My thoughts on “new” standards- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 167 of 167
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005

    My thoughts on “new” standards

    I very well may be wrong but it appears as though the industry is cannibalizing itself with all these new standards. I think it might be different if old standards were still being supported, in addition to the new tech being released, but from what I’m seeing in my searches that isn’t happening.

    I just cracked my 5 year old frame (low miles and otherwise in great condition). It’s near impossible to find a good 26er FS frame. So, if i wanted to buy into 27.5 it also requires a new fork and new rims/wheel build. But wait, the old hubs aren’t Boost so tack on new hubs... By this time a complete build is the cheaper way to go.

    Again, maybe it’s just me but I think a $5000 mountain bike should be able to remain in service longer than 2500 miles/5 years. (I have 2 bikes. Who only has one bike???) Only a few years ago I could have just bought a new frame for $1500 - $2500 and been back on the trail. Shit, I can still get a build kit for my 26” revelation and Hope hubs. Just can’t find a frame to bolt them on.

    Where I see potential cannibalizing is that “some” older riders (me for eg) will be very hesitant to spend money on high end components such as wheels and forks when there is fear that the $700 hubs I just bought will be obsolete in 3 years. Same goes for forks - will I plunk down $1k or just go middle of the road and take what comes on the stock build? And hell, I’m definitely thinking thrice before buying a $3 - $3.5k frame at the rate I see long-time standards being abandoned.

    Once the industry has burned enough customers, who will be left to plunk down thousands of dollars on new components? I foresee some great brands going out of business because too many customers had enough and chose not to spend the discretionary money.

    Anyway, rant over.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,439
    I hear you. I certainly don't have the money to waste. That said, I don't think we should be afraid of new standards as long as there is a real advantage. The days of being able to swap just about every single upgrade to a years newer frame are gone. Newer frames have different geo, hub width standards, materials, wheel size allowance, and with varying effects on stem length and handlebar width. It's all different... but we're still doing the same thing.... riding a bike through the woods. However you do that is up to you, with new stuff or old, it doesn't matter. As long as pedaling brings a smile to your face, you're still winning even if a little lighter in wallet.

    Ok, my rant is that I have a few (6) really nice LED lights for research purposes, bought a few years ago at discounted rate but still a few G a piece. Currently, no support for them whatsoever at less than 5 years, around 3 when I could get new LED plates. The company went to a new format, less power and overall size but same spectra. So, I am cannibalizing lamps to keep illuminating what I can and the company hasn't been forthcoming with a solution or a discounted price for the newer format fixture. We have a couple of those as well, 7 in one facility and 15 in another. Come on, throw me a lamp or LED plate you guys. Perhaps, refurb the bad plates? Ok, rant over.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    I hear you db. We aren’t talking about a single company, but an entire industry.

    It would be like a boat owner who can’t buy a motor, at all. That would impact the amount of money future buyers will spend on a new boat due to the fear.

    Let’s not even get into the actual waste this is all creating. For god sake, this is an outdoor sport which requires open land to participate. It’s very socially irresponsible to scrap a complete bike because of a wheel size. What are we supposed to do with 90% of a perfectly fine bike?

  4. #4
    slow
    Reputation: sgltrak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,216
    I am finding good deals on lightly used bike stuff that conforms to older "standards" as many riders upgrade to the "newest and greatest" stuff.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,439
    Have you seen any of those Chinese pile'o'BSOs pictures? That's waste. Our bikes are better can still be maintained for a while yet or can be donated to bike co-ops for others to do the same. I do agree that scrapping a bike just based on wheel size is ridiculous, but some still do it every year.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,439
    Quote Originally Posted by sgltrak View Post
    I am finding good deals on lightly used bike stuff that conforms to older "standards" as many riders upgrade to the "newest and greatest" stuff.
    I am doing the same.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by sgltrak View Post
    I am finding good deals on lightly used bike stuff that conforms to older "standards" as many riders upgrade to the "newest and greatest" stuff.
    Components aren’t the problem, finding a good frame in good condition is the issue. The frames I’ve been seeing are beat to hell and the prices are way off.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    I do agree that scrapping a bike just based on wheel size is ridiculous, but some still do it every year.
    Well, this is basically what we’re being forced to do. I’d pay $1500-$1800 for a new 26” 5010 frame, old tech and all.

  9. #9
    slow
    Reputation: sgltrak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,216
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    Components aren’t the problem, finding a good frame in good condition is the issue. The frames I’ve been seeing are beat to hell and the prices are way off.
    Around here there are lots of good riders with decent 26" bikes sitting in their basements or garages and they don't know what to do with them. They are afraid that resale is next to nothing, so they just store them rather than dumping them. You don't see them advertised for sale, but if you ask around here and offer a reasonable amount, most would let them go pretty quickly to free up storage space. There are also some pretty nice ones donated to the local bike co-op or junior racing programs.

    Maybe if you have a local MTB trading page on Facebook or a local MTB club or bike co-op, you could ask if anyone has what you need. It would be a win-win for both of you.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by sgltrak View Post
    Around here there are lots of good riders with decent 26" bikes sitting in their basements or garages and they don't know what to do with them. They are afraid that resale is next to nothing, so they just store them rather than dumping them. You don't see them advertised for sale, but if you ask around here and offer a reasonable amount, most would let them go pretty quickly to free up storage space. There are also some pretty nice ones donated to the local bike co-op or junior racing programs.

    Maybe if you have a local MTB trading page on Facebook or a local MTB club or bike co-op, you could ask if anyone has what you need. It would be a win-win for both of you.
    I’ll take your advice and keep looking for places to find something.

  11. #11
    slow
    Reputation: sgltrak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,216
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    I’ll take your advice and keep looking for places to find something.
    Best of luck!

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,489
    I'd agree, but sadly if bike companies don't follow the modern standards they will fail. So the options are fail or stick with the new standards.

    That being said, ebay & pinkbike are places to get your used 26" bike frames cheaper than new. So really, you're being forced to save money.

    I do really love my old 26r's but the Mojo HD & it's relatively antiquated geometry is't as fun as my '15 Kona Process, to the point it will sadly be on the chopping block. Some new standards are pointless, but the geometry on the modern bikes makes for a better riding experience & that's what matters most to me & the riding public in general.
    83 Ritchey Everest
    95 Bianchi Mega Tube ti
    2015 Kona Operator Supreme
    2015 Kona Process 153
    2019 Kona Process 153 CR 29

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2,447
    Mountain biking made a huge "standards" jump around 2011ish which made a lot of frames, wheel sizes, etc. obsolete. That being said, I can't this happening again anytime soon - 27.5, 29ers aren't going anywhere, 1x is here to stay, same with thru axle hub standards, tapered head tubes, etc.

    I have a 2012 hardtail that I can still easily get parts for and my 2016 full suspension still has all the latest standards after 4 years.
    Vermonter - bikes, beers and skis.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MSU Alum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4,091
    IDK what you're looking for, but if it fits, here's a large Ellsworth Truth frame for $153.
    I'll spend more than that on a pair of tires!

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/Ellsworth-T...MAAOSwNWFcxelL

    There are lots of 26er frames out there, if you just need to replace your cracked frame.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    5,386
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    ..
    I just cracked my 5 year old frame (low miles and otherwise in great condition). It’s near impossible to find a good 26er FS frame. .
    I happen to know of a nice Titus Racer X frame that needs new home. It is a complete bike build, but that might mean some good spares. 23" ETT and 17" seat tube. Located in Arizona.


