Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 390
  1. #101
    father, mountain biker
    Reputation: shredjunkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by Barheet View Post
    Wow, I'm surprised how many people insulted the OP.
    You mean the guy who posted an open letter on the internet in which he accused an entire industry of malicious intent, calling them "carneys" and blaming them for his own ignorance and confusion, all based on his personal paranoid conjecture without providing any hard evidence? Really, you're surprised?
    "He seems quite arrogant and ignores quite some valid points." -Millfox
    "I don't like you" -ne_dan

  2. #102
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,757
    I'd assume most (if not all) the posters in here have the discretionary income and leisure time to afford and ride a bike purely for pleasure.

    Why the whine-fest?
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  3. #103
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,435
    The idea that "the industry" makes ANY decisions is ludicrous. Individual companies make decisions. On occasion a few companies will make one together, and in these cases it is usually in order to agree on some standard. No company makes a decision because it will benefit "the industry" they make decisions to benefit themselves.

    In very few cases can it be demonstrated that a company introducing a new standard just for the sake of it being new would be profitable. If it does not provide some perceived benefit for the consumer, they will not make money on it. If you think that people are being duped as to actual; benefit, blame the mtb consumers for rewarding companies by buying their products.

    The CONSUMERS are the ones completely responsible for what "the industry" sells. They sell what we buy. Otherwise they are out of business.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  4. #104
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    15,230
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Having multiple standards is the only way that things improve.
    The irony is rich.

    "15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved."

    Again, not opposed to new standards.

    Imagine if when we went from 1" threaded, the industry threw out 4 different diameters, press fit styles, thread pitches and each bike maker had their own combination version of it.

    How would any suspension fork maker choose which was the one to go with?

    Like dru brought up with XTR BCD's, how did your life improve, at all?

    I'm opposed to pointlessly different, simultaneous standards in the same component. Let one ride for a while, learn from it, and grow with intent.

    ISIS was tried, and eventually for the most part, discarded. But it's not like we had 4 different ISIS standards all at the same time.....

    I'm on the side of innovation, I don't know why so many can't get that. I'm just not into everyone playing in their corner of the sandbox, making their own salad to bring to the picnic. With a bit of planning and standardization, you end up with a nice meal, not a bunch of crap on the table that no one knows what to do with, and you can't make a decent sandwich out of.
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  5. #105
    mad scientist
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by B-Mac View Post
    Open letter to the bike industry:

    ....

    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).

    .....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.


    Oooooohhh! my first mtn. bike was a schwinn sierra too in '85! red with white hubs.
    still have the 1983 mtn goat and took it out for a ride last month on some serious trails.

    missed the disc brakes and suspension, and index shifting.

  6. #106
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,435
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    The irony is rich.

    "15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved."
    Yes, I'm not a fan of 15mm, but if not for multiple standards, there would be no 20mm either. We would all be stuck with 9mm QR. The problem with 15mm is NOT that it is an extra standard, it is that it is (IMO) inferior to 20mm for nearly all uses.

    Again, not opposed to new standards.
    But don't you see that you can't have a "new" standard without at some point having multiple standards? Are you suggesting everyone in the industry all agree to change at once? What if one company thinks it has a better way to do it?

    Imagine if when we went from 1" threaded, the industry threw out 4 different diameters, press fit styles, thread pitches and each bike maker had their own combination version of it.

    How would any suspension fork maker choose which was the one to go with?
    But they did NOT do that. What is your point? What they DID do is introduce three different threadless steer tube sizes. One of them caught on the best. What is going on now is actually not as bad. I had no trouble sticking my 2004 1-1/8" fork into a 2011 frame designed to accept straight or tapered forks.

    Like dru brought up with XTR BCD's, how did your life improve, at all?
    Who cares about one single product? The point is you have other options, you don't have to keep using XTR. Would you have rather that EVERYONE in the industry had switched together with XTR? It is because of multiple standards that you had other choices, one of which was to keep using the same rings. I've got cranks ranging in age from mid/late-90's to 2010 that all use the same ring size. And SO WHAT if it uses something else?

    I'm opposed to pointlessly different, simultaneous standards in the same component. Let one ride for a while, learn from it, and grow with intent.
    Who decides what is "pointlessly different"? I for one completely disagree with you about 142mm rear spacing. The market decides, that's who. Yes, I do not always agree with the market (15mm ta and the push for so many gears in the back are examples), but NO WAY would I throw out all the GOOD innovations that came from the same fundamental process as those duds.

    ISIS was tried, and eventually for the most part, discarded. But it's not like we had 4 different ISIS standards all at the same time.....
    Yes, ISIS did not work out so well. THANK GOODNESS I had other options at the time.

    I'm on the side of innovation, I don't know why so many can't get that. I'm just not into everyone playing in their corner of the sandbox, making their own salad to bring to the picnic. With a bit of planning and standardization, you end up with a nice meal, not a bunch of crap on the table that no one knows what to do with, and you can't make a decent sandwich out of.
    The problem is that you say you are on the side of innovation, but you are opposed to one of the key requirement that makes innovation possible: the opportunity to prove your product on the market.

    To use your sandbox/meal analogy, menu by consensus does a good job of making bland food that is basically acceptable to all. Ever see what happens when 4 people need to agree on pizza toppings? you order a plain cheese pie. The salad in your case will be lettuce with no dressing. Want to find really good, creative food? Go somewhere where everyone is doing something different and try them all. Yes, you will not like some, but some you will love. Some of that food inspires others to improve on it. It is a dynamic process. Such is the case with technology as well.

    The alternative to multiple, competing standards is the industry deciding FOR everyone what is the best and giving us no other options.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  7. #107
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,320
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    The idea that "the industry" makes ANY decisions is ludicrous. Individual companies make decisions. On occasion a few companies will make one together, and in these cases it is usually in order to agree on some standard. No company makes a decision because it will benefit "the industry" they make decisions to benefit themselves.

    In very few cases can it be demonstrated that a company introducing a new standard just for the sake of it being new would be profitable. If it does not provide some perceived benefit for the consumer, they will not make money on it. If you think that people are being duped as to actual; benefit, blame the mtb consumers for rewarding companies by buying their products.

    The CONSUMERS are the ones completely responsible for what "the industry" sells. They sell what we buy. Otherwise they are out of business.
    Respectfully disagree.
    Case in point pf-BB. IMO this is a solution to simplify production for carbon frames, and is soley to lessen production costs.
    In 30 years I've never x-threaded a BB shell, and seen very few where the user did so by installing the cups incorrectly.
    All bearings require parallel surfaces to operate correctly, yet few frames come faced / chased, and believe this remains true for pf-BB's.

    Threaded BB cups are reliable and easy to service.
    Now, one needs a BB press to remove bearing cups, and there's a chance to misalign while installing, and a risk to oval-izing the BB shell.
    [LBS mech managed to slip installing the pf-BB on my new frame, removed a big chunk of paint, did not acknowledge his mistake until caught,
    then charged full $$ for the job - azzmunching idiot.]

    Perhaps, I'm biased, yet do not see pf BB's as an improvement, only as a cost savings to mfg's, and believe strongly this to be
    a new source of major headaches for the consumer. What size, ID, which model, replaceable bearings, $$, and very limited selections.
    Will quit now before ranting about the limitations of direct-mount FD's -arrrggh!

  8. #108
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,435
    Quote Originally Posted by Flyin_W View Post
    Respectfully disagree.
    Case in point pf-BB. IMO this is a solution to simplify production for carbon frames, and is soley to lessen production costs.
    In 30 years I've never x-threaded a BB shell, and seen very few where the user did so by installing the cups incorrectly.
    All bearings require parallel surfaces to operate correctly, yet few frames come faced / chased, and believe this remains true for pf-BB's.

    Threaded BB cups are reliable and easy to service.
    Now, one needs a BB press to remove bearing cups, and there's a chance to misalign while installing, and a risk to oval-izing the BB shell.
    [LBS mech managed to slip installing the pf-BB on my new frame, removed a big chunk of paint, did not acknowledge his mistake until caught,
    then charged full $$ for the job - azzmunching idiot.]

    Perhaps, I'm biased, yet do not see pf BB's as an improvement, only as a cost savings to mfg's, and believe strongly this to be
    a new source of major headaches for the consumer. What size, ID, which model, replaceable bearings, $$, and very limited selections.
    Will quit now before ranting about the limitations of direct-mount FD's -arrrggh!
    I have to respectfully disagree that your case in point is a case in point.

    In regards to it being an "industry" decision, it is not. It is some individual companies making the decision to go that way. Some do, some don't. They do it for their OWN bottom line, NOT for the sake of "the industry".

    And consumers ARE ultimately deciding if it is worth it. If it turns out that customers feel that press fit is just a PITA with no benefit (and if you are correct about costs, then lower cost IS a benefit to the customer) then it will go away.

    I think you are mistaking:

    A) The assertion that multiple standards (and new ones constantly popping up) is an inevitable by-product of technological progress and innovation in bikes which on the whole benefits cyclists in the products available to them.

    to mean the same thing as...

    B) An endorsement of every new standard that comes out.

    I believe A, but not B.
    Last edited by kapusta; 07-23-2012 at 12:00 PM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    154
    I ride the old crap and my boys get the new stuff. It's all good. Plus I always have an excuse when they are faster...

  10. #110
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    I just bought a frame having a PF-30 BB shell and while not crazy about it as a straight forward BB shell vs. threaded, I can run a Beer Components eccentric to fool with geometry and the bearing cups do not require being pressed or drifted in.

    Similar story on the drive train where I run 6 cogs on a single speed hub.

    Point being that I find all these new standards give me room to really build something individual where this was somewhat more of a challenge in the days of 1" threaded steer tubes and tapered crank spindles.

