Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

An open letter to the bike industry

31K views 387 replies 136 participants last post by  fenix501 
#1 ·
An open letter to the bike industry

Dear Bike Industry,

I’m beginning to feel that you don’t have myself and my fellow rider’s best interest at heart, all you seem to be interested in is creating new “standards” and try to force people to buy them under the auspice that the new “standard” is better than before. I would like to think that most cyclists are a savvy bunch, but we do glom onto new tech with eagerness, a fault that you (the bicycle industry) seems more than happy to exploit.
Every year there’s a new bottom bracket “standard”. Something becomes a standard once it is in wide, common, and accepted use like a square taper bb. I have never felt the need to put any of these new, false standards on my bike instead of using a tried and true standard. I think you need to think about how you label all of these pointless bottom bracket options out there. The advantages are nominal to the rider, and only serve to create more niche markets and confuse new riders that get overwhelmed by all the “standards” that have been made. Shame on you. The people that can really gain any benefit if at all from any of these alleged improvements are pro racers, and pro races get their bikes and parts for free, we, the majority of the bike buying public have to pay for our stuff. Did my square tape bb suddenly stop working after years of loyal service and 1000’s of miles? No, it did not. My mountain bike is old for sure and my friends that have newer bikes are still behind me just like they are before they had a new bike with all of the new “improvements” in technology, I expected them to leave me in the dust being that I have only 21 speeds and they 30, but alas it did not happen. I also find it funny that I having 21 speeds never once thought I could make this traverse or climb that section of trail if I only had some more gears, and now you try and sell me less gears in the form of a 2 x10 drive train for more money than my 21 gears, do you take me for a fool? Shame on you bike industry. I can go on, how lame and pointless 31.8 bars are and how ugly they look, or how a 200 dollar seat post that drops can’t beat a 10 buck quick release seat post clamp and to take the 10 seconds to take in the view before you drop in is worth way more than another lever do-hickey on your bike, are you really that lazy? And the 29 wheels, really? Every time I see some poor 5.5” guy on a 29er, I just feel like the bike industry is made up of carneys and we are it’s willing dupes. And these massive head tube bearings they look like the wheel bearings in my van, there’s no way you can convince me I “need” that junk. At some point I just feel like you think I’m an idiot they will buy anything that you put before me, I think you think so little of us as a group that one can keep changing things endlessly chasing one’s tail in the pointless quest of improving something that needs no improvement, even the bike magazines are getting weary of your cavalcade of falsehoods, they are usually your ever loyal heralds but that is even changing.
I turned away from mountain biking magazines for few years and when I came back, mountain bikes no longer existed. There are xc, all mountain, free ride, downhill, etc. but there are no “mountain bikes” anymore. I still own and use a mountain bike, I understand that by creating labels and slicing the pie in ever-smaller slices you can perhaps sucker someone into buying a bunch of bikes that only get used for one type of trail. I guess that’s clever marketing and sales go up, but I think in doing so you alienate the beginner that will certainly be confused and intimidated by all the jargon and techo-babble when they go to their local shop and want a “mountain bike” Shame on you bike industry, I think you need a time-out to think about what you’ve done.
 
See less See more
#22 ·
Open letter to the bike industry:

Dear Bike industry:

Thank you for not listening to guys like the OP. I love hauling the mail downhill on my fully suspended mountain bikes, complete with $300 dropper post and 31.8mm handlebars. Your dropper post has prevented me from getting launched over the bars numerous times when I wouldn't have wanted to pull over to drop my seat manually. The bars - super stiff & personally, I think the extra diameter makes the bars and the bike look burly! The new tires you've come up with are simply fantastic - superbly grippy. Taken as a package, your research and experimentation, and the millions of dollars associated therewith, allow me, a complete hack, to ride & jump WAAY faster, further and higher than I ever could have without your effort.

By the way - lock on grips - fantastic. Love not having to spend an entire afternoon changing a worn out handgrip.

While some of your stuff just is not for me (feel free to keep your 29r's), you guys have engineered a concept to an extent not contemplated at the time of its birth - solely in the name of promoting FUN. Your bikes today go faster, smoother, and fly higher then anyone would have thought possible in 1984, the year I bought my first MTB (a schwinn sierra BTW).