    Now frankly that may be the best thing to do is to find someone selling a used frame/bike and then just transfer parts.
    Joe
    '18 Specialized Epic 29", Vassago Verhauen SS 29", '19 Ibis Ripmo, XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,489
    Quote Originally Posted by MSU Alum View Post
    IDK what you're looking for, but if it fits, here's a large Ellsworth Truth frame for $153.
    I'll spend more than that on a pair of tires!

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/Ellsworth-T...MAAOSwNWFcxelL

    There are lots of 26er frames out there, if you just need to replace your cracked frame.
    That Ellsworth is also cracked
    83 Ritchey Everest
    95 Bianchi Mega Tube ti
    2015 Kona Operator Supreme
    2015 Kona Process 153
    2019 Kona Process 153 CR 29

  17. #17
    Trust your turbo lust
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    38
    im right there with you, i still love my 26" bikes. I would love to be able to get one of the newer styles of bikes but with 26" wheels so i could still use the tires and wheels i have in my collection.

    Its kind of a double edge sword, as well, i have a Scott Spark frame that it too big for me to ride and i cant find anyone that wants it since it seems that nobody wants the old tech. If it was a medium frame, i would be riding it, lol.. It is for sale, btw, if you are interested.

    in addition to having trouble finding good frames, i have found it damn near impossible to find a decent for for a 26" bike that isnt either way too expensive or affordable and not worth the effort. on top of that, finding anyone locally that will servicethe older forks that i have is damn near impossible. i have a fox rl fork on one bike that will need attention soon and another bike with a Rockshox Sid world cup fork that currently needs attention. it gets frustrating, for sure

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MSU Alum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4,091
    Quote Originally Posted by eshew View Post
    That Ellsworth is also cracked
    It is? Where?

  19. #19
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,523
    Buy a 650 bike and put your 26 wheels.
    It's almost the same circumference.....

    But you would have to got on the "all new standards" train.
    And BTW , that train changes track every few years
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by fokof View Post
    Buy a 650 bike and put your 26 wheels.
    It's almost the same circumference.....

    But you would have to got on the "all new standards" train.
    And BTW , that train changes track every few years
    Thought about a Spitfire so I can keep rocking my Hopes at 12x142 and my current fork. Then when a hub dies I can jump up to the Boost thing. By this time I’m sure there will be a new standard though...

    And yeah, the train can keep changing tracks - and it will. I’m cool with that. Just can’t stomach the trend of high $$ bikes becoming obsolete within 5 years.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by JoePAz View Post
    I happen to know of a nice Titus Racer X frame that needs new home. It is a complete bike build, but that might mean some good spares. 23" ETT and 17" seat tube. Located in Arizona.


    Now frankly that may be the best thing to do is to find someone selling a used frame/bike and then just transfer parts.
    May look into this. Evaluating my options at present time...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sturge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,191
    Quote Originally Posted by sgltrak View Post
    Around here there are lots of good riders with decent 26" bikes sitting in their basements or garages and they don't know what to do with them. They are afraid that resale is next to nothing, so they just store them rather than dumping them. You don't see them advertised for sale, but if you ask around here and offer a reasonable amount, most would let them go pretty quickly to free up storage space.
    Same around here (CT)...I've got a 2012 Heckler (XL) that I recently converted to 1X9 hanging on the wall. It was my #1 for 4 years but became backup after upgrading to a Kona Process 153 (27.5). I absolutely LOVED that Heckler but have not ridden it once since I got the Kona 1.5 years ago.

    Many of us are 'older' riders who ride a lot and upgrade every few years. Guys (and gals) have nice 26er's kicking around that are trail ready but the 'new' bike is better so it gets the love. Tons of nice 26" bikes sit in the basement unless called into duty as a backup.
    12 Santa Cruz Heckler
    18 Kona Process 153 AL/DL (27.5)...:thumbsup:

  23. #23
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,523
    Quote Originally Posted by sturge View Post
    Tons of nice 26" bikes sit in the basement unless called into duty as a backup.
    the solution can also be to not buy a new bike and beat the h**k out of your current/paid/broken in 26er.

    We don't HAVE to buy and drink the Kool-Aid each time a new flavor hits the market , even if everybody and their mother tells you it's the next best thing after hot water.

    Planned obsolescence anybody ?

    My signature by FZ kinda tells it all on that subject
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: seat_boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,567
    You spent $700 on hubs and you're complaining about budget issues?

    Buy some SLX and just ride.
    http://www.bikingtoplay.blogspot.com/
    RIGID, not "ridged" or "ridgid"
    PEDAL, not "peddle." Unless you're selling stuff

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ladljon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    347
    Still riding my Moots Zirkel FS with Rohloff hub. Have two forks for it. My friends mostly on 27.5 and 29ers, and I have no problems staying in the mix....tried a few 27.5's, but just not my thing. I even jumped on the wide rim kick for a while....that didn't last, worst change ever, went back to narrow strong rims. My bike fits me, short cranks, narrow bars, and I like it.
    Tread killer....

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by seat_boy View Post
    You spent $700 on hubs and you're complaining about budget issues?

    Buy some SLX and just ride.
    Has nothing to do with budget issues. I can afford to buy 10 bikes - not the point I was trying to make.

    In my OP I talked about how the industry may be consuming itself. That’s the point.

  27. #27
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,900
    Wait a second, did you just say "new standards" in the 26" forum? The current standards are far from "new."

    In almost every way the current geometry and technology is far superior to whatever you're riding. I'm sure you're not happy about it but 26" bikes have been abandoned by the industry. This is not new news.
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  28. #28
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,523
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    .... but 26" bikes have been abandoned by the industry.
    Thus : new standards

    Have I missed something ?

    We can discuss Ad nauseam what "New" means.....
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    2
    I don’t think so at

  30. #30
    Maxxis cult follower
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,837
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    I very well may be wrong but it appears as though the industry is cannibalizing itself with all these new standards. I think it might be different if old standards were still being supported, in addition to the new tech being released, but from what I’m seeing in my searches that isn’t happening.

    I just cracked my 5 year old frame (low miles and otherwise in great condition). It’s near impossible to find a good 26er FS frame. So, if i wanted to buy into 27.5 it also requires a new fork and new rims/wheel build. But wait, the old hubs aren’t Boost so tack on new hubs... By this time a complete build is the cheaper way to go.

    Again, maybe it’s just me but I think a $5000 mountain bike should be able to remain in service longer than 2500 miles/5 years. (I have 2 bikes. Who only has one bike???) Only a few years ago I could have just bought a new frame for $1500 - $2500 and been back on the trail. Shit, I can still get a build kit for my 26” revelation and Hope hubs. Just can’t find a frame to bolt them on.

    Where I see potential cannibalizing is that “some” older riders (me for eg) will be very hesitant to spend money on high end components such as wheels and forks when there is fear that the $700 hubs I just bought will be obsolete in 3 years. Same goes for forks - will I plunk down $1k or just go middle of the road and take what comes on the stock build? And hell, I’m definitely thinking thrice before buying a $3 - $3.5k frame at the rate I see long-time standards being abandoned.

    Once the industry has burned enough customers, who will be left to plunk down thousands of dollars on new components? I foresee some great brands going out of business because too many customers had enough and chose not to spend the discretionary money.

    Anyway, rant over.

