Dale said:
>With a very few exceptions, I have found CR list folk to be very generous
and
>inclusive of bike forms that we all seem to love.
Most assuredly so. I'm new here... and after going back a few months in the archive (can't wait to read it all...), I am amazed by the breadth of knowledge that your readers have picked up over the years and are anxious to share. Even the "what is a classic?" argument has been interesting (reminds me a lot of some of our after-class discussions down at the pub when I was in art school).
Brandon said:
>Riv's use modern steel, lugs, and paint
>they aren't using parts manufactured 20 years before. Rivendells are
>awfully nice bikes but they're not true "classics."
Personally, I can't help but feel that ANY bike, (not just by virtue of it's
age or pedigree), that serves to remind us of the beauty and attention to
detail that elevates an object from the utilitarian to an artform deserves to
be recognized, and certainly fits the dictionary definition of "classic".
But I understand that you have to draw the line somewhere, and in this group
it seems to be at the pre-1983 lugged (steel) frame, (perhaps you allow
exceptions for very early aluminum? What John Huston said in Chinatown...
"Even old buildings and whores get repectable if they live long enough."),
and for quality, "old-style" contemporary handmade frames. This is great,
but consider for a moment a newer frame I just picked up (was told it was one
of the last California Masi's, a Gran Corsa #3021... can anybody help me put
a date on it?) that has such nicely finished lugs and proportions that you
might mistake it for a classic if you saw it from a bit of a distance... it's
certainly no '60's GC and strictly speaking, does not belong here, but could
we admit that it at least helps carry the torch for the lovers of the
"classic bike" when one sees it in the used section of the local bike shop
sitting between an aluminum Giant and a titanium Lightspeed... no ugly weld
marks, no carbon fork... I'd like to think that we have enough of an eye for
beauty and traditional construction methods that even a later factory frame
like this might not be considered out of bounds for the occasional question
or discussion.
> We also consider "on topic" makers of very fine bicycles that can be seen
> as "Carrying the torch" for classic style cycling....
According to this, I just don't see how anyone could object to discussing a Rivendell... your description seems to acknowledge there is a "spirit" of the classic bicycle that does not nit-pick things like the type of steel, lugs, or paint. Gee whiz, with the right older components, maybe even my Masi might fit the definition <grin>.
Bob Hovey
Columbus, GA