    Some things like multiple seat tube diameters I think are certainly superfluous, but in the end I think these are the most exciting days to live for bicycle enthusiasts because of all these new, creative efforts.

    I'll take the bad with the good.

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mwcet8k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    417
    Just came across a recent blog post by Joe Graney, lead engineer at Santa Cruz, where he discusses new standards in detail. In short, while some new standards make sense and are legitimate advancements, most are nothing more than marketing bull. This is one of the biggest reasons why I'm a Santa Cruz fan - they've always been very selective in which new standards they adopt. Wish every manufacturer took this approach. Copied and pasted below for your viewing pleasure.

    *****

    Each time we work on a bike design - and we're always working on new bikes- the engineering group and our product manager sit down to haggle about what the frame is going to be like, and what type of parts it will accept. This used to be a fairly simple process - it basically consisted of deciding 68 or 73 mm width on bottom bracket width. We try to make a lot of components interchangeable between our various models. If there's not a damn good reason to have different diameter seat-posts or front derailleur clamps, then those numbers remain the same. Recently, however, we've seen a proliferation of new "standards" representing conceptual minefields that must be crossed when designing a bike frame. An incomplete list would include (stick with me through the list, there's a point somewhere near the end):

    Headsets: 1 1/8, 1.5, 1 1/8 to 1.5 tapered. And then you have integrated and semi-integrated options for each of those. Stems and forks are both subject to these dimensions, and each one can affect clearance between the fork crown to down-tube as well as influence bar height and frame geometry. To figure out what makes sense for what, we have to balance stiffness versus weight of the entire system, including the frame, headset, adaptors, stem AND fork. I've been told that the purpose of the tapered steerer "standard" (Sram and Fox have different taper lengths...) is to make it easier to find stems. WTF? So they're basically saying there is a new standard (1.5) that hasn't yet been adopted fully, so we're introducing another standard to address it, even though finding a headset or a fork will be more of a pain than finding a 1.5 stem ever was.

    Bottom Brackets: 73mm BB shells are fairly standard now for 135mm rear axle spacing, but now we've also got 83mm BB shells, and 100! (my knees ache typing that), and Shimano's new press fit version that still gets you the same chain-line with no weight difference or discernable advantage, and now the "BB 30". Kill me please. In reality, there are only two chain-lines being widely used at the moment; 50mm and 57-ish mm (there's some squabble about a few mm around that one), so why does everyone want to change this? The BB is the part that frames are built around. It's "Manhattan real-estate" for a frame design.

    Hubs and Spacing: 135mm QR rear, 135x12mm rear, 150x12mm rear, 100mm QR front, 110x20mm front, and now 100x15mm front. Let us not forget the special dropouts needed to accommodate the old Saint, or the current Maxle, on a frame. And of course there are Maverick's special hubs, and some other company w/ even bigger front axles.

    Brakes: 120, 140, 160, 180 and 200mm rotors, you got your six-bolt and your center-lock action. Plus different adaptors for post mount, Boxxer mount, ISO mount, post mount for 200mm, not to mention the Dorado mount, Hayes 22, etc.... Now and again people who make brakes try to tell me that we should put post mount type attachments on our frames, cuz' everyone knows post mount is rad, right? So, uh, how do you face those tabs in a shop anyway? A die-cast fork leg is different than a welded swing-arm assembly. I've been told - multiple times, actually - that it's better for the bolts. Yeah, those M6 bolts used for an IS mount are just crying out, can you hear 'em? Can you?

    Wheels: This is a subject that is not only related to axle diameter and spacing and rotor attachment, but also spokes and rims. These are fairly abused items on a bike, rims and wheels being the things that actually hit those rocks we ride over. There are very few "cool" wheels on the market today that can be repaired without a long wait, special tools and lots of patience. Oh, and they cost more. Cuz its freakin' *****in' to have white spokes when I'm x-in' up, yo. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the 29" and 650B wheel sizes. Yup. At least the hubs remain the same for those things, thanks to the freaks for leaving that much alone. [Late update: I just read about 135mm spacing front hubs for 29ers, what a relief!] I can see the message boards lighting up now, a boycott might start any minute now.

    ISCG "standards" include about 13 different ways to configure three stupid holes around the bottom bracket. And even then half the chain-guides on the market don't fit right without spacers, and putting your cranks on, then taking them off, and on, and off to get it right. And then there's ISCG05, same 3 holes 'cept we moved 'em! These holes initially held a back-plate to orient rollers that weren't abused much, but now people are hanging "taco" style bash guards on there which puts a lot more force on that little frame tab. And how do you weld that tab on anyway? It's only in the way of the freaking DOWN-TUBE on a lot of bikes. Beauty standard you got there. Well thought out.

    Seat-posts: I don't have to list every diameter post there is, but to add to that mess, road and XC bikes are now getting super neat by not saving weight and adding a new way to screw up your bike by integrating the seat-post into the frame. Anyone ever cut a steerer tube too short by accident? I wonder if anyone out there has had to buy a "tall" saddle to make up for a mistake... Wanna sell your bike ever? Here's a great way not to.

    Saddle/Post: There are different rail diameters of course, along with the unfortunate execution of the I-beam concept. I predict this relatively constant area to blow up in the next few years. It's just too predictable and easy not to have new "standards". Roadies are already getting into one piece molded post/saddle combos.

    Bars and Stems: Forget about the varying stem length and bar widths, that's something justifiable. But if, speaking as a bike company, you figure on two steerer diameters, 5 stem lengths, and two bar diameters (25.4 and 31.8), then we've got 20 different combos right there. No wonder you can't find the combination you want for a particular type of riding (from a product manager point of view) that doesn't suck or cost a ton. Nobody can commit to tool up that much crap.

    Derailleur mounting and cable routing is another thing, but probably more arcane than is worth getting into - top and bottom pull, top and bottom mount, 31.8, 34.9, E type, etc. Shimano should be applauded for doing a great job in recent years of making their FDs work in multiple situations though with adaptors and clever design. Just wait though; new "standards" are coming your way.

    I won't even get into shock mounting or annual height increases of fork top caps, as I think my point is made. There are lots of different "standards". Fans of evolutionary theory might argue that this sort of proliferation is good for mountain bikes, and I tend to agree with that sentiment - in theory. However, the concerns I have are when a trend conflicts with two core values I hold when designing a new bicycle: choice and long-term support. There's a crew of mountain bike freaks that work at Santa Cruz Bicycles engineering department. We're not old-school curmudgeons and don't sit around lamenting the day that clunkers weren't used anymore. We get paid to push the envelope and be creative and come up with new stuff. But evaluating "performance gains" versus our core values is something we take very seriously - we put a lot of time into figuring out if the new way will be better than the old way. And I mean things that are fairly basic, albeit time consuming, like calculating the system weight by switching a frame to integrated headset from a plain old boring press in style. Call us crazy, but that seems like something that should be considered in the decision making process. Turns out, it doesn't save more than a few grams, it decreases your choice in headsets, and it looks kinda dumb with some forks.

    Choice, as we define our customizable mountain bike builds, depends on compatibility. Long term support, to a great degree, does as well. It's hard to be confident that the newest steerer tube diameter or BB attachment scheme is going to be supported for a long time by the company introducing it, and for that reason it's difficult for us to spec a frame with a new "standard", since we want our customers to use our bikes for a long time. And if only one or two companies adopt the new specifications, one's choices and chances for long-term support are even more restricted.

    On the surface, this multiplication of options seems a boon for cyclists that appreciate performance gains. Look a little closer, however, and sometimes new options are introduced merely because the manufacture has nothing new to offer, so they create "buzz" by making something different even though it doesn't provide much in terms of increased performance. Companies introducing new standards have a vested interest in their success, and we should all be wary of accepting the marketing claims. The performance data (if there even is any) should be independently vetted. Often, it takes years of evolution with any new design to optimize it, since engineers are typically (and hopefully) initially conservative with the design to ensure rider safety.

    Some critical questions that get in the way of the rad factor with any new product can go a long way in determining if that product has been well thought through. Beyond the system weight comparison mentioned previously, there are some even more basic ones: How do you get those bearings out? Does your local shop have a tool? How much does the tool cost and when will it ship? How exactly does pressing bearings in make a difference? Did you make up a problem to solve after you made this thing? What other problems does it create? Let's take this marketing BS down to brass tacks here, because I don't want to screw with my bike all the time. I want to ride it, put it away and go drink beer, okay? Tomorrow, I want to pick it up and do that again. Maybe some people have the time and patience to screw with their bikes all the time, but I bet many of these people (a) don't ride enough, or (b) don't have a life, or (c) consider working on their bike a hobby. (If you are (c), I have some stuff to sell you, gimme a ring.)

    There's plenty of opportunity for improvement on bikes. Hey, it's what I do for a paycheck, so there better be. There's a flip side to the coin though. I have the first frame I ever designed (a fixed gear made in Waterloo) that I can't get the bottom bracket out of, because the new "standard" tool that the manufacturer dreamed up in 1996 is extinct, and it worked so poorly anyway that it destroyed the interface the last time I tried to remove it six years ago. I'm lucky that the spindle still turns, which is more than I can say for some of these brand new "oversized" bearings that don't last six months without seizing up (and those were created by the people that want us to change). Does anyone understand how much work that is? There's moving front derailleur mounting, pivot locations, tire clearance, down-tube welding, alignment, QC tooling, machining tooling, etc., etc... It better be for something, but the track record is not looking good.

    Let's face it, we've all been burned before with glittering promises of radness, stiffness, and the newest bestest thing ever. But when you open the box, does it really deliver as advertised? When do we wake up and not believe the same old song and dance? Show me something that lasts ten years and I'll change to it tomorrow. Boring, huh? I just want my bike to work well and last a long time without spending more money on it.