    BEIOU Downhill Dual Suspension 3K Carbon Fiber Mountain Bike Frame DW-Link 26-Inch Matte Black Unibody Internal Cable Routing T800 Ultralight 18-Inch MTB B022A18X $629

    Plenty of 26" components all over the place. China is making them brand-new, this frame is not some 5-year old holdover. 26" is not dead, it's just not being Made in America anymore. Very important distinction.
    We ALL have something to learn here. Post helpful solutions instead of flaming for your own sadistic need.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,489
    Generic Chinese carbon is by far the dumbest investment you can make. Untested, no support and quite possibly dangerous. Not to mention no resale value if it happens to last more than a year.

    The only thing worth less than generic chinese carbon is used generic chinese carbon.

    Stick with gently used known brands. Unless you're a very gentle rider
    83 Ritchey Everest
    95 Bianchi Mega Tube ti
    2015 Kona Operator Supreme
    2015 Kona Process 153
    2019 Kona Process 153 CR 29

  32. #32
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    3,834
    this is not limited to 26'ers. my 2011 pine mountain 29er might as well be a 26er.

    outdated geometry.

    only clears a 2.2 tire in the back and that depends on what tire it is.

    3 x drivetrain.

    straight steerer tube.

    135 rear wheel spacing.

    and i paid 1500 out the door for it, although the marin has served me quite well and i still ride it.

    my .02
    Last edited by shekky; 05-24-2019 at 07:05 PM.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by MSU Alum View Post
    It is? Where?
    In the description:

    "There is a small crack on the rear wheel stay. I tried to be completely honest and took the best pictures of the crack as possible. I road the bike with the crack and didn't notice any issues with handling, etc. "
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    Components aren’t the problem, finding a good frame in good condition is the issue. The frames I’ve been seeing are beat to hell and the prices are way off.
    I got 2000 bike, frame looks like new. Well actually the whole bike... But I was worried I wouldn't find parts when needed. Now I know, I don't need to worry about parts.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    I used to think the industry was stepping on its own feet, but for every rider buying less because of incompatibility, there are two new riders coming into the fold. The sport has grown a ton over the years, so no, the industry isn't suffering. It's the few small companies left that are suffering because they can't keep up. Before long there will be nothing but a few big companies owning everything. We're just about there already.

    It's interesting that on pinkbike right now there are more 650b used bikes, frames, wheels and tires than 26 and 29 combined! My main bike is 650b not because I want 1" bigger wheels, it was more about wanting geo changes and support. I'm running a 26" rear wheel though. Pretty easy to do on any 650b with the right modifications to correct geo to your taste. 650b devaluation seems to be on par with 2014 when everyone unloaded their 26'ers. It's a difference case mostly driven by market saturation, interest in 29'ers, and standards changes I guess? I still prefer 26. I have a short travel 26'er (TRC) I'll never sell. 27" is kind of annoying honestly but like anything you get used to it and adjust quickly. I find it does nothing better other than get over square edges at slow speeds better. Nothing comes for free though. 26" corners better when you like inside lines and tight stuff. That's why I run a 26" rear wheel. There's a reason pump track, 4x, and slolom racers are still winning on 26". Still crossing fingers that the 29'er take over will result in 650b being viewed as the unwanted middle child breathing new life into 26'ers. Wishful thinking I know.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    137
    what is pinkbike? I never heard of it.

  37. #37
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    3,834
    Quote Originally Posted by FlyingCookie View Post
    what is pinkbike? I never heard of it.
    https://www.pinkbike.com/

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by shekky View Post
    Thank you. I wonder if I am so noob or there are non in my country. I seen Konas, Specialized, Scoots, Gt-s and similar stuff.

    edit: yep, I'm noob That site is for used bikes.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    16
    This cycle is an ugly fact of capitalism. You think these companies and engineers are going to say "wow, we've created great stuff, can't improve on it, our job is done"? Shimano, SRAM and all of the major players will be satisfied by riders replacing stuff that wears out every 8 to 10 years and selling a few chains and brake pads in between? I bet when 12 speed was designed, they already had 13 speed developed. Just wait, there will be 13 speed, and also hyperboost spacing as well. You're now riding on obsolete crap. I predict in about twenty years or so some company will come out with revolutionary multiple chainrings attached to the crank.

  40. #40
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    3,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Roge View Post
    This cycle is an ugly fact of capitalism. You think these companies and engineers are going to say "wow, we've created great stuff, can't improve on it, our job is done"? Shimano, SRAM and all of the major players will be satisfied by riders replacing stuff that wears out every 8 to 10 years and selling a few chains and brake pads in between? I bet when 12 speed was designed, they already had 13 speed developed. Just wait, there will be 13 speed, and also hyperboost spacing as well. You're now riding on obsolete crap. I predict in about twenty years or so some company will come out with revolutionary multiple chainrings attached to the crank.
    if this sort of thinking pervaded the industry, we'd still be running 3 x 6 drivetrains, 1" threaded headsets and rigid forks.

  41. #41
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,184
    Quote Originally Posted by FlyingCookie View Post
    Thank you. I wonder if I am so noob or there are non in my country. I seen Konas, Specialized, Scoots, Gt-s and similar stuff.

    edit: yep, I'm noob That site is for used bikes.
    Go check out the "Friday Fails" crash reels. Those are the bikes being sold on the used listings as "barely ridden, only 20 hours, like new". https://www.pinkbike.com/news/video-...-fails-70.html

  42. #42
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,184
    Quote Originally Posted by eshew View Post
    Generic Chinese carbon is by far the dumbest investment you can make. Untested, no support and quite possibly dangerous. Not to mention no resale value if it happens to last more than a year.

    The only thing worth less than generic chinese carbon is used generic chinese carbon.

    Stick with gently used known brands. Unless you're a very gentle rider
    Maybe 5 years ago that was true. The factories making the unbranded stuff are the same factories shadow manufacturing name brand frames. Look at the Kross fs bike that got 5th today in Nove Mesto. It's an open mold frame with a paint job. You can buy it for $600.

  43. #43
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,215
    This is why I like small companies like Ventana. Even though I'm on the previous gen frame which is ten years old, I can still get seat stays and swingarms. In fact the stays and swingarm are 13 years old because the original front triangle died in a head on with a moto. I called them up, gave them my geo numbers which are the standard these days, and had a new front triangle in three weeks. Everything including heat treating and powder coating is done in house. If I ever need a complete frame from them, they'll credit me $400 through their customer appreciation program.
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,558
    "Standards" are constantly changing. Larger companies wisely started pushing instead of following, in order to put hurt on some boutique companies.

    You can't full-proof your bike, but you can full-proof cash, somewhat. Treat it like insurance payout and demand cash. Apply it to whatever.

    Looking in garage now, I have a Canfield, Santa Cruz, and Knolly. Next bike going to be a Pivot. They meet my min. Standards as a brand, and I want to continue to diversify brand and "standard" risk.



    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    Go check out the "Friday Fails" crash reels. Those are the bikes being sold on the used listings as "barely ridden, only 20 hours, like new". https://www.pinkbike.com/news/video-...-fails-70.html
    I've been buying and selling on PB for a long time. As long as you get good pics and know what you're looking at there's nothing to worry about. There's no reason to be worried about PB stuff anymore than ebay, craiglist, mtbr....

    PB is safer actually because you can look at the sellers profile who will often have pics or, videos of them riding the equipment you're interested in. Users often post their age, expereince level, and location. You'll be hard pressed to get more info about used gear from any other venue. I love buying stuff from light riders from the flat lands. Probably safe to stay away from expert level riders in whistler lol. I was looking at an enve m90 wheelset with king hubs for cheap until I looked at the rider's profile and realized he was a pro freerider in St George. Yeah, pass on that!

