Midschool date, year, era, decade etc. I need your input

[Dannywhac]

good points.

However then the first appearance of 1 1/8th headsets would by the same token designate the start of New School?

Cheers Fisch.

But no - as that's one thing (unlike the above) that was adopted from MTB's in 1993 by Standard Byke Co.

Same with 14mm - 1998 saw that creeping in.

Cassettes were around in 1997 (Profile ones).

It's when you start seeing true micro gearing, the dropping of US BB's and a new 'make it light and strong' approach kicking in that for me defines the start of new. Although as any kid at a park and they don;t give a fook about owt earlier than last year 

[Discostu]

Mid started in 89. 

[Dannywhac]

Mid started in 89. 

Justify it Stu - just for my piece of mind why?

It's easy to say but back it up with factoids.

[stidds]

I am interested in the 14mm years, as I gave up racing in late 85 and I never saw or heard of 14mm axles until I got back in the sport in 2001.

That to me seems a good point if we can pin it down to its introduction.

[OrgasmDonor]

Mid started in 89. 

Justify it Stu - just for my piece of mind why?

It's easy to say but back it up with factoids.

Why not? 

89 would be my ball park but as said, and I agree fully, setting decades is the most correct way to go, the only way to go. People dont like change but the 'school' thing has always just been a phrase. Other than the hassle of renaming sections, how can anybody argue with the logic of correctly catagorising bikes?

[Dannywhac]

Mid started in 89. 

Justify it Stu - just for my piece of mind why?

It's easy to say but back it up with factoids.

Why not? 

89 would be my ball park but as said, and I agree fully, setting decades is the most correct way to go, the only way to go. People dont like change but the 'school' thing has always just been a phrase. Other than the hassle of renaming sections, how can anybody argue with the logic of correctly catagorising bikes?

Because I want to know - it might change my mind. Called debate.

Saying that I ain't forcing anyone to justify it. Just wanna know as it's a piece of piss to come on the thread and just say a year without a decent reason.

Fook it - I'm going with 1997-1998. No reason 

And yeah - like I talked bollocks about on Saturday, decades would be the way to go and drop schools, but that looks like a fook load of hassle to rejig the site?

[Discostu]

When the bashy era started and most of the frames started to change shape, simples!
I don't support the ad990 argument as they only came out on haro's and gt's for a couple of years and then they disappeared when the bashy era started, only to re-appear in 91. 

In 87/88 there were only a few bikes that had ad990's and they were basically the same as the 86 models with a few small changes and ad990 mounts,

It wasn't until 1989 when all the big changes started to happen, frames looked completely different, and a different type of riding began, gone were the days of riding in your team outfits on your nicely presented Haro or gt. You had anarchic adjustment, life's a beach, 2hip, hammer pads and a bell moto lid, and everyone started to ride hardcore, totally different to what had happened before, now it was balls out and underground.

Yes S&M started before 89 but it didn't really start to hit it off until the 90's!  Luckily for Haro and gt the riders were still supporting them but strangely enough the hardcore riding ended up making a mockery of their frames and forks, which eventually ended there popularity as riders moved on to better made equipment built by riders to be ridden. This was then the era that S&M amongst others started to come to the fore, if you look back at videos of the late 80's/early 90's you don't really see anyone riding an S&M but plenty of haro's and gt's are about. Yes the S&M was probably a better and stronger bike back in 88 but it hadn't gained any popularity at that time. 

[Dannywhac]

I am interested in the 14mm years, as I gave up racing in late 85 and I never saw or heard of 14mm axles until I got back in the sport in 2001.

That to me seems a good point if we can pin it down to its introduction.

People started cutting their drops as early as late 1997/ early 1998 - Peregrine Phat Jacks came with a 10/14mm flippable axle for that very reason. Thing is though if you're sticking with schools then thats one tiny change in a big old sea of change in later years

[Discostu]

Mid started in 89. 

Justify it Stu - just for my piece of mind why?

It's easy to say but back it up with factoids.

Why not? 

89 would be my ball park but as said, and I agree fully, setting decades is the most correct way to go, the only way to go. People dont like change but the 'school' thing has always just been a phrase. Other than the hassle of renaming sections, how can anybody argue with the logic of correctly catagorising bikes?

Because I want to know - it might change my mind. Called debate.

Saying that I ain't forcing anyone to justify it. Just wanna know as it's a piece of piss to come on the thread and just say a year without a decent reason.

Fook it - I'm going with 1997-1998. No reason 

And yeah - like I talked bollocks about on Saturday, decades would be the way to go and drop schools, but that looks like a fook load of hassle to rejig the site?

 

[Gary72]

1987-2003 Follows on from old school on the forum, That no one is moaning about and pushes NS up a year that no one will moan about
That's my line in the sand. But there are far more worthy men on here than me.
As for the 14mm axle! My 2001 mid school FBM has 10mm drop outs, I think quite a few mid frames have 10mm drop outs that got hacked to take 14mm.

[Dannywhac]

When the bashy era started and most of the frames started to change shape, simples!
I don't support the ad990 argument as they only came out on haro's and gt's for a couple of years and then they disappeared when the bashy era started, only to re-appear in 91. 

In 87/88 there were only a few bikes that had ad990's and they were basically the same as the 86 models with a few small changes and ad990 mounts,

It wasn't until 1989 when all the big changes started to happen, frames looked completely different, and a different type of riding began, gone were the days of riding in your team outfits on your nicely presented Haro or gt. You had anarchic adjustment, life's a beach, 2hip, hammer pads and a bell moto lid, and everyone started to ride hardcore, totally different to what had happened before, now it was balls out and underground.

Yes S&M started before 89 but it didn't really start to hit it off until the 90's!  Luckily for Haro and gt the riders were still supporting them but strangely enough the hardcore riding ended up making a mockery of their frames and forks, which eventually ended there popularity as riders moved on to better made equipment built by riders to be ridden. This was then the era that S&M amongst others started to come to the fore, if you look back at videos of the late 80's/early 90's you don't really see anyone riding an S&M but plenty of haro's and gt's are about. Yes the S&M was probably a better and stronger bike back in 88 but it hadn't gained any popularity at that time. 

Thank you Stu (apart from the simples bit - I fooking hate that advert)

[Discostu]

No problem. Simples! 

[Dannywhac]

1987-2003 Follows on from old school on the forum, That no one is moaning about and pushes NS up a year that no one will moan about
That's my line in the sand. But there are far more worthy men on here than me.
As for the 14mm axle! My 2001 mid school FBM has 10mm drop outs, I think quite a few mid frames have 10mm drop outs that got hacked to take 14mm.

Ere - that is a good point. Mid worked in with the others before the site rejig. Didn't we have Mad Dogs in the show and shine/mid section n'stuff.

I'm shutting my cakehole now. The missus is eyeballing me.

[rodriguez]

If this thread carries on, I think most people reading it will be driven to throwing themselves under a bus, thus removing the need for any decision at all....or is that the aim?

Setting a year will only perpetuate the moans, but that appears to be the only acceptable answer.  I may have missed the point, but why is a crossover period not possible, with a list of defining features for frames?  I don't see why that would fuel any more grief than a specific year will.

I also think that setting years is essentially forcing rules on people, which is never welcome.

Basically, you either allow members some leeway, which I realize may result in more hassle for mods etc, or you peeve them off....damned if you do and damned if you don't springs to mind.

No the aim is for you guys who are supposed to know and the ones doing all the moaning to sort out what you want.

The reason for no cross over period is because that is not the way we are going to run things, as I said before all the other era's have a date that they work to so MS is also going to have to compromise.

Who is to say what that cross over period would be, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, when you have a sliding scale it slides further and further depending on where you want you bike to appear.

We also run the biggest OS get together in the world, this runs a massive S&S that takes about 4-5 hours to judge, during this judging to then have to decide is this a cross over year bike, has it got double thickness dropouts etc etc is just too much to ask.  Remember judges/mods/admin get paid nothing for all these hours we put in to ensure the weekend runs smooth, we barely have time to think, let alone enjoy the weekend.

Is it too much to ask that we have some compromise and assistance from MS era to ensure that we continue this site smoothly?

Remember it is only a problem if you make it into one.

It's not only a problem for the mid school section Sean it's also a problem for the old school section.

I don't see people moaning I see people trying to solve a problem that's not even of their making, what I see is people mostly with a foot in both camps trying their best to facilitate what you want by making suggestions which are followed by discussion leading to suggestions, unfortunately any suggestions are just non-runners.

The problem created by the transition period between the two schools is not the fault of the members who frequent the mid-school section on RADBMX, it is a problem within the hobby in general.  No other site has managed to get this right, with a bit of ingenuity and forward thinking RADBMX could be the site that gets it as close as you possibly can to being right, this may/will involve adjudication from time to time on factors other than years.

I agree with others who say if you segregate the sections purely into years the moaning is going to go off the richter scale.

There are a few guys who really know there stuff about what was happening between 87-89 and the differences between old school and mid school maybe one of them should be made a moderator and adjudicate when necessary, for example, in the S&S said moderator could decide if a bike is old school or mid school.