    Done well, product improvements can make our bikes lighter, stronger, faster and more fun to ride. Done poorly (no perceptible improvement but a 100% increase in incompatibility), they can disenfranchise riders who find themselves unable to get parts and have their vacations or after-work rides ruined by simple mechanical failures that can't be easily repaired, and create a whole scrap heap of prematurely obsolete bicycles that could otherwise have had longer functional life-spans. The "market" (that's you by the way) has the last word in this. If you can control your addiction to shiny new stuff for a few minutes, and ask the right critical questions when faced with "new standards", manufacturers and suppliers might think twice - or even once - about those questions before they dribble out their next batch.

  12. #112
    Five is right out
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,174
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw2jr View Post
    Paragraphs are awesome
    What he said. They make the "bike industry" more likely to read the letter.

    At least the (for me) inscrutably dense block of text spurred some interesting commentary.

  13. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,781
    Quote Originally Posted by Flyin_W View Post
    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.
    Killing it with close inspection.

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: moofish's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    127
    I like Beta

  15. #115
    Weekend warrior aspirant
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by FireLikeIYA View Post
    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.
    I hear what you're saying - but if it's too costly... don't upgrade.
    They make the upgrades at that price because people will buy them.

    I didn't upgrade for over 20 years because it simply wasn't worth it. When it was finally a big enough gap that I felt it was important to upgrade, I did. Went with a new frame and all X9 components, still got everything built for around 1400. Not a lot more than I paid for my *old* bike, and that was 20 years ago when that was quite a bit more money.
    Mountain bike with 15k miles, Road bike with 10k miles, breaking in my 29er by riding the entire AZ Trail

  16. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GiantMountainTroll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    I think new stuff is way expensive and the prices for everything just keep going up. And now alot of manufacturers are leaning toward 29"(nothing against them so dont bully me). I personally prefer the mountain bikes from 07-11. Some sh** is getting ridiculous.
    2013 Specialized P 26 AM green/purple. Nuff said

    Giant Faith

  17. #117
    livin' the dream......
    Reputation: tjkm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,637
    Unless riding a bike is paying your bills, just ride what you want and be selective in what you buy. I picked up a 29er 3 years ago and am very happy with that purchase. I can't swing buying a new bike each year, so now I ride a 2010. Big f'ing deal!

    When I AM READY I will get a new rig. I recently inquired about going 2x10 on my current bike (feeding off the hype). Rough #'s from the shop was $500 +/-. The new model of my current bike now comes with 2 x 10 off the floor, so I will wait for 2 x 10 until I get a new bike (or what ever then next advancement is).

    Don't get me wrong. I am all for advancement of the technology and companies need to make a profit, I just contribute to the cash flow when I choose to, not when the next shiny thing hits the sales floor.

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    9
    I like my 3 year old FS 26'er. Lots of improvement over my 12 year old HT Marin that rattles my spine in rock gardens. Better to have choices...

  19. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chas_martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by B-Mac View Post
    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.
    Amen!
    Nobody cares...........

  20. #120
    Gamers local 2112
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    784
    I did not just say what I said just to stir up a hornets nest, I've come to these conclusions after years of riding and professionally wrenching, watching all the twisted up angry confused faces of people that don't care about all the new standards or whatever you want to call them. I have a friend who is a very fit, very strong rider and he has a 300 dollar 29 from performance bike (a whole different kind of evil), he bought a niner and said for the huge difference in cost the difference in ride quality was none or nominal as best. Now if you just plopped down $$$ for some new bit for your bike would you be honest enough with yourself to say it was a waste of money or you noticed no appreciable difference? New is not better all the time, new is simply new. I feel the bike industry is out of control with forcing new on to us, and it is up to us to do or at least say something about it.

    And to those that hurled insults from the safety of their computer, I'm so hurt! Grade school antics lead me to believe that you need to let off some steam and ride more.

    Thanks!

  21. #121
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,435
    Quote Originally Posted by rev106 View Post
    Now if you just plopped down $$$ for some new bit for your bike would you be honest enough with yourself to say it was a waste of money or you noticed no appreciable difference? !
    Sure, I've stated many times when I spent a bunch of money on something and was unimpressed or disappointed.

    But my Gravity Dropper that I bought 6 years ago is definitely not one of those cases.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  22. #122
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by rev106 View Post
    if you just plopped down $$$ for some new bit for your bike would you be honest enough with yourself to say it was a waste of money or you noticed no appreciable difference? New is not better all the time, new is simply new. I feel the bike industry is out of control with forcing new on to us, and it is up to us to do or at least say something about it.
    I plop down much more on classic American auto's and in both cases it rarely improves my performance, but customization is part of the fun.

    I did most my riding in the early nineties and returned to riding in January of this year. I had a handle on most if not all these different standards pretty quick.

    My current ride sports a PF30 BB shell, a 12mmX142mm rear axle, a Maverick fork with it's own proprietory 24mm axle hub, etc...

    I understand it can be frustrating, but it was much more so back when options were so very limited. I find it exciting to see so much thought and innovation being invested in bicycle technology, can't wait to see what else the future holds for this sport which I have such passion for.

    At least all the hardware is metric (shrug), I would agree the trend toward Torx instead of Allen heads is unnecessary.

  23. #123
    RideDirt
    Reputation: aedubber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,252
    Hey nobody said this was a cheap hobby , i buy what i want when i want ... You can feed me all the new stuff and old stuff bla bla bla , but at the end of the day WE make our own choices and spend OUR own money..

    So if you dont like the new stuff , dont buy it lol plain and simple . I sure as hell can tell the difference between a $500 bike and a $3-4k bike big time ..You just gotta pay to play thats all .

  24. #124
    father, mountain biker
    Reputation: shredjunkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    192

    the irony is killing me

    Quote Originally Posted by rev106 View Post
    And to those that hurled insults from the safety of their computer, I'm so hurt!
    You mean like the guy who called the folks that work in the bike industry a bunch of "carneys"? Oh, wait, that was you in the OP! Where's the irony emoticon when you need it?
    Last edited by shredjunkie; 08-06-2012 at 09:05 PM.
    "He seems quite arrogant and ignores quite some valid points." -Millfox
    "I don't like you" -ne_dan

  25. #125
    ~ B A D A S S ~
    Reputation: car bone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,170
    wtf is a carney??
    Rule #9 // If you are out riding in bad weather, it means you are a badass. Period.

    Quote Originally Posted by iheartbicycles View Post
    Specialized sucks ass.

  26. #126
    occ member
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,195
    Quote Originally Posted by car bone View Post
    wtf is a carney??
    <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZXRfnIfFYFI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

  27. #127
    father, mountain biker
    Reputation: shredjunkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by car bone View Post
    wtf is a carney??
    Here in the US, you find them running carnival ripoff games, trolling renaissance fairs, and lurking on the outskirts of dead shows. Here's what the urban dictionary says... not my words, not sure I even understand all the variations and references. Point is they are universally unliked people.

    Urban Dictionary: carny

    1. freak

    2. Someone who works at a carnival
    I saw an extremely fat and tugley carny with unusually small eyes which got much bigger when it smelled my popcorn.

    3. A carnival worker, often running the mechanical rides, who likes to hit on teenage, or younger, females. They are generally not clean people, and will buy alcohol in exchange for companionship.

    4. Carnival Folk, one with small hands and freakish appearance to be laughed at by normal people

    5. In Europe a carny is a scary person who is on the darker, wilder side of the crusty world.

    6. Typically wearing dreadlocks, goatie beards, stripey pants, various small bells, and pointy shoes, they are often skilled in juggling or fire breathing.

    7. Commonly found all over Europe but particulary in Czeck Republic, Germany and Norway, not neccessarily having been born there.

    8. They live in a world of red mushrooms with white spots, jesters, gnomes, trolls, dwarfs, chainmail, pointless medievil references and bad music.

    9. They play freaky variants of guitars and mandolins and often speak in rhymes or riddles.

    10. They are rarely seen on TV, One appeared on Ali G, singing a song about "the pixie people"

    11. They dont listen to CDs, opting to play their own freaky rubbish. The closest thing to carny music you might find is a band called "folque" -

    12. Middle class guy on holiday in Prague:
    "Oh no, here comes another f&*kin carny"
    Last edited by shredjunkie; 08-07-2012 at 06:40 AM.
    "He seems quite arrogant and ignores quite some valid points." -Millfox
    "I don't like you" -ne_dan

  28. #128
    father, mountain biker
    Reputation: shredjunkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    192
    Cornfield... excellent reference. Wish I'd thought of that.
    "He seems quite arrogant and ignores quite some valid points." -Millfox
    "I don't like you" -ne_dan

  29. #129
    ~ B A D A S S ~
    Reputation: car bone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,170
    OK i think I understand now hahahaha.

    "They live in a world of red mushrooms with white spots" these are the best, yummy yummy



    Amanita muscaria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Rule #9 // If you are out riding in bad weather, it means you are a badass. Period.

    Quote Originally Posted by iheartbicycles View Post
    Specialized sucks ass.

  30. #130
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    15,230
    Quote Originally Posted by car bone View Post
    wtf is a carney??
    Carnivale HBO trailer promo - YouTube

    ^These folks^
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  31. #131
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,950
    Quote Originally Posted by rev106 View Post
    I feel the bike industry is out of control with forcing new on to us, and it is up to us to do or at least say something about it.
    The industry is giving us what they think we want. The only way to effectively tell them we don't want it is to not buy it.

  32. #132
    inexperienced at large
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,859
    Quote Originally Posted by car bone View Post
    OK i think I understand now hahahaha.

