# Used bike -- how old; does it matter ?



## eee (Jan 16, 2007)

I am looking around to upgrade from my (?) 36 year old Fuji S10S Road Racer (but it is so comfortable for my build) to something that is not a tank -- i need to keep up with my wife who stumbled over a sweet deal on a Bianchi Giro. So -- suppose i find something nice from 2000 -- or 199x or whatever -- at what point do you think i am foolish in buying something that old? For example, i saw an ad for a '2000 Trek 5200 ($800) but did not get there in time -- but, my brother-in-law (much more experienced cyclist) is afraid to look at stuff that old ("too many advances in techology"). Is (for example) a 501 or Ultegra group set from several years ago the same as one today? Any comments / general principles here ?

Thanks !


----------



## Argentius (Aug 26, 2004)

Two potential issues: reliability and component availability / compatibility. A LOT changed since the 70's and 80's, less changed from the mid-late nineties and now. The pivotal switches were cassettes from freewheels, and STI / Ero levers from downtube shifters.

Shimano levers that are several years old are prone to failure -- the shifters in particular. When this happens replacement is generally the only option, and they can be expensive. This is compounded by the fact that, if you have a 7- or 8- speed STI system, you may have to source used components as nothing new is made for 'em. The fact that I don't know what a 501 group IS speaks something of it, but I know plenty of poeple whose old stuff has broken down.

Compatibiltity -- Older frames may not have the same rear dropout spacing as modern bikes, though circa 2000 ought to be. Quill stems were common and though they work, avaibility is less on quality quill stems and they are not nearly so easy to swap and adjust as threadless. 1" threadless headsets are somewhat harder to source stems or forks for, but it's not too bad. 

Most "big" changes have already happened by 10 years (or so) ago: Frames of the age you're talking about should all have English or Italian BB's, so you're good there. The swap from 27" to 700c wheels should already have happened.

SOME people will claim that 5-year-old-and-older aluminum should be avoided for fatigue / breaking worries, but that is a big can of worms and many / most say there is nothing to be concerned about.

If it were ME, if I were in the market for a bike that is around $1000, I would either new or used within the past couple of years. You can get a pretty nice bike these days for $1000, even new.

Hope this helps!


----------



## brianmcg (Oct 12, 2002)

eee said:


> but, my brother-in-law (much more experienced cyclist) is afraid to look at stuff that old ("too many advances in techology"). Is (for example) a 501 or Ultegra group set from several years ago the same as one today? Any comments / general principles here ?
> 
> Thanks !


1. Your brother-n-law is an idiot. But I'm sure you already knew that. :thumbsup: 

2. Its 105 group not 501 (those are jeans).

3. As long as everything is in good working order there would be nothing to worry about. Bikes have not evolved that much in the past few years. Its all good. 

There are literally thousands of people riding bikes with groups over 20 years old. Road bikes can go thousand upon thousands of miles on their components if they are maintained properly. 

Having the latest and greatest is hogwash. Its every marketers dream to have customers that feel they need to replace equipment every year to keep up with "technology". Its a bicycle.


----------



## mud390 (Sep 6, 2006)

I just recently built up a 1993 Cannondale 3.0 and a friend of mine built up an identical frame from 1989 that I stripped all the parts from for mine. We both took a different approach. 
Mine: Reuse the stock components replacing only what I had to so everything would work and upgrade the steel fork. The 1" headset wasn't too tough to find, but the carbon fork was a little tougher. Once found it went together fine. I also needed a new stem (quill to threadless). I went with a 1 1/8" stem with a 1" adapter. No problems. I'm still using the downtube shifters with a 7sp cassette and double front without any problems. Bike rides great.
Friend: He had an older (2000-ish) Sora level Diamondback (TANK--weighed over 30lbs) road bike laying around. He stripped that bike of its components and swapped everything over. The rear spacing on the Cannondale frame is 126 and his rear wheel is 130. A little gentle persuasion and it went in fine. He is using the original steel fork with a 1 1/8" threadless adapter. He is also using STI on his 8 speed cassette and double front. Bike it running smoothly with no problems. Rides great.

Two different approaches to making the same frame work with different components, both new and old. Oh, just by swapping the frame, my friends bike now weighs just over 24 pounds. You can make it work if you really want it to.

Kris


----------



## jimcav (Jun 15, 2003)

*age not so important--how it was used is*

get a good used bike from someone who hopefully rode softly, skillfully, and with luck weighed a reasonable amount. crashes and abuse will weaken frames--my rule, no matter how good it looks i won't buy it from a 16 yr old who outgrew it--i was once 16 and remember some of the short cuts i took on my road bike.

anyway, new bikes have different head tube and rear wheel spacing. and of course the shifting is up on the bars now--other than that the frames are just like the components--lighter--sometimes more fragile. 

i still think record 8 speed was the best gruppo i ever road in terms of precision and lack of attention it required. but i started at 6 speed so am not that old.


i've bought mid 90s frames and bikes no problem get what you like--just get good pics and ask questions about it--look for scrapes on the RD, pedals, bars ends hoods that may indicate some falls 

I went forma 22 lb bike to a 17 and never looked back--probably have 3 now that are right at 15+ 
good luck


----------



## giordana93 (Jan 10, 2007)

biggest issues and change are the aforementioned rear dropout spacing and its cohort, index shifting, which is now sti-ergo shifting (shifters built into the brake levers). if you really want a more modern drive train, you should get a bike with 130mm rear spacing, which was standard on road bikes by early 90's. everything 8, 9, and 10 speed today is on that standard and assuming you want to go to the new indexed packages, you need at least that. on the other hand, presumably you already know how to shift without indexing and for us old farts, nothing is more elegant (or lighter!) than a down tube shifter on an old lightweight racing bike--but you can't shift while you're standing up or in a sprint situation. in any case, a 20 year old bike with down tube shifters and good wheels is every bit as fast as just about anything today in the same price range. I would avoid 7 speed-indexed though, as parts are getting hard to come by, and the long-term reliability of some of the older 8 speed stuff is questionable, but if you find something with really low mileage it should be fine. I guess one other innovation that is pretty nice about the post 80's bikes are dual pivot brakes, but again the single pivots stopped us just fine (albeit with a bit more hand strength) and were lighter. just shop around and you'll get an idea. If you want to keep up with your wife, the most important thing (after training, of course!) is light wheels (and by light I mean basically any road wheels that have about a 23-25c tire) if any of this is jargon for you, I apologize and can explain. the sheldon brown web site many refer to is an excellent primer on all of this stuff, and if you want to read about retro rides, there are plenty of places that diss all the modern stuff. cheers!


----------