  46. #46
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,184
    Well thats good that you could find the profile to avoid that sale.

    I found a listing for a New in Box pair of Lake shoes, a pretty expensive model for like $70. The pics looked good. Got them in and the soles had scratches all over them and no insoles. Contacted the seller and he said, "These were Like new, only ridden half a dozen times by my girlfriend". fckin meat head!

  47. #47
    Rides all the bikes!
    Reputation: Sidewalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    3,278
    I hate how bikes are getting better! Why can't bikes just stay old, outdated, and shitty! Damn bike industry screwing us over by innovating and making cool stuff!

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    I think its fair to look at it this way... go ride a brand new 2019 bike, a complete ready to ride bike.

    Then ask yourself how much of that bike would you like just a teeny tiny bit worse. I think if we're being honest, we dont want any of it worse! Chances are theres a few things we wouldnt mind changing, actually.

    Most of these changes are just a tiny bit better, not world changing, but if you're throwing down all this money for a brand new bike, wouldnt you take better over worse? Its not like bikes have downgraded or anything.

    Most people buy complete bikes, so backwards compatibility isnt a huge deal overall, for most riders.

    The real argument is that bikes got really expensive and some people dont want to spend. Thats just fine. These changes are nice, but not world changing. If you want to stick to 26, they're insanity cheap now! You can get high end xtr level bikes for ~500. I basically gave away a decked out kona to a buddy for $100. You're not getting a new bike anywhere near that.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    Well thats good that you could find the profile to avoid that sale.

    I found a listing for a New in Box pair of Lake shoes, a pretty expensive model for like $70. The pics looked good. Got them in and the soles had scratches all over them and no insoles. Contacted the seller and he said, "These were Like new, only ridden half a dozen times by my girlfriend". fckin meat head!
    This is why you follow PB's very clearly posted rules and do all communication through PB and pay via Paypal as a Goods/Services payment. If something shows up not as advertised you open a dispute and one way or another you will get your money back eventually. I had to do this with a fork once. Paypal is deferential to buyers to a fault.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sidewalk View Post
    I hate how bikes are getting better! Why can't bikes just stay old, outdated, and shitty! Damn bike industry screwing us over by innovating and making cool stuff!
    Hah, truth. On paper my GG Shred Dogg v2 is quite similar to the heavily upgraded 2012 Reign it replaced (sus. travel, weight, component quality, etc.), but it handily outperforms the Reign in every respect.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by cjsb View Post
    You can't full-proof your bike, but you can full-proof cash, somewhat. Treat it like insurance payout and demand cash. Apply it to whatever.
    Anyone know what language this is? Google Translate is as stumped as I.

  51. #51
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,523
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    Most people buy complete bikes, so backwards compatibility isnt a huge deal overall, for most riders.
    Agreed
    But it will be a problem when he'll have to change the rear wheel of his new bike but the new standard at that time for rear axle will be 267mm and the new wheel size will be 863C

    So what ?
    Just buy another new bike , right ?
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    371
    To be honest, I have no interest in riding "old" bikes regardless of what componentry is on them. The geometry on most 26" full suspension bikes, even those from 2013 or so just plain sucks compared to what is out there today. I would rather ride a mid-range bike with slack hta, steep sta, and a short seat tube for dropper clearance.

    There's plenty of used frames out there. Buy one, or bite the bullet and sell off your old components.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    Quote Originally Posted by fokof View Post
    Agreed
    But it will be a problem when he'll have to change the rear wheel of his new bike but the new standard at that time for rear axle will be 267mm and the new wheel size will be 863C

    So what ?
    Just buy another new bike , right ?
    We went about 2 decades on 135/142, then moved to boost. 135/142 is still available.

    It took decades to make that one change, that seems fairly slow to me. It's still not a problem for the old standard, I doubt boost will be any less available for the next 10 years too.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    Quote Originally Posted by Honda Guy View Post
    There's plenty of used frames out there. Buy one, or bite the bullet and sell off your old components.
    I swapped most of my components from my old 2010 to my new modern bike. Just not the rear hub.

    The standards haven't really changed, people just freaked out about boost. If you have cool gear already, just move it forward to a new bike! Youll just need a $20 spacer and even your old hub works.

  55. #55
    damned rocks...
    Reputation: Aglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    I swapped most of my components from my old 2010 to my new modern bike. Just not the rear hub.

    The standards haven't really changed, people just freaked out about boost. If you have cool gear already, just move it forward to a new bike! Youll just need a $20 spacer and even your old hub works.
    Same here, I swapped everything except the PF BB that's a threaded BB on my new frame, and the bottom assembly on the headset now needs a pressed cup while the old was an integrated headset, so in fact my new frame went backward, only thing that needed an update was my DT 350 142mm rear hub that I converted to 148mm with a wolftooth adapter. Everything else went to my new frame, a Transition Sentinel.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    646
    To the OP, if you want a frame to swap your old stuff on. https://www.cotic.co.uk/product/BFe26#frame
    Ragley Big Wig, Sunday Soundwave (BMX), Nashbar CXSS (workout)

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by Sidewalk View Post
    I hate how bikes are getting better! Why can't bikes just stay old, outdated, and shitty! Damn bike industry screwing us over by innovating and making cool stuff!
    Who said innovating was bad? And who said all of these new standards were better? The ppl who absolutely must own the latest and greatest tech? Great... go back and look at my comments though. I love innovation - just don’t like the idea of scrapping parts that were $2k just a few years ago because the industry convinced everyone that if they’re not rocking 27.5 they’re missing out.

    I understand that new sales fuel innovation. When Honda releases a new sedan in 2019 doesn’t mean I have to haul my old Honda to the junk yard if I blow a piston. That sort of thinking is juvenile... but maybe that’s the problem with this market. Case in point, I see tons of offers to finance a new mountain bike while most millennials I know are carrying an ass load of student loans. Irony.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    ...
    Once the industry has burned enough customers, who will be left to plunk down thousands of dollars on new components? I foresee some great brands going out of business because too many customers had enough and chose not to spend the discretionary money.

    Anyway, rant over.
    We are looking at it from the customer perspective and would like to have products that last longer, but the whole world is going in other direction, where products are working just as long as the guarantee lasts. Bikes are much over the average, so we are lucky.

    From the company perspective, different factors are important. I would expect that majority of profit comes from the low-end bikes/components than from the top one. Margins are smaller but with thousand times higher sale volume, overall profit is higher anyway. I would guess that Shimano or SRAM are earning much more on the low-end OEM components than on the top models, this is why you can still buy new (2018/2019) models with 3x7 drivetrain.

    Probably 90% of buyers don't go beyond woolmart-type bike and use it till it dies without even a service. 5+% will go for low-end brand names as these might be their
    second or third bike. Only a small % will go for high-end model as most of them have anyway low-end components. A very small % will go for building the bike from parts as they like or they can afford/ need.

    Most of the "new" standards are brought as the cheaper version of the existing ones, I think. And it doesn't really matter for majority of buyers.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,558
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    Anyone know what language this is? Google Translate is as stumped as I.
    Example: bike frame breaks, bike company no longer makes bike. Company offers new frame but main components don't "fit". Customer may be also offered store credit, and if lucky the store has other brands that "fit."

    Would you like frame that does not fit stuff, store credit only towards that brand, credit towards multiple brands, or straight Cash? Or door number 5?