    "They live in a world of red mushrooms with white spots" these are the best, yummy yummy



    Amanita muscaria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    I remember finding some Amanita muscaria out hiking not too long ago. I was happy to see them, really! It had been some time. Though I hope you know that those aren't for consuming. The muscimol in them is pretty terrible for you. Finding real magic mushrooms is easier than these guys, in my experience, because these you have to actually find growing.

  33. #133
    ~ B A D A S S ~
    Reputation: car bone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,170
    Yeah I know these are dangerous, this is the first mushroom you are taught never to touch when you are a kid. The vikings supposedly ate them, and if one viking survived the experience it was then considered safe to drink his urine to get the same effect.
    Rule #9 // If you are out riding in bad weather, it means you are a badass. Period.

    Quote Originally Posted by iheartbicycles View Post
    Specialized sucks ass.

  34. #134
    bringer of doom
    Reputation: p.doering's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    201
    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.
    Last edited by p.doering; 08-08-2012 at 12:46 PM.
    Ride on, Anthony.

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    269
    I dont read this forum much at all, but I had to respond to the OP

    I DO agree with you to a point. Especially after selling a fork with a 20mm thru axle and buying another with a 15mm thru axle. New front wheel here we come-lol.

    I kind of agree 21 speeds were enough, as long as the high and low gears could be what we have now.

    I have been riding since before suspension. I remember the first Rockshox. Everyone wanted a fork that didnt dare move when pedaling.

    Now its years later, I still ride at all the same places. And l wouldnt give up my full suspension 29er with disc brakes for anything-lol. Its not the fact that I can ride faster. Its just more damn fun. If anything we ride slower now, playing on the technical parts of the trail.

    I am not one of those guys that always has to have to latest and greatest stuff, if anything I'm usually the holdout. But like many of the posters mentioned, no one is forcing you to buy anything.

    Thinking about it, I'm not sure I'd still be riding now if it wasnt for the changes in the industry. My body couldnt handle it-lol

    Tom

  36. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation: danmtchl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    453
    I agree with the bottom bracket "standards". There are so many bottom bracket sizes these days it's hard to keep up. There are really three standards that I can think of 1) square taper 2) IsIs and outboard bearing. They are widely accepted and can be found in almost any shop.

    Trek have at least 4 standard BB according to them. Cannondale has the BB30 which I almost consider a standard since it has been around so long.

  37. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BoiseBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by rev106 View Post
    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.

    I hope that your "van" is from the 1960's, does not have an automatic transmission nor air conditioning. Furthermore, I hope that you have nothing but an AM radio as well.

    As you proclaim things, anything above the basics is just useless marketing to create profits for the companies!
    BoiseBoy

  38. #138
    Feet back and spread 'em!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    624
    Quote Originally Posted by Zachariah View Post
    OP, you're never forced to buy anything. Be glad MTB is a progressive sport....and not one mired in abject obsolescence. Mind you, I don't even ride with the latest and greatest...even though I can well afford it. But, since I'll never see myself racing - I'm perfectly happy with my two-year-old FS 26er with eight year-old parts. Why? Because the parts I do have are durable. I will replace them as they break....not with the same, but with 2012+ equivalents.

    Your letter will only fall upon deaf ears and eyes. Having the upper edge simply does not mean you need to have the latest 29er with 2x10 componentry....but with what you are safely having enough fun on.
    Exactly, speak with your checkbook. example:.i will never buy carbon because i don't race and don't want to replace parts after minor crashes. i am apparently in the minority.

    i like progress. i like disc brakes, 29ers, etc, but i also like square taper, steel, 8-9 speed. buy what works for you. i don't worry about emulating some racer or looking "pro". that's marketing ******** of the highest order.
    the time is right for violent revolution

  39. #139
    Feet back and spread 'em!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    624
    Quote Originally Posted by bikecop View Post
    Exactly, speak with your checkbook. example:.i will never buy carbon because i don't race and don't want to replace parts after minor crashes. i am apparently in the minority.

    i like progress. i like disc brakes, 29ers, etc, but i also like square taper, steel, 8-9 speed. buy what works for you. i don't worry about emulating some racer or looking "pro". that's marketing ******** of the highest order.
    i've been auto-bleeped. how lame.
    the time is right for violent revolution

  40. #140
    Thread Terrorist
    Reputation: IndecentExposure's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,854
    Why is my motorola startac so awesome?
    Golden Bike Park Group

    Peak Cycles Gravity Team & Bikeparts.com
    Trestle Bike Park

  41. #141
    pyroclastic flow
    Reputation: troyer2112's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    193
    I will agree with so many companies deciding what is better is BS. However we are ultimately benefiting from all of this technology.
    The "used market" is where we are really benefitting from! You can find so many great deals on everything because someone is "chasing" technology.
    My advice is to become very familiar with the industry and follow the trends, dont bite until you are ready and its ironed itself out. Also work on your bikes!!! get tools!!! its so rewarding and you wont be at the mercy of someone else. Be a responsible person!!!
    I understand the pain of wanting to stay primitive and when something breaks you are forced to buy the new standard because either they dont make it anymore or it doesnt fit.

    Dont just say its an awesome upgrade unless you can really feel it!!! A lot of people just take the bait and are really fooled into thinking its the "monkeys nuts" just because they read an article from a bike mag stating it is so great. People dont think for themselves most of the time and follow blindly but act like its their idea...thats what they want you to think.
    This is like all of the damn reality shows and someone is just checking it out because its LIVE ACTION. All we are doing is making networks want to make horrible fake reality shows and we are left with junk.

    That being said....OP lets race and ill show you how new technology has helped me become faster and safer as well as happy, you are pissed because everytime you want something that looks great you are reminded of what a curmudgeon you are and you cant afford it.
    "THE FACT IS THIS FRICTION WILL ONLY BE WORN BY PERSISTENCE"
    2009 PIVOT MACH 4

  42. #142
    No longer a hardtailkid.
    Reputation: hardtailkid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,830
    To the OP: I am just going to take a wild guess here... you are an engineer!


    Another guess... you must know more about the mechanics of a bike than I or any of the other mechanics at my shop!
    Quote Originally Posted by anthonys
    Its still just the push of a button away...
    I am no longer a hardtailkid. 2012 Trek Remedy 9!

  43. #143
    inexperienced at large
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,859
    Hey, Bike Industry here-we got your letter


    YEAH
    thanks

  44. #144
    I'm SUCH a square....
    Reputation: bigpedaler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,950
    I'm a lot less concerned about what's newest, brightest, bestest, etc., than I am about the good stuff that fell by the wayside over the years.

    I ride an ISIS crankset/BB; I'm getting a little concerned! I've been looking, and ISIS is getting pretty rare; AFAIC, it's better than Octalink, but external BB has taken over (and don't get me started about BB30/whatever). A lot of things I mourn are brand-specific (Santa Cruz dropped the VP-Free, and developed the Nomad -- I'd like to have BOTH! Manitou's Travis line has VANISHED....), but things like that damned 142 rearend standard just ruffle me.

    I can see the advantage to a tapered steerer in some apps; but DAMN, standardize the headset! Standard cups top & bottom, or zero-stack top & bottom, let's just make it right!
    A bike is the only drug with no bad side effects....

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tillers_Rule's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by troyer2112 View Post
    I will agree with so many companies deciding what is better is BS. However we are ultimately benefiting from all of this technology.
    The "used market" is where we are really benefitting from! You can find so many great deals on everything because someone is "chasing" technology.
    My advice is to become very familiar with the industry and follow the trends, dont bite until you are ready and its ironed itself out. Also work on your bikes!!! get tools!!! its so rewarding and you wont be at the mercy of someone else. Be a responsible person!!!
    I understand the pain of wanting to stay primitive and when something breaks you are forced to buy the new standard because either they dont make it anymore or it doesnt fit.

    Dont just say its an awesome upgrade unless you can really feel it!!! A lot of people just take the bait and are really fooled into thinking its the "monkeys nuts" just because they read an article from a bike mag stating it is so great. People dont think for themselves most of the time and follow blindly but act like its their idea...thats what they want you to think.
    This is like all of the damn reality shows and someone is just checking it out because its LIVE ACTION. All we are doing is making networks want to make horrible fake reality shows and we are left with junk.

    That being said....OP lets race and ill show you how new technology has helped me become faster and safer as well as happy, you are pissed because everytime you want something that looks great you are reminded of what a curmudgeon you are and you cant afford it.

  46. #146
    ONE speed under God.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    190
    Maybe I'm old school, or maybe I just don't get it, but OPs letter sounds like one big whine without any point at all. I don't know the first thing about bb taper, 92 bearings or any of the other minutiae he's talking about. Nor do I understand the whining about all new parts out there that may or may not be better than the current parts. You don't like one of the new standards, then don't buy it.

    what I DO know is that the improvements in bikes the last 20 years has been vast, and I have a vertitable plethora of choices in bikes, and all the parts I decide to put on them. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

    what I also like is that so many bike parts are interchangeable. You can often take parts from one bike and put it on another bike, or you can buy parts on-line and have a high degree of confidence that those parts will work. In the last six months, I've upgraded my SS 29ER with carbon fork and post, wheels, seat, bashguard, pedals, stem, and probably a few other parts I don't recall offhand. All of these parts were bought online and they all worked. This is really a good thing.

    So if I missed the point please let me know --- without anonymous neg rep please. And finally to OP, paragraph breaks are your friend, and the friend of everyone trying to get through your wall of text.
    Nashbar SS 29er
    K2 FS Attack
    Cannondale R600

  47. #147
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,435
    Quote Originally Posted by bigpedaler View Post
    I ride an ISIS crankset/BB; I'm getting a little concerned! I've been looking, and ISIS is getting pretty rare; AFAIC, it's better than Octalink, but external BB has taken over (and don't get me started about BB30/whatever).
    Why do you think ISIS is better than octalink?
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    8
    Here here!