Keep it up! There are those of us who WILL pony up when you improve a product we're interested in and will not simply sneer that you've created a "new standard." And bear in mind that while you must endure the online protestations (and occasional phone calls of those luddites who have not evolved beyond brazed-together cromoly, we, your customers, are the ones who suffer the fate of being stuck behind said luddites as they skitter haphazardly down hills and ride around obstacles too steep or fearsome for their underdeveloped steeds.

Pity us.
 
#24 ·
Open letter to the bike industry:

Dear Bike industry:

Thank you for not listening to guys like the OP. I love hauling the mail downhill on my fully suspended mountain bikes, complete with $300 dropper post and 31.8mm handlebars. Your dropper post has prevented me from getting launched over the bars numerous times when I wouldn't have wanted to pull over to drop my seat manually. The bars - super stiff & personally, I think the extra diameter makes the bars and the bike look burly! The new tires you've come up with are simply fantastic - superbly grippy. Taken as a package, your research and experimentation, and the millions of dollars associated therewith, allow me, a complete hack, to ride & jump WAAY faster, further and higher than I ever could have without your effort.

By the way - lock on grips - fantastic. Love not having to spend an entire afternoon changing a worn out handgrip.

While some of your stuff just is not for me (feel free to keep your 29r's), you guys have engineered a concept to an extent not contemplated at the time of its birth - solely in the name of promoting FUN. Your bikes today go faster, smoother, and fly higher then anyone would have thought possible in 1984, the year I bought my first MTB (a schwinn sierra BTW).

Keep it up! There are those of us who WILL pony up when you improve a product we're interested in and will not simply sneer that you've created a "new standard." And bear in mind that while you must endure the online protestations (and occasional phone calls of those luddites who have not evolved beyond brazed-together cromoly, we, your customers, are the ones who suffer the fate of being stuck behind said luddites as they skitter haphazardly down hills and ride around obstacles too steep or fearsome for their underdeveloped steeds.

Pity us.
Totally agree
I rode the heck out of my old Trek 8000 - but now that I've spent some quality time on my new bike, there is no going back.
The advances that have been made over the last 20 years are just incredible. Everything from geometry to materials technology has undergone a huge change. If standards changed a little requiring some new parts?
No big deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bad mechanic
#4 ·
Paragraphs are awesome

But seriously, I like my 29er wheels. I also like my square taper BB and it hasn't given me any crap. Ya know, you don't have to buy all this new stuff they keep coming out with. If you like your square taper BB, they can still be had. You can still get 26er wheels too, as well as 1 1/8" headsets.
 
#81 ·
Even if they do see it, they won't spend even 5 seconds reading it because of how ugly the formatting is and because of his poor grammar.

Want to get somebody's attention in written form? Do a better job at writing it.

That said, I get annoyed hearing about people satisfied with their old bikes. You're fast on your 20 year old rig and don't see any point in upgrading. That is really good for you. Clearly you are a special snowflake.

But guess what, it's not your money being spent on this shiny new tech, so don't worry about it. For many, the technological and engineering aspect of mountain biking is part of what makes it so fun. It's a hobby, and we're supposed to splurge on our hobbies every now and then.
 
#12 ·
True....

However, would we be better off if Mr. Bike Industry just stopped technological progress at some designated point? I don't think so.
It's the marketing and advertising that annoys the crap outta me. I got a subscription to BIKE magazine the beginning of this year, and I thought it was neat...at first. Now I can barely stand to look thru it. All the shiny ads, the coddled bike testers, the constant pics of beautiful B.C.'s north shore. It all makes me feel unworthy on my 5 year old bike, riding thru the same old scenery.
 
#134 · (Edited)
OP, I have a sizable collection of classic rarities and exotic vintage MTB's, and love them for what they are as well (though, a lot of what we rode then could be considered off-road capable road bikes). ...but I've also wound up in scary sections well beyond my ability where the performance capabilities of a modern DH bike were not just apparent, but neck-saving.