    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

  60. #60
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,523
    Quote Originally Posted by cjsb View Post
    Example: bike frame breaks, bike company no longer makes bike. Company offers new frame but main components don't "fit". Customer may be also offered store credit, and if lucky the store has other brands that "fit."
    That happened to me this year.
    Had a SS , nice bike , loved it , it broke after 3-4 years.
    Went for a frame replacement but all the parts didn't fit :
    -wheels are now 700
    - Hub width
    -Thru axle
    -BB >Press fit cups

    So they gave me a new bike as exchange.
    Great (In theory) but now , no parts that I have on my bin fits that new bike with new standards. I can't update the bike with the parts I have , I have to buy stuff all over again.

    And I prefer the old SS.

    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,265
    You could buy an older style hard tail frameset from a place like Gunnar Cycles and just use it for a different type of riding. And I guess sell the rear shock from the old frameset. Not ideal, but doable to reduce waste.


    Gunnar Cycles USA — Rock Hound – 29er or 26er – fast steel frame
    2018 Surly Karate Monkey 'dingle' speed
    2013 CAADX 105
    2012 Pinarello Quattro
    2002 Zurich LeMond

  62. #62
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Ironically, the proliferation of all the new "standards" has resulted in my spending a lot less less on MTB stuff. In the 7 years since 2012 I have spent what I normally spent every couple of years since I got into the sport in the late 90s, always trying new frames, forks, and wheels.

    When I wanted to replace my old Pike a few years back in 2017, I had to look all the way back to 2013 to find a high-end 160mm fork that would work with my 1/8" head tube, 20mm axle, and non-boost spacing. Ended up spending just $200 on an old Lyrik that I rebuilt for $60 in parts. Love it. In the past I would have dropped $800+ on a fork I wanted.

    I would have bought a new wheelset years ago, but not only will the 26" rims be worthless on a new bike, but likely so will whatever hubs I get. So I just keep riding my 9-year old wheelset.

    6-year old fork, 7 year old frame, 9 year old wheelset... yeah, the industry is not making a fraction off me what they used to.

    At some point I will break down and buy a whole new bike, but it is always going to be hard to justify, knowing that in 3 years I will likely be in the same predicament as I am now. I have been waiting for the wheel sizes and countless BB, head tube, axle, and wheel size standards to settle down before buying. I'm giving a few more years.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  63. #63
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by sgltrak View Post
    I am finding good deals on lightly used bike stuff that conforms to older "standards" as many riders upgrade to the "newest and greatest" stuff.
    I've had decent luck with forks, but not wheelsets. I see them occasionally, but they are never cheap. I may just live in the wrong part of the country.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    The fork example is a good example. I had a tapered 15mm 650b fork on my 2010 reign... I have that same fork on my 2017 orbea. We're rolling into 2020 models, so that same fork standard has been relevant for me for 10 years.

    If you're still on a straight 1 1/8th fork, I think its fair to say you had a good run, right? Just this week I *finally* retired my last straight steerer 20mm fork, a 2008 manitou minute. Cool fork, but its had a good run!

    Its not like they pulled the carpet out from under you, its had a very long backwards compatible run. My non tapered fork made it through 4 frames.

  65. #65
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901

    My thoughts on “new” standards

    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    The fork example is a good example. I had a tapered 15mm 650b fork on my 2010 reign... I have that same fork on my 2017 orbea. We're rolling into 2020 models, so that same fork standard has been relevant for me for 10 years.

    If you're still on a straight 1 1/8th fork, I think its fair to say you had a good run, right? Just this week I *finally* retired my last straight steerer 20mm fork, a 2008 manitou minute. Cool fork, but its had a good run!

    Its not like they pulled the carpet out from under you, its had a very long backwards compatible run. My non tapered fork made it through 4 frames.
    Not sure if you were responding to my post.....

    My 2012 frame is 1-1/8”. In less than 2 years it was nearly impossible to find a new high end fork that worked with it and the 20mm standard that was also a common standard for 160mm forks at the time.

    Sometimes you luck out and the standard you buy into sticks around for a while. Sometimes you’re not so lucky. There’s really no way to tell except in hindsight.

    Yes, my 1-1/8” forks had a good run. Frames and forks HAD been interchangeable for me for almost 15 years. Wheels almost completely interchangeable.

    It does not work that way anymore. Yes I am still on a 1-1/8 fork, and as a result I can’t getting much newer than 2013.

    The problem is it’s not just the steerer size. There’s also the wheel size, and the axle standard. Next year they may decide to throw a new brake mount standard at us as well (happened with road bikes recently).

    My point was not to gripe about the changing standards, I was simply pointing out that as a result of them I’m spending a lot less money on bike upgrades than I used to.
    Last edited by kapusta; 05-30-2019 at 11:03 AM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    My point was not to gripe about the changing standards, I was simply pointing out that as a result of them I’m spending a lot less money on bike upgrades than I used to.
    Yep, exactly what I was thinking. I guess we’re in the minority.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,558
    I’d say less upgrading, too, and i think that’s one of the main intents of the changes. I don’t view it as a negative in general.

    Current bikes:
    Canfield Brothers 2012 Yelli Screamy: 135 rear spacing, Hub that I chose does not accept adapters (but my choice), Tapered head tube but using a straight fork with massive CC “adapter”, 10mm quick release, 100mm open bath (somewhat of a relic but it works fine). 1X drive but frame can mount a front derailleur if I choose, and I like that. This bike will never be “upgraded.” Finally, frame-wise, it is the best fitting bike I have owned. It is now my son’s bike and I use it in the winter months. I love this bike.

    Knolly Endorphin 2016: 142 spacing, a non-boost bike. Frame accepts a front derailleur should I choose to use one. Bike was built up with components from my 2014 Heckler, whose frame I broke. This is my bike where the standards had a major impact on my decision. I had already put aftermarket carbon wheels on my Heckler and decided I’d rather use those without adapters and avoid boost, but only if I could find a great 142 frame option. Another tough call was more long travel 29ers appearing. Had a I waited 6 more months, probably would have sold off all Heckler components including 27.5” carbon wheels and gone for a boost or super boost LT 29er. But the Knolly is a great bike and brand, no complaints. The jump to LT 29ers will happen in due time.

    Santa Cruz Tallboy Carbon 2017/18?: Provided as warranty for my Heckler. Sized the frame for my wife and built bike for her. Boost frame. I have ridden it twice and love the carbon frame, and it convinced me to go LT 29er with the next bike for me.

    My parts bin is pretty much tapped out after these 3 bike builds. Next bike may still be frame only if I don’t like the complete build setup and there is still a frame only option. Pivot is my next brand choice, but it’s not set in stone, and super boost probably next spacing. I do want to start out by continuing to diversify across brands, but we’ll see what the future holds. Maybe it will be an eShuttle?

    Consolidation in the suspension/component groupings and the changing “standards”, at least IMO has led to fewer frame only options, less upgrading, and more complete bike purchases, which is what the larger companies and the consolidated suspension/component companies prefer.




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    94
    I started mountain biking in 1992. I can only imagine how confusing it is for new riders today. Three wheel diameters, normal, plus and fat tires, 1x, 2x, 3x, straight steerer, tapered, rear spacings..................... I can't even keep track of all the different standards. I miss the old days, it was so simple and you had just as much fun riding. Not once did I think "gee, I wish I only had one chainring" or "man, I wish I had wagon wheels with 6 inch wide tires".

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    My final comment on the thread...