  49. #149
    RideDirt
    Reputation: aedubber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,252
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    why do you think isis is better than octalink?

    +1 :d

  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 11 Bravo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by bigpedaler View Post
    .................................................. ..............................
    I ride an ISIS crankset/BB; I'm getting a little concerned! I've been looking, and ISIS is getting pretty rare; .................................................. ................
    I would disagree that ISIS is getting hard to find. It seems to me that the bottom brackets are available all over the place. That said, finding a GOOD one is another matter.

    My brother and I both still run ISIS BB in our singlespeeds. We were both about to give up on ISIS because it was nearly impossible to get a bottom bracket that would last more than a summer. The Crank Brothers BB with the 5 year warranty seemed like the answer, but they were the worst. I had one that only made it about 2 months. After a couple cycles of that, I got tired of warrantying it and sold the thing.

    I like the Middleburn cranks I have, but I was about ready to stick them on e-bay and go to square taper. Then I heard that SKF was making ISIS bottom brackets. I know SKF stuff from work and they make excellent stuff. The bottom bracket is no different. Excellent quality and serviceable.

    They are a little hard to find sometimes, but get one. Compass Bicycles: Bottom Brackets

    I see new ones on e-bay from a bike shop in Australia from time to time if you can't find anybody that has one in stock here.

    We installed the SKF units in our bikes at the same time. That was 5 years ago and they are both still going strong.

    We fell for the upgrade to the new standard stuff because it is better and found out it was BS. But, I will run the parts as long as I can.

    If these SKF bottom brackets ever give out and I can't find another one, then I will upgrade my cranks. Probably with the latest, greatest best new "standard" thing that is out when that time comes
    I'm not very smart, but I can lift heavy things

  51. #151
    Now broadcasting from CO
    Reputation: PAmtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,224
    Someone seems a bit butthurt...
    Brought to you by rocks.

  52. #152
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,870
    I pretty much stayed away from this thread, but since I just shared this thought elsewhere, this is probably a more appropriate spot:

    Every bike forum I've read has way too much complaining from people about 'the industry' using 'marketing' to try and take their money and make them buy something new (29ers, 650b, tapered steerers, the list goes on). But there are a lot of people looking to buy at any given point, and besides I would guess the majority of bike sales are people buying new complete bikes, rather than enthusiasts building up a frame. I don't remember people complaining about having to buy a new car when side curtain airbags or traction control became common, but any advance in the bike industry has people screaming about being gouged rather than thinking "yeah, that might be cool when I get my next bike in a few years."

  53. #153
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by evasive View Post
    I pretty much stayed away from this thread, but since I just shared this thought elsewhere, this is probably a more appropriate spot:

    Every bike forum I've read has way too much complaining from people about 'the industry' using 'marketing' to try and take their money and make them buy something new (29ers, 650b, tapered steerers, the list goes on). But there are a lot of people looking to buy at any given point, and besides I would guess the majority of bike sales are people buying new complete bikes, rather than enthusiasts building up a frame. I don't remember people complaining about having to buy a new car when side curtain airbags or traction control became common, but any advance in the bike industry has people screaming about being gouged rather than thinking "yeah, that might be cool when I get my next bike in a few years."
    I've never had to use the features of a seat belt, and I've never had to use the features of ABS, yet I get to pay for them, because of the masses being idiots that are irresponsible drivers in the driving conditions out there. You can't fix stupid, be it people, or operators, with engineering feats mandated into place making vehicles more and more expensive for the masses.

    I say, let Darwins Law sort it out, and leave all the crap bells and whistles off of our cars, morons shouldn't be driving in the first place, driving is a privelege, not a right. Leave it as an option for those that want it, not mandated by a Nanny State government.

  54. #154
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,870
    Sure, but even the best drivers can and do have collisions beyond their control. Besides, that's irrelevant to the point I was making. Replace safety features with convenience or performance improvements in cars; my point is the same.

  55. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Zion Rasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,421
    Obviously the OP has a hard time understanding that the bike industry is a Business. Yes, to make money. Otherwise, no innovation, no new bikes, no specialties, nothing. Marketing? Yes, some of it BS, some of it actually works. You can also thank the pros that have pushed the sport to the limit.

    I personally thank God for 29ers. I started road bike racing and in 5 years I fell behind in MTB technology. The only thing that saves me are fully rigid 29ers and that is now also tricky with oversized forks and BB30. That I do not like. CArbon wheels on a MTB? Humm Dont know. I still nurse the carbon wheels on my roadbike.

    So Thank you bike industry for:
    Tubless tires
    29ers
    Carbon Forks
    Rear shock platform and brains
    Super light hydro disk breaks
    Carbon Fiber frames
    Carbon Fiber Parts
    Sit and spin my ass...

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woahey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,289
    Quote Originally Posted by Zion Rasta View Post
    So Thank you bike industry for:
    Tubless tires
    29ers
    Carbon Forks
    Rear shock platform and brains
    Super light hydro disk breaks
    Carbon Fiber frames
    Carbon Fiber Parts
    Sounds like a scary ride...a 29" carbon frame 5" travel bike with a rigid carbon fork, ultra light brakes, tubeless tires and carbon bits holding it all together.
    The secret to mountain biking is pretty simple. The slower you go the more likely it is you’ll crash.
    - Julie Furtado

  57. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,655
    So OP, with this type of reasoning, you are basically saying that once the bicycle was invented, all evolution or change should have stopped. Or is it that all evolution of the bicycle should have stopped once you bought your, "mountain bike"? For me, I can't wait to see what the next 20 years has in store for the mountain bike, which ever type of mountain bike I decide to buy, or not to buy.

  58. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Zion Rasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,421
    Quote Originally Posted by woahey View Post
    Sounds like a scary ride...a 29" carbon frame 5" travel bike with a rigid carbon fork, ultra light brakes, tubeless tires and carbon bits holding it all together.
    That is funny!
    Sit and spin my ass...

  59. #159
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,956
    Quote Originally Posted by evasive View Post
    I don't remember people complaining about having to buy a new car when side curtain airbags or traction control became common
    Actually, I wish you could find cars without airbags and all that fancy crap they force you buy on new cars. Not that I don't like that stuff, but it would be nice if you could get a decent new car for under $10k otd
    I don't mind that is is available to have if you want it, but in many cases we are forced to get it if we want a new car.

    Difference with the bike industry is that you are not forced to buy any of that stuff.
    If you want a basic rigid bike with cantilever bikes and a steel frame you can still buy one and get it cheap. If you don't like the advances, then stick with what you have and let those who do want improvements buy them.

  60. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    239
    Like anything else, cycling is a big business. In order for companies to remain solvent, they need to sell their product. Providing 'new', yet maybe unnecessary products give them the opportunity to bring in their needed capital.

    No one forces us to buy. We're all suckers to some degree!

  61. #161
    DIY all the way
    Reputation: Mr.Magura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by iCollector View Post
    No one forces us to buy.
    See this is where I disagree.

    It would be nice if the new stuff, was just added to the list of options.
    The problem is that standards are hardly standards anymore, so spares and wear items are pretty specific.
    This is all good and fine, till the standards change, so spares and wear items are becoming obsolete, forcing us to bin a bike that otherwise is still good.

    A good example would be, that finding a high quality 8sp cassette, is close to impossible by now. So a perfectly good XTR 8sp drivetrain is pretty much for the bin.


    Magura

  62. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Magura View Post
    See this is where I disagree.

    It would be nice if the new stuff, was just added to the list of options.
    The problem is that standards are hardly standards anymore, so spares and wear items are pretty specific.
    This is all good and fine, till the standards change, so spares and wear items are becoming obsolete, forcing us to bin a bike that otherwise is still good.

    A good example would be, that finding a high quality 8sp cassette, is close to impossible by now. So a perfectly good XTR 8sp drivetrain is pretty much for the bin.


    Magura
    See, this is where I disagree:

    8 speed cassette in Mountain Bike Parts | eBay

  63. #163
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,982
    OP: more people will read your post(s) if you break them up into easy-to-read paragraphs...

  64. #164
    DIY all the way
    Reputation: Mr.Magura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    See, this is where I disagree:

    8 speed cassette in Mountain Bike Parts | eBay
    Which in the cases i have seen so far, has turned out very expensive

    But yes, they naturally can be found, just not at a cost that has anything to do with the reality usually.

    Used ones are plenty, but buying a used cassette, is at best like buying a lottery ticket.

    Besides, having to hunt NOS on Efraud is not my idea of having things available.
    It is a far cry from not getting issues for no good reason, from the industry changing "standards" in a rapid pace to keep peoples bikes becoming obsolete, just for the sake of making them obsolete.

    It would have been easy for the industry to have kept the compatibility all the way from 7sp. They just saw an opportunity to create a latent need.


    Magura

  65. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwnhlldav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by 92gli View Post
    Dear Redline and Profile,

    Thanks for pushing splined cranksets in the early 80's. Square taper blew then and it still does.

    -The guy who stopped reading the rant and rolled his eyes when he got to "square taper".
    I didn't even start reading, I opened the thread, saw the massive run on sentence and moved to the responses.

    Mountain bikes, and all bikes for that matter have never been standard. To think otherwise is to be willfully ignorant of the past.

    If you've been intimately involved with bikes for any length of time, you know this.
    Disclaimer: I no longer fix bikes for a living.
    National Ski Patroller to feed my winter habit.