I work as a design consultant between a few co's. Every time we sit down to hash out a new suspension concept, we go through standards gridlock. Nobody likes it. What's a bit depressing is that there ARE great solutions already in existence to the modern design issues brought about by suspension and big wheels which these "standards" were created to solve. Just, not yet all in one place, readily available, compatible with each other, or well-understood/marketable. So instead of building the ultimate bike, every manufacturer in the biz has to waste thousands of hours obsessing over which pile of compromises they're going to endorse. However, if every MFG were to unite behind a set of standards, making things a lot more convenient & less $ for new bikes, it instantly relegates millions of bikes built around these myriad interim standards to obsolescence when component MFG's stop producing compatible product. Whatever happens, it's going to be ugly. But keep in mind, there are very few companies "making millions" on this stuff. Most of us barely eke out a living. It's not a colossal conspiracy to screw you, most of design is trying to make bikes lighter, more durable, less expensive, and lastly, still somehow compatible with old bb shells from road bikes 30 years ago. Bikes just aren't perfect enough that anyone can ride one and not find some way of improving it.

Check back in in another 5 years when things are a bit more ironed out, and go for a test ride. If your classic ride is sufficient, enjoy it, and take comfort in the knowledge that your bikes don't have issues that need complicated solutions, and even as you wear out gearing, you'll never exhaust the production capacity of Phil Wood, Chris King, & Paul Component, whose "obsolete" component lines are still the finest made in the entire biz, and still sell like hotcakes.
 
#10 ·
rev106,
Agree with many of your points, so guess I too am a retro-grouch.
Having new bikes have been amazed by "new standards" one must meet to build up a frame.

Do not believe for a minute that one can tell if wheel flex originates from a Q/R axle, or that a 56mm H/S bearing will actually make a bike stiffer. :skep: Perhaps, true in theory, yet in reality PSI and big tires influence flex, and rigidity far greater, as they are the weakest link.

I too absolutely detest being made to buy new tech for no clear advantage. Anyone know how to overhaul pf BB92 bearings? Appear to be disposable, require a bearing press, and a trip to the LBS for a limited selection of available parts. This is not progress, this is segmentation, which didn't work too well for car dealers when their parts supplier's went bankrupt.

Short term profits that incur long term damage to customer retention, and brand image are costly, just ask Dell.
 
#113 ·
Short term profits that incur long term damage to customer retention, and brand image are costly, just ask Dell.
This is the best response here. I feel that the industry is starting to become less standardized which causes a lot of confusion and does nothing for repeat business or brand loyalty. Like most of you, I spend a great deal of money every year just to ride and it seems like the industry just keeps finding ways to make it more expensive without providing an appreciable benefit. Remember when mid level cranks cost around $100 (like, 4 years ago)? Now they run $300 MSRP and the technology hasn't really changed; just the "standard". MTB'ing is much like a meth habit... its all or nothing. Eventually it is going to cost so much that I am not going to be able to convince myself that I am having a good time.
 
#14 ·
i confess. i do share some of the op's thoughts but it's towards road bikes. I've learned to live with terms like NOS and NIB and it's been fine as far as purchases go. I don't ride like a total beast anymore so "going" thru parts is not a bit frustrating to me at all. It'll never frustrate me to the point where i'd ever let it kill the enjoyment of a ride, that's for sure.

seriously, square taper bbs suck. that's the second thing i would destroy after wheels if you grew up on bmx. there's a reason profiles had splines.
 
#15 ·
I can't really agree to this letter. Progress is good, it gives choice for those who want it.
Bike industry is actually very good, in others you actually can't buy previous standard, while here you have choice to buy all of them from last decade.
- Yes they advertise everything as better (same as any other industry)
- Yes it is anojing that with new technology they also bring new tools (sometimes they could leave existing size screws etc.)
- No they dont say you need to change your parts if they are still working (why the hell do you even look at new standards if you don't need to change anything?)
- No they dont say you can't change to same standard as you had (it is quite easy and cheap to still buy square tapper cranks and bb)
- No they dont say you need to know what xc,am, dh, fr etc means. they expect you to go to bikeshop, tell them what type of riding you want, and they will say which one will be best for you
- If you were able to learn what mtb means, there is no big problem to learn 4 more terms
- It is still easy - if you want to do light mountain biking and road riding you go with XC, if you want to do harder mountain biking you go with AM. There is no rocket science, it is so simple. All other types are for those who know what they mean and not for regular people
- super regular people dont even go to bike shop but simply take one in supermarket which looks like mountain bike