    When considering all these upgrades which are designed & sold, in part, to make things stiffer - I grabbed the latest and greatest 27.5 boutique bike on the floor of the shop (boost, 34mm stanchions, wide rim, etc), braced the front wheel between my knees and have the bars some torque to each side. Guess what, the thing flexed nearly as much as my old 26er. Much of the flex appeared to be in the steer tube, fork legs and wheel (non carbon rims).

    I know overall stiffness = sum of the parts but still, flex was easily generated.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    My final comment on the thread...

    When considering all these upgrades which are designed & sold, in part, to make things stiffer - I grabbed the latest and greatest 27.5 boutique bike on the floor of the shop (boost, 34mm stanchions, wide rim, etc), braced the front wheel between my knees and have the bars some torque to each side. Guess what, the thing flexed nearly as much as my old 26er. Much of the flex appeared to be in the steer tube, fork legs and wheel (non carbon rims).

    I know overall stiffness = sum of the parts but still, flex was easily generated.
    I had a straight steerer 2000g fork that I could visibly see the fork flexing when riding in chunk. The 9mm qr wheel flexed enough to rub the lowers and the qr shifted enough to rub the disc. Often, it was scary to ride.

    My new fork is 1700g, and it doesnt even sort of do that. My rims are 120g lighter and crazy stiffer. Through axles eliminated qr's shifting in the dropouts and wheel twisting with big rotors.

    You cant honestly say your new boost bike isnt stiffer than what was common on 26ers. It wasnt until the end of the run that we got 20/15mm axles (which stuck anyway).

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    One Pivot, no I’m not claiming that my old Reba with QR was close to as stiff as a TA fork. But I’m not sure that Boost has done all that much beyond what a 20TA did to stiffen up the front end. It very well may have made front wheels stiffer but with the amount of flex that i saw, I’m not sure it matters all that much. Which is the point anyway, if you don’t address the weakest link it doesn’t matter.

    I could be wrong though.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    605
    The 148x12 rear end on my new bike is very, very noticeably stiffer than the 135x9 rear end on my old bike. YMMV.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    The 148x12 rear end on my new bike is very, very noticeably stiffer than the 135x9 rear end on my old bike. YMMV.
    Probably has more to do with your new wheel and frame than 148. I was talking to a mechanic in Moab who commented on how many bent hangers and mechs they are seeing since 148. 157 should help lol!

    Just for anyone that doesn't know all 135x9 frames will accept a 10mm through axle which in my experience offers the same benefits as 12mm. A well designed frame and wheel will not have excessive flex regardless of rear spacing. Hope uses their own 130mm spacing on their 160mm enduro bike. Graves likes to detention his spokes to add flex. That's with 135mm flange spacing.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,029
    I had a frame that has a convertible rear end. Initially I ran the rear wheel as a 9mm QR. I eventually got some adapters to convert the wheel to 142. I honestly could not tell a difference...not sure I'd be able to tell if it was 148.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    My final comment on the thread...

    When considering all these upgrades which are designed & sold, in part, to make things stiffer - I grabbed the latest and greatest 27.5 boutique bike on the floor of the shop (boost, 34mm stanchions, wide rim, etc), braced the front wheel between my knees and have the bars some torque to each side. Guess what, the thing flexed nearly as much as my old 26er. Much of the flex appeared to be in the steer tube, fork legs and wheel (non carbon rims).

    I know overall stiffness = sum of the parts but still, flex was easily generated.
    A lot of newer stuff has more designed in flex than older stuff.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bilirubin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    415
    I'm going to ride my 2008 Pitch until it breaks or can't be repaired any longer. At my riding skill level I'm the biggest factor that needs work, not my bike. That said, I will demo the newer tech (been off my bike for the past 6-7 years) this summer to check it out. Can't imagine climbing with slacked out geometry but we'll see.

    Similarly I never build computers that are state of the art either, and have never bought a new car.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    94
    The only reason I'm looking at perhaps buying a 27.5 is because I want a new bike with a slightly bigger frame than I have now. I want something all modern and up to date as far as components and thru axles and there's just nothing in a 26. I did consider the Jamis 26+ bikes but I don't really want a tire that wide. If it came in a regular 26 i would have already bought one. I do want to see one in person, though.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by AbnInf View Post
    The only reason I'm looking at perhaps buying a 27.5 is because I want a new bike with a slightly bigger frame than I have now. I want something all modern and up to date as far as components and thru axles and there's just nothing in a 26. I did consider the Jamis 26+ bikes but I don't really want a tire that wide. If it came in a regular 26 i would have already bought one. I do want to see one in person, though.

    Honestly, have you spent time on a 27.5 bike? The difference between a good 26 and a good 27.5 is very small and actually in favor of the 26. I don't recommend it. I actually found on my local flat trails, I was faster on a 26 then a 27.5. Was a little surprised but it was consistently the case. In the mountains on big all day rides, I did not feel much of a difference at all.

    However, a 29er is a whole different ball of wax. I am much faster on a 29er - even one with cheap heavy wheels. And on the big days, at the end I feel much better as well.

    I personally am convinced that the 27.5 movement has been nothing but a big joke and milked money out of tons of people. 29ers are not and honestly are what you should be looking at.

    My personal findings are very similar to this paper:

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/...eedAccess=true
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    Honestly, have you spent time on a 27.5 bike? The difference between a good 26 and a good 27.5 is very small and actually in favor of the 26. I don't recommend it. I actually found on my local flat trails, I was faster on a 26 then a 27.5. Was a little surprised but it was consistently the case. In the mountains on big all day rides, I did not feel much of a difference at all.

    However, a 29er is a whole different ball of wax. I am much faster on a 29er - even one with cheap heavy wheels. And on the big days, at the end I feel much better as well.

    I personally am convinced that the 27.5 movement has been nothing but a big joke and milked money out of tons of people. 29ers are not and honestly are what you should be looking at.

    My personal findings are very similar to this paper:

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/...eedAccess=true
    I've ridden a 29 and I don't like it. My trails are tight twisty stuff and they are less agile. It's all about feel and I don't like the way they handle. I'm certainly no faster on one. I would gladly take a 26 over a 27.5 if I could find a new one all modern and up to date. I've searched ebay and everywhere else for even a 26 cross country frame set up with thru axles. But the industry has killed them off.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    Honestly, have you spent time on a 27.5 bike? The difference between a good 26 and a good 27.5 is very small and actually in favor of the 26. I don't recommend it. I actually found on my local flat trails, I was faster on a 26 then a 27.5. Was a little surprised but it was consistently the case. In the mountains on big all day rides, I did not feel much of a difference at all.

    However, a 29er is a whole different ball of wax. I am much faster on a 29er - even one with cheap heavy wheels. And on the big days, at the end I feel much better as well.

    I personally am convinced that the 27.5 movement has been nothing but a big joke and milked money out of tons of people. 29ers are not and honestly are what you should be looking at.

    My personal findings are very similar to this paper:

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/...eedAccess=true
    That's just the bikeradar study right? If it is, this summary doesn't mention how they found 26" to be faster than 29 on all DH sections, but slower overall than 29. 27" was slower than both in all areas lol. Of course no one cares about studies, or race results. If we did 27" never would have caught on considering the first two years of the EWS saw discontinued 26'ers dominate until being removed from competition. Whatever, I ride 650b now because that's what the industry makes. 29'er crotch clearance is a deal breaker for me, though I won't argue they can be faster for many if not most riders. They certainly make general trail riding easier in every aspect other than tight stuff

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    94
    I don't even pay attention to "tests" where they try to show what bike is faster. Unless you're racing at the highest level of the sport the difference is pretty much negligible. So I might be 7 seconds slower on one loop lol. I only care how a bike feels to me personally. I don't like how 29ers feel, I don't like how they handle. I just don't like them.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by AbnInf View Post
    The only reason I'm looking at perhaps buying a 27.5 is because I want a new bike with a slightly bigger frame than I have now. I want something all modern and up to date as far as components and thru axles and there's just nothing in a 26. I did consider the Jamis 26+ bikes but I don't really want a tire that wide. If it came in a regular 26 i would have already bought one. I do want to see one in person, though.
    If you want to stick with 26" wheels but want newer geo and sizing just run 26" wheels on whatever 650b frame you want. You can keep the BB and other geo numbers pretty much the same by doing any one, or all of the following:

    20mm taller fork, .25" longer eye to eye shock (assuming the stroke is also .25 longer you'll increase travel by 15 to 20mm which works great because you'll have extra seat tube space at bottomout). If you dont' want more travel keep the stroke the same as stock which isn't always possible depending on shock size. offset bushing in reverse on stock eye to eye shock (only up front because in the back it's likely to rotate to the slack short position) 650b front wheel 26" rear. Mix and match any of these things and you can run 26 on pretty much any 650b fframe without making it a low rider. 650b fork offset works great with 26" so there's no reason to hunt down 26" forks. Or you can buy a super modern "short offset" 650b fork that uses 26" offset.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by AbnInf View Post
    I don't even pay attention to "tests" where they try to show what bike is faster. Unless you're racing at the highest level of the sport the difference is pretty much negligible. So I might be 7 seconds slower on one loop lol. I only care how a bike feels to me personally. I don't like how 29ers feel, I don't like how they handle. I just don't like them.
    Have you given a go with some of the newer offering? They are really good (Ripley). To me, who still rides a 26 for most things, I don't want to spend more to go slower - so no 27.5. I have demoed a ton and desperately wanted to buy a new 27.5 bike. But after almost every ride, I came to the conclusion that my old Turner was still better suited to the job. The 29er is a different story. My older 29er HT was just my race bike. I used it for races and that was it. It was fast but I agree, not nearly as fun on my trails as my Turner. The Ripley changes all that. Faster than my race HT and just as fun (if not more) then the Turner. The key is that while I would be exhausted after 4 hours and 25 miles on the 26" Turner, I could get 5 hours and 35+ miles before being blown on the Ripley and to me, the more I can ride, the happier I am!
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Sidewalk View Post
    I hate how bikes are getting better! Why can't bikes just stay old, outdated, and shitty! Damn bike industry screwing us over by innovating and making cool stuff!
    So you think all the BB standards are needed to progress technology? How about all the head set standards? I just bought a crankset that takes direct mount rings, do you think having 6 different DM ring interfaces progresses technology? I'm just scratching the surface.

    Your comment is so worn out, and misses the point entirely. We all love progression, but to act like the industry isn't jerking us around, and is only progressing technology, is beyond naive. You've clearly not been in the game long. Get back to me after you've acquired 4 different BB tools just to service bearings in a cup that all do the same thing. Progress!

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    So you think all the BB standards are needed to progress technology? How about all the head set standards? I just bought a crankset that takes direct mount rings, do you think having 6 different DM ring interfaces progresses technology? I'm just scratching the surface.

    Your comment is so worn out, and misses the point entirely. We all love progression, but to act like the industry isn't jerking us around, and is only progressing technology, is beyond naive. You've clearly not been in the game long. Get back to me after you've acquired 4 different BB tools just to service bearings in a cup that all do the same thing. Progress!
    Great examples of a point I was trying to make. No longer will I invest/upgrade to high-dollar parts, the risk outweighs the benefits.

    Side note, I see that I can no longer buy a Sram X9 9spd rear derailleur. That sucks because I love my XO shifters.

  86. #86
    Here, diagonally!
    Reputation: JACKL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,092

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    So you think all the BB standards are needed to progress technology? How about all the head set standards? I just bought a crankset that takes direct mount rings, do you think having 6 different DM ring interfaces progresses technology? I'm just scratching the surface.
    I needed headsets and bottom brackets before, and I need them now too. It just is, its not better or worse, just simply is. Its completely inconsequential to me to pay 20 bucks for a pressfit BB, or 20 bucks for a old threaded 73mm bb.

    My new crank needs rings and I have to buy them, just like my old crank. They're completely and widely available.

    Why would the bottom bracket or headset your bike takes being different than mine, make any difference to me? I dont really understand your angle on that one. I dont even understand how you think its jerking you around.

    I have 4 different BB tools. Thats pretty awesome that just 4 tools can cover basically any bike made in the last 50 years. The compatibility has been incredible and largely unchanging, for a loooooong time.

    If suddenly bikes needed TWO cranksets for some bizarre reason, that would be a pain in the ass. I only had to buy one crank before, I dont want to run 2. I dont want 4 seats on my bike, or suddenly have two rear wheels. But none of that is happening, so honestly whats different? I needed all these parts before, and I need them just the same now and I seem to buy them with similar frequency.

  88. #88
    Shortcutting Hikabiker
    Reputation: Acme54321's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,215
    I got some rapid rise XTR derailleurs, narrow 25.4 handlebars, donger stems, fixed seatposts. Step right up and start the bidding on these marvels of "old" standards. I'm waiting on offers.

    Of course this thread is in the 26" forum, it's fitting.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by Acme54321 View Post
    I got some rapid rise XTR derailleurs, narrow 25.4 handlebars, donger stems, fixed seatposts. Step right up and start the bidding on these marvels of "old" standards. I'm waiting on offers.

    Of course this thread is in the 26" forum, it's fitting.
    You sucked me in, LOL...

    I can still buy a 25.4 clamp stem for those bars. I prefer to clamp my bike in the stand using a fixed seat post. And your rapid rise derailleur was a just a fad when it was new, not a mtb standard so it’s ironic that you bring it up.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    I needed headsets and bottom brackets before, and I need them now too. It just is, its not better or worse, just simply is. Its completely inconsequential to me to pay 20 bucks for a pressfit BB, or 20 bucks for a old threaded 73mm bb.

    My new crank needs rings and I have to buy them, just like my old crank. They're completely and widely available.

    Why would the bottom bracket or headset your bike takes being different than mine, make any difference to me? I dont really understand your angle on that one. I dont even understand how you think its jerking you around.

    I have 4 different BB tools. Thats pretty awesome that just 4 tools can cover basically any bike made in the last 50 years. The compatibility has been incredible and largely unchanging, for a loooooong time.

    If suddenly bikes needed TWO cranksets for some bizarre reason, that would be a pain in the ass. I only had to buy one crank before, I dont want to run 2. I dont want 4 seats on my bike, or suddenly have two rear wheels. But none of that is happening, so honestly whats different? I needed all these parts before, and I need them just the same now and I seem to buy them with similar frequency.
    You said "it's not better, it's not worse." Exactly! You're saying you dont' understand where I'm coming from yet you've hit the nail on the head?

    Progress is shimmed dampers, droppers, material breakthroughs, geo.... not a million standards that are "no better, no worse" in your words.

    I miss the days when I could buy any companies 104bcd chain rings, now I have direct mount with 6 different splines that all do the same thing but I can only use one of them. I have three frames and all of them have different thead pitch axles. Please explain how different thread pitches progresses anything? I can go on and on. I mean, we all know the game that's being played. It's one big circle jerk. So yeah, we are being jerked around.