  66. #166
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,026
    Quote Originally Posted by RandyBoy View Post
    I've never had to use the features of a seat belt
    You've never stopped so suddenly that your seatbelt was keeping you in the seat? What about your passenger? I think you underestimate the restraining of a seatbelt. Never had to quickly stop or slow down for someone in front? You probably weren't concentrating on the seatbelt, because it was holding you in place and keeping you from being pushed towards the wheel. Sure, you haven't used it in a crash while spinning through the air, but I think your life and experience in a car would still be quite different if there weren't any. We'd be constantly trying to brace ourselves against something when we slow down. I know I sure like to test my brakes.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  67. #167
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Magura View Post
    See this is where I disagree.

    It would be nice if the new stuff, was just added to the list of options.
    The problem is that standards are hardly standards anymore, so spares and wear items are pretty specific.
    This is all good and fine, till the standards change, so spares and wear items are becoming obsolete, forcing us to bin a bike that otherwise is still good.

    A good example would be, that finding a high quality 8sp cassette, is close to impossible by now. So a perfectly good XTR 8sp drivetrain is pretty much for the bin.


    Magura
    I don't think that's really practical. Maybe you do have a "perfectly good 8spd drivetrain", but derailer springs wear, the pivots and their bushings wear, pulleys wear, the rings wear, the freewheel carrier gets scored, shifters wear, detents wear down, and so on. Some of these are replaceable, but this far down the line an 8spd cassette is the least of most people's 8spd worries, and if you happen to have all the other parts in pristine condition, well that's just an anomaly.

    Where you should be thanking the manufacturers is that they use the same width hub and BB standards, for the most part.

    You said you have to "bin your bike", what is wrong with it, besides the drivetrain? 1.125" steerer? 73 or 68mm BB? 135mm hub? And so on? That doesn't sound like it's obsolete. It sounds like you are complaining about wear-items, things that are never intended to be "lifetime" components in the first place. If one does sneak through, then it's an anomaly, not the standard.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  68. #168
    Anti-elitist
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    402
    In response to OP. as a consumer, you have a right to feel that way, and the right to express it. However, as someone else here mentioned, the bike industry is out there not just for your enjoyment/convenience, but to make MOOLAH. They need to get paid. And if bikes were made so that they lasted forever without obsoletion, then people would hold onto their rigid steel bikes with center pull cantis.

    Progress is good, most of the time. I like my disk brakes and my thread less headset and dual compound tires. I like having 24 speeds. And this one I don't get: what's your beef with 31.8 bars? You may think they look ugly, but mine look sick! And I drool over technologies like black box motion control and brain. We live in an industrialized world, and you can try and hold onto the past, but someday the industry will leave you hanging. you may kick butt with your bike. But have you tried kicking butt on a more recent bike? It's easier.

    You mentioned the square taper bb. It is widely accepted that sq tp is inferior to other standards. It flexes and is heavy. In response to that, Shimano created its proprietary Octalink. It sucked because the bearings were too small (or something). So they created Octalink V2. Other crank/bb manufacturers were mad that Shimano made a proprietary bb, and they wanted splines too. I.S.I.S. was born. RF, FSA and I believe SRAM all support ISIS. But people wanted to do better. They needed external bearings. And thus was born the 2 piece crank. Press fit was created by trek for even more rigidity and lightness.

    Square taper, octa, octa v2, ISIS, external bearing, and Press fit.
    Seems like a lot of places to screw up, but feel blessed. At least they all use 68mm bb shells with English thread (ISO) (except for pf, which is screwy IMHO). You can get any one of these at any time. The 68 x 30 English thread has survived a long time. You may still want a UN 55 or w/e but let us have our x types and hollow techs please. The bike industry doesn't force kool aid down everyone's throats. it asks the majority if they like it. If they do, then we have called obsoletion of old stuff ourselves.
    Last edited by sauprankul; 11-26-2012 at 12:00 AM.
    It's pronounced "so pro and cool."
    It was an impulse decision.

  69. #169
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,320
    Quote Originally Posted by sauprankul View Post
    ...
    Press fit was created by trek for even more rigidity and lightness.
    The bike industry doesn't force kool aid down everyone's throats. it asks the majority if they like it..
    No. They make changes to cut their production time & costs. Many changes have occurred recently, which I feel is a result of their attempt to mass-market carbon. IME, Press-fit is a PIA, and a deterrent to buying a new bike/frame.
    Anyone who cross-threaded has bigger issues, should rely on their LBS, become a lemming, and increase industry profits.
    No thanks, sheeple.


    Mmm... tapas

  70. #170
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,026
    Quote Originally Posted by sauprankul View Post

    You mentioned the square taper bb. It is widely accepted that sq tp is inferior to other standards. It flexes and is heavy. In response to that, Shimano created its proprietary Octalink. It sucked because the bearings were too small (or something). So they created Octalink V2. Other crank/bb manufacturers were mad that Shimano made a proprietary bb, and they wanted splines too. I.S.I.S. was born. RF, FSA and I believe SRAM all support ISIS. But people wanted to do better. They needed external bearings. And thus was born the 2 piece crank. Press fit was created by trek for even more rigidity and lightness.
    That's close, but not quite right. Shimano with the octalink 1 system had a pretty good system, not as strong as the external BB system, but a good step up. They used two sets of bearings, one set of needle bearing inside, and then some fashion of ball/roller bearings on the outside. They patented it. To compete, the others got together and did ISIS, but there was a fatal flaw. Because shimano had that needle bearing tucked in there, they had a much stronger and more reliable system. The ISIS never lived up to the reliability of the equivalent shimano system because there simply wasn't enough space to cram a regular bearing in there and the needle-setup was patented, until they came out with some of the "gigapipe DH" type ones that had double-bearings stuffed in the ends, and those weighed a ton due to the design compromise. The eventual shimano external BB did two important things for this system (and some other side benefits), it made it even stronger and better able to cope with modern riding, and it got rid of the taper-interface. The taper inteface was still being used on the octalink V1, as well as ISIS. This is where Race Face and Truvativ had really never caught up, because even when they were using external BBs, they were still using a taper inteface that wore every time you took them on and off.

    Other side benefits of the shimano external BBs include being able to pry up the dust seal and regrease the bearings, buying new bearings for extremely cheap ($15 at enduroforkseals.com), and of course working in most every "old" bike out there.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  71. #171
    Anti-elitist
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    402
    Sorry if my info wasn't totally accurate, should have had a disclaimer. The point was to show there was a REASON why all those bottom bracket "standards" exist. They aren't just trying to get more money from you, they are actually making better bikes, believe it or not.
    It's pronounced "so pro and cool."
    It was an impulse decision.

  72. #172
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,026
    Quote Originally Posted by sauprankul View Post
    Sorry if my info wasn't totally accurate, should have had a disclaimer. The point was to show there was a REASON why all those bottom bracket "standards" exist. They aren't just trying to get more money from you, they are actually making better bikes, believe it or not.
    Yep, I remember watching videos of people bending and snapping square taper cranksets. They were not up to the task when we started going freeride, downhill and all mountain. What many of us consider normal drops and not freeride or downhill stuff will bend and snap them. That and it's stupid easy and quick to take off the shimano cranks without excessive force or wearing down a taper-interface (which can cause creaking, wobble, play, etc).

    I was just trying to point out that octalink V1 was pretty good. Most people had no problems with it, but it was an intermediary step. Huge difference between V2 and square, but still V1 was a step up for sure. ISIS on the other hand, that was a "me-too!" trainwreck.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  73. #173
    bog
    bog is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,223
    Quote Originally Posted by 53119 View Post
    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.
    You know that NIB means new in box right? It has nothing to do with old stock. My 2012 XTR brake came NIB.
    Tallboy3 CC : Nomad3 CC: Highball2 CC : Stigmata2 CC

  74. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    93
    Pretentious much?

  75. #175
    Big Gulps, Alright!
    Reputation: Berkley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    I don't think that's really practical. Maybe you do have a "perfectly good 8spd drivetrain", but derailer springs wear, the pivots and their bushings wear, pulleys wear, the rings wear, the freewheel carrier gets scored, shifters wear, detents wear down, and so on. Some of these are replaceable, but this far down the line an 8spd cassette is the least of most people's 8spd worries, and if you happen to have all the other parts in pristine condition, well that's just an anomaly.

    Yeah, it seems like a lot of folks talk about having "perfectly good" older generation high end derailleurs, and I wonder if they've had any experience on a new one for comparison. I usually end up replacing derailleurs because the pivots and springs develop play, not because I smash them into things. I do ride quite a bit, but I only get ~2 years out of a derailleur before it gets sloppy and loses precision.

    Some folks talk about still using derailleurs that are 8+ years old and I can't help but think that they must be worn out by this point. I'd rather have a brand new Deore derailleur than an 8 year old used XTR model.
    Axle Standards Explained

    Founder at North Atlantic Dirt, riding & writing about trails in the northeast.

  76. #176
    Anti-elitist
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkley View Post
    I'd rather have a brand new Deore derailleur than an 8 year old used XTR model.
    How about an 8 year old NOS XTR derailer?

    You're missing the point. Its not used and worn out components that the OP likes. He likes old technology. He doesn't necessarily use a 5 year old chain, but he like his cantis, even if he has to change his pads or even rims every now and then. He likes his square tapers, and is OK with getting a new BB every now and then, but doesn't want to have to change his BB if he wants a high end crank (though this makes no sense).

    I can understand the OPs hate for obsoletion. But I don't share it. He just feels left out when he needs to replace an inexpensive part and ends up spending a lot more because of progress.
    It's pronounced "so pro and cool."
    It was an impulse decision.

  77. #177
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,026
    Quote Originally Posted by sauprankul View Post
    How about an 8 year old NOS XTR derailer?

    You're missing the point. Its not used and worn out components that the OP likes. He likes old technology. He doesn't necessarily use a 5 year old chain, but he like his cantis, even if he has to change his pads or even rims every now and then. He likes his square tapers, and is OK with getting a new BB every now and then, but doesn't want to have to change his BB if he wants a high end crank (though this makes no sense).