The point is - the fact that they create many types of standards and parts does not mean that you need to buy and try them all. They are simply trying to give choice for everyone. some like 21 speed, some 24, some like 2x10 some 1x10, some 1x1. they all want their parts, so manufacturers try to make everyone happy by creating parts for them all.

but that is only my opinion. I just saw ad about new cool plane to buy for just 2 million bucks... it does not mean that they say I need to buy it, it does not mean I care or will buy it. But some people will, and they probably care
 
#26 ·
I believe there is a difference between progress/innovation and planned obsolescence. I suspect the OP is against planned obsolescence. I was one of the first people in my area with disc brakes, I like good suspension, beefy tires, tubeless, clipless pedals, etc. But I detest products like ten speed (and maybe 11 speed already) which don't really improve anything for me (although I am quite sure it improves the bottom line of manufacturers and bike dealers).

I am beginning to see the same thing happen with headsets. Bike manufacturers are now changing those designs, and I have never had a freaking problem with my Chris Kings (and I ride aggressively in wet conditions). Currently, I am putting off buying a new bike simply because I have no want for 10 speed, I have many Chris King headsets and "old style" threaded bottom brackets (most of which will not work with new bikes these days because I am told they are obsolete).

But I must disagree with the OP about 29ers. I do not put them in the planned obsolescence category (even though I don't own one yet).
 
#30 ·
I believe there is a difference between progress/innovation and planned obsolescence. I suspect the OP is against planned obsolescence. I was one of the first people in my area with disc brakes, I like good suspension, beefy tires, tubeless, clipless pedals, etc. But I detest products like ten speed (and maybe 11 speed already) which don't really improve anything for me (although I am quite sure it improves the bottom line of manufacturers and bike dealers).

I am beginning to see the same thing happen with headsets. Bike manufacturers are now changing those designs, and I have never had a freaking problem with my Chris Kings (and I ride aggressively in wet conditions). Currently, I am putting off buying a new bike simply because I have no want for 10 speed, I have many Chris King headsets and "old style" threaded bottom brackets (most of which will not work with new bikes these days because I am told they are obsolete).

But I must disagree with the OP about 29ers. I do not put them in the planned obsolescence category (even though I don't own one yet).
9 speed is still available (and pretty cheap).
I just bought 2 new frames, both of which use threaded bottom brackets - no need to upgrade there any time soon.

A lot of the modifications are manufacturers trying to solve engineering issues while still keeping bikes affordable. Some changes are fashionable, but if you go do the research on things like bottom brackets there are some pretty solid reasons for many of the changes.
 
#29 ·
I don't believe the OP is against improvement, as much as, the planned obsolescence which seem a bit too common in the MTB world.

If you're not familiar, it's the strategy many companies use to sell more product next year. Back in Detroit's heyday, the big 3 would change the car's body styling every year simply to move more product, e.g. '55, '56' and '57 Chevy. In the electronics world, Sony came out with a portable tape player called The Walkman. And then followed up with the CD version. And then tried a mini CD until Apple made them irrelevant.

When you get something better for your money, there's little reason to complain. But when I don't see a benefit ... yeah, I'll pass.

(Edit: Ah Pisgah, you beat me to it! :) )
 
#34 ·
I'm in two camps here.

I could not agree more on BB headset and rear end standards.

Tell me someone can really feel the improvement from BB30 to PF30? Um, no. Just another standard I need to be aware of, and keep track of. Of course, 3 years from now, it will be PF30.1, and of course, non compatible with PF30.

Yes, square taper is a tad flexier, so okay, we have at least 3 generations of stiffer options already (Isis, Octalink, HollowTech II etc), do we really need 14 new ones every year now?

Headset standards, Tapered, really? That much better than 1 point five? Hmm, where'd that one go anyway????

So you want a headset, "can I have a tapered headset please?" Which one? Inset, zero stack, etc etc etc. Again, feel any difference from Inset to Zero Stack? Doubt it.

How about one tapered "standard" even? Pretty effin' please????