For me putting the bikes into decades isn't even a runner, RADBMX "home of the UK Old School BMX since 2004" will lose part of it's identity and reason for being.

[fischflo]

guess you're right there.

ATM i'm leaning towards following Stu on the 89/90 start date - and following Rod/Danny on the end date of 2003ish

...or f.ex Philbert:

"This for me ran up until about 03. Then new school made a real headway with companies jumping on the standard bandwagon and using lighter tubing from strengthened metals, smaller chainrings, euro, Spanish, and mid bbs were becomingly widely available."

[OllyHall]

Then put it to the vote!

[Gish]

Sean just do it by decades and if peoples don't like it then it's just tuff shit 

[OrgasmDonor]

Sean just do it by decades and if peoples don't like it then it's just tuff shit 

 

its a logical, its chronological! its the future 

[Dannywhac]

When the bashy era started and most of the frames started to change shape, simples!
I don't support the ad990 argument as they only came out on haro's and gt's for a couple of years and then they disappeared when the bashy era started, only to re-appear in 91. 

In 87/88 there were only a few bikes that had ad990's and they were basically the same as the 86 models with a few small changes and ad990 mounts,

It wasn't until 1989 when all the big changes started to happen, frames looked completely different, and a different type of riding began, gone were the days of riding in your team outfits on your nicely presented Haro or gt. You had anarchic adjustment, life's a beach, 2hip, hammer pads and a bell moto lid, and everyone started to ride hardcore, totally different to what had happened before, now it was balls out and underground.

Yes S&M started before 89 but it didn't really start to hit it off until the 90's!  Luckily for Haro and gt the riders were still supporting them but strangely enough the hardcore riding ended up making a mockery of their frames and forks, which eventually ended there popularity as riders moved on to better made equipment built by riders to be ridden. This was then the era that S&M amongst others started to come to the fore, if you look back at videos of the late 80's/early 90's you don't really see anyone riding an S&M but plenty of haro's and gt's are about. Yes the S&M was probably a better and stronger bike back in 88 but it hadn't gained any popularity at that time. 

As Stu did with the 87 - I'd just like to add me two penneth, again in the spirit of debate and nothing nasty 

I get why not the u-brake argument. Although there were there and did emerge.

I'm not too sure other than bashguards what changed physically about frames in 89. The change in riding imho began in mid 1987, heralded the arrival of double dropouts on both frames and forks - with welded steerers, rake changes and the HT angle etc.

And as in me list - it wasn't just S&M that started this - I'm a little unsure of the they didn't really start off till 1990? No one really came to the fore until around 1994 to be honest when stuff started to slowly pick up again. As for making a mockery of early S&M's - dunno where that's from. We wouldn't have the reeeeeal early (some may argue classic midschool frame) if it wasn't for the fact the Mad Dog XL is exactly the same as a Dirt Bike. They held up as well as any Bully bashy etc aavailable later on.

Anyway sounding like a fanboy now - genuinely not - I've got more DK stuff than S&M 

[skidmark]

I'm out...there's actually no 2 way debate happening here as far as I can see.

Laters potatos 

[Munnyella]

There was a transition period, and there is nothing that can be done about it. decades is the best solution, but its not ideal.

I say leave it as it is, let people put their bikes wherever they like, if they enter them in the wrong bit of SnS, then they won't win, but they may learn.

You wont ever please everyone, so carry on doing the good job that you all do with the site and leave this be, it can't be fixed!

MM

[Discostu]

I don't agree the change of riding happened in 87, that was defiantly 89 where a complete new style of riding appeared, street riding appeared as a new way of doing things, and a barrage of grinding tricks came to the fore on vert and street, due to the bashy era.

However I would like to say that 1987 was the time where bmx bits started to actually work. Things like rotors and brakes could actually stop you on a dime instead of just slowing you down, decent levers that didn't bend when you pulled them. At this time a lot of the gimmicky bolt on stuff started to disappear, pretty much by 89 it was all gone. 

[Discostu]

And now I'm confused! 

[Dannywhac]

Me too. Stepping aside from being a keyboard warrior now 

(Mainly cos me tea's ready)

[Gary72]

The 2 years that keep appearing in all this is 1987 and 1989. Everyone seems to acknowledge 2003 as the end.
As everyone keeps saying with various examples/exceptions it is impossible to give a definitive date.
If you read Stu's post it can be interpreted as implying that MS developed in 1987 and was full on by 1989.
So as a compromise, Which is what is needed. Start at 1988 and run till 2003.
I dont agree with the decades idea, Its to simplistic for what everyone agrees is a conflicting topic.
It is good to see that there is still plenty of passion for kids bikes