    I can understand the OPs hate for obsoletion. But I don't share it. He just feels left out when he needs to replace an inexpensive part and ends up spending a lot more because of progress.


    An M592 Deore or M663 SLX is lightyears ahead of that 8 year old XTR. Both of these new derailers are "shadow" derailers with the mechanism tucked way in, so it doesn't hang out looking for rocks. They have stiffer springs, for more positive gear shifts. Wide pivots help with consistent shifting and eliminating flex/misalignment. They have the direct-feed cable mount, so no looping necessary.

    I think a lot of us understand the sentiment, but it's like anything else. Can I just leave a computer dormant for 8-10 years and boot it up and expect it to run everything fine? Nope, the world has moved on, now there's a new OS and new browsers and so on. That's probably one of the most extreme case, but it's the same with many things. It would be one thing if you are actually using it enough to wear out wear-parts and occasionally damage stuff, that's where you upgrade and convert slowly as things change, thereby keeping the price manageable. Not much sympathy because those of us that put miles on bikes realize this stuff is all "disposable" to some extent. The further you move away from the main parts (frame), generally the more "disposable" it is. You might like your solid-rear axle Mustang, but they've squeezed about everything out that is possible and the only way to make it better and to hang with the camaros in the turns is to make the rear suspension independent. Ok, there will be plenty of people offering solid rear axles aftermarket, for a while, but things will eventually move on and stock will get scarce. By that time virtually no one will be using them, and the few holdouts that are will simply realize that their cars are essentially "disposable" at that point. It would be ultra-rare for it to have been owned by the same person the whole time, but if it really did reach that age with one guy, he's probably going to baby it and not use it for anything serious anymore...or realize it's disposable at that point.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  78. #178
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkley View Post
    Yeah, it seems like a lot of folks talk about having "perfectly good" older generation high end derailleurs, and I wonder if they've had any experience on a new one for comparison. I usually end up replacing derailleurs because the pivots and springs develop play, not because I smash them into things. I do ride quite a bit, but I only get ~2 years out of a derailleur before it gets sloppy and loses precision.

    Some folks talk about still using derailleurs that are 8+ years old and I can't help but think that they must be worn out by this point. I'd rather have a brand new Deore derailleur than an 8 year old used XTR model.
    I was one of those guys. Rode the same xtr rear derailleur for 9 years. Was the first derailleur I wore out. It started throwing chains. At first I thought it was out of adjustment but it eventually occurred to me it might be wearing out. I went to the lbs to check out new derailleurs because I thought mine was damaged in a crash but when I started handling the new ones I realized that mine was worn. Got a NOS XT 9spd as a replacement because there is no good sense in upgrading the whole drivetrain to 10spd because I wore out a derailleur.

    And that last sentence is the crux of the matter, isn't it? You enjoy your old bike the way it is and when something wears out you want to buy a new replacement of equal or better quality yet you don't want to upgrade half the bike (parts that don't need replacement yet) just because you wore something out.

  79. #179
    bog
    bog is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Magura View Post
    Which in the cases i have seen so far, has turned out very expensive

    But yes, they naturally can be found, just not at a cost that has anything to do with the reality usually.

    Used ones are plenty, but buying a used cassette, is at best like buying a lottery ticket.

    Besides, having to hunt NOS on Efraud is not my idea of having things available.
    It is a far cry from not getting issues for no good reason, from the industry changing "standards" in a rapid pace to keep peoples bikes becoming obsolete, just for the sake of making them obsolete.

    It would have been easy for the industry to have kept the compatibility all the way from 7sp. They just saw an opportunity to create a latent need.


    Magura
    Hmmm, so it looks like you have something to do with Magura. You do understand that Magura makes disc brakes and suspension forks that would not be around if we were all riding rigid steel frames with rigid steel forks and canti brakes right!? Thankfully technological advances have given us these wonderful parts that allow us to ride more difficult trails with more control.
    Tallboy3 CC : Nomad3 CC: Highball2 CC : Stigmata2 CC

  80. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bridger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    245
    Quote Originally Posted by Millfox View Post
    Some things in the letter have a point.

    I also dont understand the reason for 2x10 or (new) 1x11 shifting systems. Sure that front derailleurs can be a pain in the ass but they ad flexibility to the ride. With 1x11 they plan to sell about 5 versions of crank wheels depending on the teeth count. With a classic 3x10 they sell 44-33-22 or 42-32-22... Thats much more of an all rounder IMHO.

    And those bottom brackets... I'm having quite a problem finding an octalink 1 for my bike these days. Cranks are OK but I guess I'll have to swap... THANKS a lot shimano!

    EDIT: I dont really see problem in new standards. Thing that bugs me more is the fact that sooner or later we'll be forced to buy a 2x10 or 1x11 because there will be nothing else that will be decent on the market.
    So what's wrong with 2x10? It's slim & trim and is just what many need.
    "Prollyisnotprobably"

  81. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AmbientLight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    33
    I kind of like the progress. As someone who moved away from the sport of "Mountainbiking" over 10 years ago to pursue other things in my life, I am excited and in awe of the new technology, and how much things have changed (for the better). Things that were top of the line when I used to ride are considered entry level now, and as such much cheaper to buy. My current ride (A Giant STP-0) is a dream bike for me when I think back to my old "mountainbike" all purpose bike. The first jump I pulled on the new bike was a revelation. How the hell did I achieve what I did ten years ago on what was considered a very good bike at the time (I had a Diamond Back V-Link with Marzocchi Bomber Z2's). Without progress, no-one moves forward...

  82. #182
    DIY all the way
    Reputation: Mr.Magura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkley View Post
    Yeah, it seems like a lot of folks talk about having "perfectly good" older generation high end derailleurs, and I wonder if they've had any experience on a new one for comparison. I usually end up replacing derailleurs because the pivots and springs develop play, not because I smash them into things. I do ride quite a bit, but I only get ~2 years out of a derailleur before it gets sloppy and loses precision.

    Some folks talk about still using derailleurs that are 8+ years old and I can't help but think that they must be worn out by this point. I'd rather have a brand new Deore derailleur than an 8 year old used XTR model.
    If maintained well, you can easily have old stuff that works pretty much like new.

    ....and yes, I do have new stuff as well.


    Magura

  83. #183
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,956
    As much as I would like to try and ride one of these, I imagine it wouldn't be too much fun on the trails.


  84. #184
    Flow like water
    Reputation: DavyRay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    As much as I would like to try and ride one of these, I imagine it wouldn't be too much fun on the trails.

    You might want a slacker HT angle. That one looks a bit twitchy. Old school, you might say.

  85. #185
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,956
    That would involve making advancements which forces us to spend more money and that would just be wrong.

  86. #186
    Pickin' n' Grinnin'
    Reputation: btl68's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    51
    I didn't read thru all the responses that were posted, so forgive me if it's all ready been suggested...


    The #1 thing that I think that Shimano should do is remake the XT/XTR line of 8-speed from about 96-01. Talk about a money-maker! They would be selling gold from a gold mine, and all the tooling is already made!

    Ignorance is bliss until they take your bliss away...

  87. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,269
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    ... Got a NOS XT 9spd as a replacement because there is no good sense in upgrading the whole drivetrain to 10spd because I wore out a derailleur.

    And that last sentence is the crux of the matter, isn't it? You enjoy your old bike the way it is and when something wears out you want to buy a new replacement of equal or better quality yet you don't want to upgrade half the bike (parts that don't need replacement yet) just because you wore something out.
    That is exactly right. I ride the bike I built in 2003. I used nice XT components throughout back then it was a nice riding bike. 9psd, V-brakes and all. These days is getting harder and harder to find similar quality parts without needing "upgrade" the entire bike. I rode bike in 2003/2004 and then took some time off riding. So the bike just sat in the garage. When I started riding it again last fall I felt no need to "upgrade" since the bike worked. In fact other than new tubes it needed nothing. That is right I still run tubes to. Now wear items like tires are new now, but they don't require me to upgrade the wheels to put them on. I just put on the tires and be done with it.

    I am close to the point where 1 failed part that should cost $20 will force a $500 upgrade. I busted a tooth off my middle chainring and was able to get a XT M751 middle ring. However I wanted to replace my big ring as I had couple teeth ground down going over rocks. It still worked, but while I had it off I figured it would be good change.. Well try to find a XT M751/752 big ring... You can't... The 760 might fit, but who wants to spend $80 on chain ring that "might" work. Then given the BB change I figure if something else breaks on there I will need a new BB/crankset. I could go on, but I think you get the idea.
    Joe
    '12 Santa Cruz Highball 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5",Vassago Verhauen SS 29" XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  88. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Magura View Post
    If maintained well, you can easily have old stuff that works pretty much like new.

    ....and yes, I do have new stuff as well.


    Magura
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    As much as I would like to try and ride one of these, I imagine it wouldn't be too much fun on the trails.

    Look the point is mtn bikes from 10-20 years ago are not that different. Not like what you see here. Changes from V-brakes to discs are not earth shattering. 9 or 10 speed drive trains, 29" wheels not to mention 31.8 vs 25.4 bars, taper head tubes. even 1 1/8 vs quill.

    All of these changes are detail changes and refinements. Just because they are out there it does not mean the old stuff is bad. It just means the new stuff is slight improvement. I don't dislike new stuff, but forcing upgrades not my idea of fun. There is that attitude that all the old stuff is bad or going to break. Hell no. A well built 10 year 26" hardtail with v-brakes will ride the trails today just fine. I did race on such bike a few weeks ago. Results were fine and I finished where I did due to me and not my bike. If I were racing for wins then I would probably need to upgraded, but when are just out for fun it is hard drop $$$ for only minor update.
    Joe
    '12 Santa Cruz Highball 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5",Vassago Verhauen SS 29" XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  89. #189
    DIY all the way
    Reputation: Mr.Magura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by JoePAz View Post
    Look the point is mtn bikes from 10-20 years ago are not that different. Not like what you see here. Changes from V-brakes to discs are not earth shattering. 9 or 10 speed drive trains, 29" wheels not to mention 31.8 vs 25.4 bars, taper head tubes. even 1 1/8 vs quill.