Rear ends. 135 makes sense, has for years. There's already tandem in 145 and 160 which is wider for those who'd need it. Then we came out with 150, okay, fine, wider is better, DH guys like it for a beefier rear wheel etc. So, with all those existing ones, yep, absolutely, we need 142 as well, cause gosh, that just solves everything.

I'm pretty retro grouchy, yes, but that said, I do like a lot of what's come out of the growth the industry has seen. I like my 6" 29er, disc brakes etc. I like my fat bike too, a whole bunch.

I guess what I don't like is incessant change marketed as improvement, when really, it doesn't change anything that much besides the makers bottom line, as it forces you to buy their option.

Perhaps slow it down. Give us stuff every few years. Let us wear crap out a bit first. Gosh, you might even learn something groundbreaking by taking to the time to smell the roses, instead of headlong rushing to make it .000034526% newer, stiffer, lighter, every goddamn year.....
 
#45 ·
Perhaps slow it down. Give us stuff every few years. Let us wear crap out a bit first. Gosh, you might even learn something groundbreaking by taking to the time to smell the roses, instead of headlong rushing to make it .000034526% newer, stiffer, lighter, every goddamn year.....
Thing is, people read reviews and crave those .000034526% because they think it'll make a world of difference. The manufacturers make those .000034526% because people are willing to throw good money after it.

As long as people are willing to buy pointless "improvements" just because it's something new and might make things microscopically better, manufacturers will keep inventing pointless "improvements" to fuel the hype and let the fools part with their money.
 
#43 ·
An open letter to the bike industry

Dear Bike Industry,

My mountain bike is old for sure and my friends that have newer bikes are still behind me just like they are before they had a new bike with all of the new "improvements" in technology, I expected them to leave me in the dust being that I have only 21 speeds and they 30, but alas it did not happen.
When was the last time you could buy a 7 speed cassette, chainrings or chain? 15 - 20 years ago? Doesn't sound like you put a lot of miles in......that stuff wears out regularly if you ride much.
Although that might be the industry trying to keep you down as well.

At some point I just feel like you think I'm an idiot .
At this point right now actually.
 
#48 ·
rev106: Your passion for vintage bikes is cool and all, but really, you need to learn more about this new stuff before you trash it.

Also, I don't know where people get the idea that "multiple standards" (an oxymoron, I know) is anything new.

Headsets: Back in the 90's you had a whole mess of headset and steertube types. Threaded, unthreaded, and several diameters.

Cranks / BB. Honestly I don't see what the issue is, here, you buy the bb with the crank, and when the bb wears out, you replace it. Just like it was with square taper. Besides, ST is not one universal size, anyway, you need a different lengths for different cranks.

If you think some new standard that is being forced on everyone is actually worse, that's one thing (and there are a couple of those examples), but you seem to have a problem with things simply changing at all, or the fact that everyone is not forced to buy the same thing.

Adjusting for inflation, you get WAY more bike for your money now than you did back in the "good old days".
 
#79 · (Edited)
I started riding in 1992 on a Bridgestone MB4. Today, my primary bike is a 2011 Specialized Enduro. They weigh the same and in inflation adjusted dollars they cost the same but the Enduro is 10 times the bike because of all of that new-fangled, marketing driven technology that the OP can do without.

I have a rigid single-speed for when I want to go retro (but it weighs 19 pounds) but I really like my hydraulic brakes, six inches of suspension, Hammerschmidt, dropper post, and the whole package that makes up today's super-bikes.

Seems silly to complain about advances in what are essentially big, useless toys. Last time I checked there were thousands of different bikes and millions of combinations of components to choose from. Specialized, my favorite company, by themselves make bikes for every budget and with every level of technology.

Seriously, they're just bikes. Buying one is not a huge decision like enlisting in the Marines or getting married. Heck, buying a new bike is fun. I like looking at different bikes and components. There are a lot of choices but isn't that part of the fun?

Mountain biking is fun, right?
 
#89 ·
On behalf of the entire bicycle manufacturing industry, I will respond to your open letter.
Thanks.

We did not want to innovate so much, despite what some have said about us.
We would rather keep selling the same designs for years, and simply search for lower cost labor to manufacture and assemble the product.

Thanks again,

The Bicycle Industry
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top