Many times, when writing about a vintage bicycle's create, I have mentioned that this has been configured for a 'modern fit. ' Subsequently, I have recently been asked what that means. Seeing these two cycles side by side in our yard recently provided a convenient possibility to clarify. I will preface this by saying that, to experts on the matter - with whom We do not doubt my readership is replete with - my explanation will come across as extremely simplified and merely grazing the surface of the subject at hand. In the interest of those new to the subject matter and not technically-minded, a discussion needs to get started on someplace. And so I'll start mine here.
The 2 mountain bikes in the above image belong to the same rider. Both bicycles fit him. Moreover, despite their dissimilar-looking setups, they fit him similarly - interpretation, he is extended in a similar way when astride each one. The bicycles accomplish that differently: The one on the kept stretches the rider away using a long top tube. Normally the one on the right would it by means of low handlebars.
In case you sit down on a chair and still have someone carry an apple just within your reach, this will learn to make sense. In the event that they lower the apple, you will have to lean over and reach for it. Now if rather than lowering the apple, they move it a bit further out, you will, likewise, have to trim over and reach for it.
There is a rudimentary geometrical explanation for what I am planning to describe here, but Let me stay away from être. If you do the reaching for an apple bit, you will learn to see how a bike can be placed in a variety of ways to achieve similar higher body extension in order to achieve the handlebars.
You will also commence to see that, just because a bicycle has a metre of seatpost sticking away and a slammed base, does not necessarily make it an 'aggressive' installation. In fact, depending on rider's size, it can be quite upright. Similarly, a cyclist riding a bi-cycle with the saddle and handlebars level can be in a super-aggressive flat-back position.
So why are bicycles today sized down and place up with plenty of saddle to handlebar drop, whereas bicycles in the Olden Times (roughly pre-1990) were sized larger sized, with the handlebars and saddle practically level?
Presently there are several overlapping answers, and here is where we have to the more complicated stuff. The move to the modern drivetrain, with its involved brake/shift levers, resulted in cyclists spending additional time on the 'hoods' with their handlebars rather than in the drops. It therefore made sense to lower the complete handlebar setup. A few will argue that the rise in bottom group heights over the many years contributed also, as do the changing condition of the bicycle frame as tubing manufacturing practices advanced.
It also goes without saying that there is more to a bicyclist's position than reach only, and the vintage compared to modern setups - mixed with a particular frame's angles - will affect the overall balance and controlling of the bike in another way. All this is part of a quite complex and often heated discussion, which you can follow on many a bicycle online community.
But also... It may not be denied, I think, that it's at least to some extent down to trends - which change for bicycling-related matters just as they actually for other aspects of popular culture.
To the eye of today's sports cyclist, the current setup simply looks cool - fast, sleek, aggressive. The retro setup looks quaint, heavy, relaxed.
But trend-based awareness are not forever in line with reality. And let's just say that several of my friends of a Certain Time gently poke fun at younger road cyclists for being way too upright on their bicycles in comparison to the 'correct' position. Of course the present day bikes, with their brief top tubes and high head tubes, are to blame.
What constitutes an 'aggressive' setup is subject matter to cultural/ peer/ marketing influence.
From an acceptable perspective, the vintage vs modern fit preference matters, mainly because it determines the frame size we look for in a bike. For instance, referring again to the photography in this post the bike on the left is a 57cm top conduit frame, and the bi-cycle on the right is a 54cm. Put simply: for a vintage fit, you will desire a greater frame... and a perfecting cloth for those lovely downtube shifters!
The 2 mountain bikes in the above image belong to the same rider. Both bicycles fit him. Moreover, despite their dissimilar-looking setups, they fit him similarly - interpretation, he is extended in a similar way when astride each one. The bicycles accomplish that differently: The one on the kept stretches the rider away using a long top tube. Normally the one on the right would it by means of low handlebars.
In case you sit down on a chair and still have someone carry an apple just within your reach, this will learn to make sense. In the event that they lower the apple, you will have to lean over and reach for it. Now if rather than lowering the apple, they move it a bit further out, you will, likewise, have to trim over and reach for it.
There is a rudimentary geometrical explanation for what I am planning to describe here, but Let me stay away from être. If you do the reaching for an apple bit, you will learn to see how a bike can be placed in a variety of ways to achieve similar higher body extension in order to achieve the handlebars.
You will also commence to see that, just because a bicycle has a metre of seatpost sticking away and a slammed base, does not necessarily make it an 'aggressive' installation. In fact, depending on rider's size, it can be quite upright. Similarly, a cyclist riding a bi-cycle with the saddle and handlebars level can be in a super-aggressive flat-back position.
So why are bicycles today sized down and place up with plenty of saddle to handlebar drop, whereas bicycles in the Olden Times (roughly pre-1990) were sized larger sized, with the handlebars and saddle practically level?
Presently there are several overlapping answers, and here is where we have to the more complicated stuff. The move to the modern drivetrain, with its involved brake/shift levers, resulted in cyclists spending additional time on the 'hoods' with their handlebars rather than in the drops. It therefore made sense to lower the complete handlebar setup. A few will argue that the rise in bottom group heights over the many years contributed also, as do the changing condition of the bicycle frame as tubing manufacturing practices advanced.
It also goes without saying that there is more to a bicyclist's position than reach only, and the vintage compared to modern setups - mixed with a particular frame's angles - will affect the overall balance and controlling of the bike in another way. All this is part of a quite complex and often heated discussion, which you can follow on many a bicycle online community.
But also... It may not be denied, I think, that it's at least to some extent down to trends - which change for bicycling-related matters just as they actually for other aspects of popular culture.
To the eye of today's sports cyclist, the current setup simply looks cool - fast, sleek, aggressive. The retro setup looks quaint, heavy, relaxed.
But trend-based awareness are not forever in line with reality. And let's just say that several of my friends of a Certain Time gently poke fun at younger road cyclists for being way too upright on their bicycles in comparison to the 'correct' position. Of course the present day bikes, with their brief top tubes and high head tubes, are to blame.
What constitutes an 'aggressive' setup is subject matter to cultural/ peer/ marketing influence.
From an acceptable perspective, the vintage vs modern fit preference matters, mainly because it determines the frame size we look for in a bike. For instance, referring again to the photography in this post the bike on the left is a 57cm top conduit frame, and the bi-cycle on the right is a 54cm. Put simply: for a vintage fit, you will desire a greater frame... and a perfecting cloth for those lovely downtube shifters!
0 Response to "Vintage vs Modern Fit "
Post a Comment