    All of these changes are detail changes and refinements. Just because they are out there it does not mean the old stuff is bad. It just means the new stuff is slight improvement. I don't dislike new stuff, but forcing upgrades not my idea of fun. There is that attitude that all the old stuff is bad or going to break. Hell no. A well built 10 year 26" hardtail with v-brakes will ride the trails today just fine. I did race on such bike a few weeks ago. Results were fine and I finished where I did due to me and not my bike. If I were racing for wins then I would probably need to upgraded, but when are just out for fun it is hard drop $$$ for only minor update.
    Exactly!


    Magura

  90. #190
    DIY all the way
    Reputation: Mr.Magura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by bog View Post
    Hmmm, so it looks like you have something to do with Magura. You do understand that Magura makes disc brakes and suspension forks that would not be around if we were all riding rigid steel frames with rigid steel forks and canti brakes right!? Thankfully technological advances have given us these wonderful parts that allow us to ride more difficult trails with more control.
    Hmm, it looks like Magura is my nickname in the real world, and has been for like 20 years

    I have no connection with the company called Magura.


    Magura

  91. #191
    Anti-elitist
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    402
    Magura... where does that come from?
    Anyway, it has been mentioned that the progress in MTB tech has been incremental. Its true, but only to a certain extent. Try free riding on a rigid 5 speeder with cantis. I dare you...
    Tech has allowed athletes to push the sport to its extremes, and new tech is made to accommodate those extremes.
    It's pronounced "so pro and cool."
    It was an impulse decision.

  92. #192
    DIY all the way
    Reputation: Mr.Magura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by sauprankul View Post
    Magura... where does that come from?
    Anyway, it has been mentioned that the progress in MTB tech has been incremental. Its true, but only to a certain extent. Try free riding on a rigid 5 speeder with cantis. I dare you...
    Tech has allowed athletes to push the sport to its extremes, and new tech is made to accommodate those extremes.
    I got that name back when hydraulic brakes were fairly unknown, and I guess I was much into them back then, so I got the nick.
    Now I just go by that name.

    If you take a look around the MTBR, you'll see that I'm all for development, in fact I have made a few bits here and there myself.
    What I am against, is change for the sake of change, with no benefit besides lining the pockets of the industry.
    Much of the "development" we see, has no real benefit. A great example is the new Sram XX1. That has to be a joke if you ask me. Even 10 speed offers very limited benefit.
    The limited benefit XX1 offers, could be achieved without making another "standard", and at a minimal cost.

    Magura

  93. #193
    Anti-elitist
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    402
    Really? I like the concept of XX1. Not having to worry about shifting in front is already a known + of the 1 x n setup. Being able to achieve most of the ratios of a triple is awesome. Would it be possible to but a 42-10 cassette on a standard hub? Maybe the 11 speeds are unnecessary though.
    It's pronounced "so pro and cool."
    It was an impulse decision.

  94. #194
    DIY all the way
    Reputation: Mr.Magura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by sauprankul View Post
    Really? I like the concept of XX1. Not having to worry about shifting in front is already a known + of the 1 x n setup. Being able to achieve most of the ratios of a triple is awesome. Would it be possible to but a 42-10 cassette on a standard hub? Maybe the 11 speeds are unnecessary though.
    I'm doing a 40-11, 10 sp. at the moment, which does not seem to leave much to wish for compared to a 42-10, and mine is compatible with all the usual hubs.
    I would much rather have seen the industry do that, but the industry chose to make it a 1000$ upgrade, instead of a 50$ solution

    Besides that, I guess we want the same thing, I just like that my stuff is not at total loss every time something goes south away from home.
    So I develop stuff that can be replaced by just about anything on the market, if need be, but offers the same as the top shelf stuff or better.


    Magura

  95. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,269
    Quote Originally Posted by sauprankul View Post
    Really? I like the concept of XX1. Not having to worry about shifting in front is already a known + of the 1 x n setup. Being able to achieve most of the ratios of a triple is awesome. Would it be possible to but a 42-10 cassette on a standard hub? Maybe the 11 speeds are unnecessary though.

    I personally think a 1x set-up it is big step backward. Ok if only ride a one trail type, but for all around use it is big step down. The triple chainring set-up gives you a wide range of gears and close spacing. Close spacing is important if you want to run a set cadence. For me idea is somewhere between 85 and 95 rpm. With more gears and maximize speed and maitiain optimum cadence. Now a triple does have overlap and so some might prefer a 2x10 to 3x9, but those are detail differences. I have road bike with a triple front and 12-23 9 spd rear. Compared to my mtb with its 11-34 rear I get the same number of grears, but a much tighter spacing. This is handy to allow me to pick just the right gear run at my max pedal force while also optimizing my cadence. These two thing combine to allow max speed for most any road or wind condition.

    Now single speeds are completely different in that those riders WANT the challenge of just one gear. It is badge of honor really as you have learn to ride around the weakness of just one gear.
    Joe
    '12 Santa Cruz Highball 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5",Vassago Verhauen SS 29" XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  96. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    964
    Quote Originally Posted by JoePAz View Post
    Look the point is mtn bikes from 10-20 years ago are not that different. Not like what you see here. Changes from V-brakes to discs are not earth shattering. 9 or 10 speed drive trains, 29" wheels not to mention 31.8 vs 25.4 bars, taper head tubes. even 1 1/8 vs quill.

    All of these changes are detail changes and refinements. Just because they are out there it does not mean the old stuff is bad. It just means the new stuff is slight improvement. I don't dislike new stuff, but forcing upgrades not my idea of fun. There is that attitude that all the old stuff is bad or going to break. Hell no. A well built 10 year 26" hardtail with v-brakes will ride the trails today just fine. I did race on such bike a few weeks ago. Results were fine and I finished where I did due to me and not my bike. If I were racing for wins then I would probably need to upgraded, but when are just out for fun it is hard drop $$$ for only minor update.
    I have to disagree. The difference between my 1992 Bridgestone MB4 and my 2013 Specialized FSR Stumpjumper Elite are profound. Both cost roughly the same in inflation adjusted dollars (I think I paid $800 bucks for the MB4) but the ride quality, speed, and comfort are not even in the same galaxy.

    I am fortunate to have a pretty good job so I can afford nice bikes. Upgrades are fun which is the whole point of mountain biking. Certainly it's not pulling any chicks or increasing my social standing in the community. New bikes with cool technology are fun for their own sake and require no justification. If I were poor I would be happy (and was happy when I was poor) with a basic, sturdy, inexpensive bike but now, heck, mountain biking beats golf, hunting, or any other hobbies common in my demographic and it's probably cheaper in the long run.

    The OP is a retrogrouch which is fine but five years from now what is now a high end component will be found on low-priced bikes and everybody will benefit. Heck, you can get a very nice "generic" carbon frame for less than $400 today. A few years back they were highly exotic and ran in the thousands. I happen to really like the ride quality and coolness factor of carbon.

    So my letter to the bike industry would urge them to continue developing new, unnecessary technologies. I lead a fairly Spartan life, drive a cheap car, live in a modest house, and generally live well below the level that my income would allow me to if i was that kind of guy. My only real extravagances are bikes. Beats putting the money into our creaky and tottering financial system in the misguided expectation that the political cronies of Wall Street and the government will do anything to prevent our investments from being ass raped. My inlaws bought into the hype and have lost almost three-quarters of the value of their investments.
    Last edited by Ailuropoda; 11-29-2012 at 03:04 PM.

  97. #197
    Anti-elitist
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by JoePAz View Post
    I personally think a 1x set-up it is big step backward. Ok if only ride a one trail type, but for all around use it is big step down. The triple chainring set-up gives you a wide range of gears and close spacing. Close spacing is important if you want to run a set cadence. For me idea is somewhere between 85 and 95 rpm. With more gears and maximize speed and maitiain optimum cadence.
    Triples are nice for narrow cassettes. Maintaining an optimum cadence isnt at the top of my list. Definitely not over reliability and simplicity. I ride for fun and fitness. I can go a little slower than my body permits if I want an optimum cadence.

    I think the 11 speed cassette is to be able to keep an optimum cadence even with a 1 x n drive train.
    It's pronounced "so pro and cool."
    It was an impulse decision.

  98. #198
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,655
    Quote Originally Posted by sauprankul View Post
    .

    I think the 11 speed cassette is to be able to keep an optimum cadence even with a 1 x n drive train.
    If you don't have strong legs, it's harder.
    Last edited by Mountain Cycle Shawn; 11-29-2012 at 07:07 PM.

  99. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    964
    Quote Originally Posted by sauprankul View Post
    Triples are nice for narrow cassettes. Maintaining an optimum cadence isnt at the top of my list. Definitely not over reliability and simplicity. I ride for fun and fitness. I can go a little slower than my body permits if I want an optimum cadence.

    I think the 11 speed cassette is to be able to keep an optimum cadence even with a 1 x n drive train.
    I confess to have never used the largest chain ring on a triple setup and for what it's worth would really prefer a 1x10 setup on most of my bikes with a 24 tooth chainring up front.

  100. #200
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Ailuropoda View Post
    I confess to have never used the largest chain ring on a triple setup and for what it's worth would really prefer a 1x10 setup on most of my bikes with a 24 tooth chainring up front.
    Really? Don't you spin out in the middle on flat ground?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •