Orwell Randonee earlier this year (were you the guy struggling with cable breakages?), and if I recall, you were a few inches taller than me.

That was me, railing at the vengeful god of mechanical failure.

Yes, it's probably too big.

Wishbone Ash

gadetra wrote: »

...Wishbone ash would the 22 On the back be the issue? I haven't got a modern bike to compare it to so I don't know what they go up to...

It would for me as I'm a mediocre climber. Two of my bikes would be 34/28 in the lowest gear. I have occasionally fitted a 30 (:o).

Your 39/22 would be a 1.77 ratio (i.e. one turn of your pedals will turn the back wheel 1.77 times) whereas a 34/28 would be a 1.21 ratio. I just wouldn't be able to grind your ratio if the gradient was severe or very long.

RobFowl

We just used bigger gears back then !
52/42 was the standard front ratio and 21/14 was the standard block, best I got until mid 90's was a 24 cog...

07Lapierre

RobFowl wrote: »

We just used bigger gears back then !
52/42 was the standard front ratio and 21/14 was the standard block, best I got until mid 90's was a 24 cog...

As a teenager I used to cycle around Wicklow with a lowest gear of 42x17! ... I couldn't cycle over a speed ramp in that gear today!

Yarisbob

I'm glad I went Vintage.. Again an old Peugeot 531pro. I needed tyres and on recommendations from here I went with Panasonic Pasela PT's with tan sides. They are decent for what I want.. Headset was indexed so it needed replaced. I put in a Stronglight A9 Alloy which is still available - Rides really nice now and its totally practical on club outings.

On a separate note I recently done the East Galway Cancer Care spin. A carbon fanboy said to me "You need a bike upgrade" - Later on I passed him as he tried to run with the big boys and got royally burned up.... I said "you need a leg upgrade mon ami"

eeeee

I feel so much better about my (shytty) climbing now