  91. #91
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    You said "it's not better, it's not worse." Exactly! You're saying you dont' understand where I'm coming from yet you've hit the nail on the head?

    Progress is shimmed dampers, droppers, material breakthroughs, geo.... not a million standards that are "no better, no worse" in your words.

    I miss the days when I could buy any companies 104bcd chain rings, now I have direct mount with 6 different splines that all do the same thing but I can only use one of them. I have three frames and all of them have different thead pitch axles. Please explain how different thread pitches progresses anything? I can go on and on. I mean, we all know the game that's being played. It's one big circle jerk. So yeah, we are being jerked around.
    This^^^^
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by Acme54321 View Post
    I got some rapid rise XTR derailleurs, narrow 25.4 handlebars, donger stems, fixed seatposts. Step right up and start the bidding on these marvels of "old" standards. I'm waiting on offers.

    Of course this thread is in the 26" forum, it's fitting.
    "Man, I really wish non-clutched RDs would come back."

    Said no one, ever.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by RS VR6 View Post
    I had a frame that has a convertible rear end. Initially I ran the rear wheel as a 9mm QR. I eventually got some adapters to convert the wheel to 142. I honestly could not tell a difference...not sure I'd be able to tell if it was 148.
    You didn't notice because flex happens in the rim/tire and rear triangle/linkage, not axle/frame interface. Rob Roskopp, former owner of santa cruz said in an interview when 142 first came out that he found no rigidity benefits over 135. He said anyone that wants an axle can run 135x10 on all their QR frames. Of course he capitulated when the market demanded the new standard. This is why SC was 2 years behind in adopting 142. They learned to not miss the boat so they adopt early now. I remember people questioning the 2011 Nomad for still using 135. I owned the 2011 nomad2 alloy, 2012 nomad carbon, and now 2016 nomad3. 142 was a great standard because it's more secure and easier to use, but it doesn't do anything in regards to riding characteristics. My Nomad3 has a little more flex than my Nomad2. Mostly because of the rear wheel I'm running I"m sure, and maybe SC designed in a little more compliance which is a popular thing these days. We want some flex in the rear triangle. Helps the rear wheel track and not deflect as much. All the new boost frames have designed in flex, just like 35mm bars have designing in flex. We learned a long time ago that the goal isn't to make everything as stiff as possible, but when it comes to marketing, people eat up the wider and stiffer is better rhetoric.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    Thats like selling your chevy truck and buying a toyota corolla, and being upset that your old alternator doesnt fit anymore. The new one isnt any better or worse, but its certainly different. Or you buy a new home and your old front door doesnt fit. Of course it doesnt! No reasonable person would expect it to. It just is.

    I dont understand why people expect bike to be endlessly compatible industry wide. How is that being jerked around? I needed a $20 bottom bracket before, and I need a $20 bottom bracket now. If they kept changing stuff to jack up prices, id get it, but they're not.

    The reality of it though, is that often this new stuff IS better, you just dont like the degree in which its better. My first FS bike in 07 was 29 pounds, had 100mm of travel and top of the line stuff. It actually was a pretty flexy bike with clunky gear, poor damping, and a drivetrain that slapped all over. My new bike is 160mm, 28lb and plain works better. New standards? Sure, but its a package and all together the net difference is substantial.

    Its a pretty hard sell to say im being jerked around when I end up with a bike thats better, for basically the same price. When it comes down to it, you can even run 26er wheels in a new bike if you really insist on doing so. Nearly all the rest of the parts are backwards compatible. I still have an ooooold XTR/saint brake combo from when saint was still a single piston, still bolts up to my brand new fork and bars.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    Thats like selling your chevy truck and buying a toyota corolla, and being upset that your old alternator doesnt fit anymore. The new one isnt any better or worse, but its certainly different. Or you buy a new home and your old front door doesnt fit. Of course it doesnt! No reasonable person would expect it to. It just is.

    I dont understand why people expect bike to be endlessly compatible industry wide. How is that being jerked around?
    Anyone involved in automotive repair/racing/etc. probably finds the demands for standardization in bikes pretty hilarious. Hell, there are 17 different lug bolt patterns for 5-lug wheels (https://www.discounttire.com/learn/bolt-pattern).

  96. #96
    Rides all the bikes!
    Reputation: Sidewalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    3,278
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    So you think all the BB standards are needed to progress technology? How about all the head set standards? I just bought a crankset that takes direct mount rings, do you think having 6 different DM ring interfaces progresses technology? I'm just scratching the surface.

    Your comment is so worn out, and misses the point entirely. We all love progression, but to act like the industry isn't jerking us around, and is only progressing technology, is beyond naive. You've clearly not been in the game long. Get back to me after you've acquired 4 different BB tools just to service bearings in a cup that all do the same thing. Progress!
    Oh my god! Four tools!

    I work in HVACR. It is a VERY slow evolving industry. I still use 3-4 gauge sets at roughly $150 each (for cheap ones). Come back to me when you have spent $600 on cheap tools to do BASIC diagnosis.

    I have had R22, R410a, R134a, R407, R404 in my van just for basic service work. None of those refrigerants are odd or unusual, just regular refrigerants I will see daily. That is five 25-30 pound refrigerant bottles just for ADDING refrigerant. If I want a recovery bottle, and a reuse bottle post repair, I need TWO more 30 pound bottles in my van.

    I don't know what you do for a living. But if it is EASIER than working on bicycles, then you really shouldn't be arguing about how complicated it is. Imagine being in software and having to learn a whole new coding language every other week.

    Edit: I recently went to Raceface cranks so I can run their power meters. Yes, that is progress. I can now run a powermeter that has a long life USB rechargeable battery in my bottom bracket! Oh deer god, I had to buy new chainrings too! Oh no! But I got to use the same chain, same pedals, and the cranks will last virtually forever (Turbines). But oh no, I wasted $40 on a chainring (which, I went from a 28 to a 32 anyway) and needed a new $30 BB! Now I am broke!

    I am actually downgrading my XC bike though. Going back to hardtail with 135QR and 11s. I hope I can find parts!

  97. #97
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    "Man, I really wish non-clutched RDs would come back."

    Said no one, ever.
    That's not a standard.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    That's not a standard.
    De facto standard. How many clutched 8/9sp RDs do SRAM and Shimano make?

  99. #99
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    De facto standard. How many clutched 8/9sp RDs do SRAM and Shimano make?
    And you've hit on why they keep changing standards.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,439
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    De facto standard. How many clutched 8/9sp RDs do SRAM and Shimano make?
    None, but I think Microshift may.

    I don't know that I'd call the RD clutch a standard, a feature and a good one but perhaps not a standard. I tend to think of standards dictating what fits together, but a clutched RD and standard or shadow RD should fit if there's a derailleur hanger.

    IDK, tomatoe tomato...
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  101. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    None, but I think Microshift may.
    It was a rhetorical question. Microshift does now, but it's only been out since February.

    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    I don't know that I'd call the RD clutch a standard, a feature and a good one but perhaps not a standard. I tend to think of standards dictating what fits together, but a clutched RD and standard or shadow RD should fit if there's a derailleur hanger.

    IDK, tomatoe tomato...
    It's a feature that was used to push otherwise reluctant users into a new-ish standard (10 sp) that was not being rapidly adopted. When they first came out people we practically begging for SRAM/Shimano to make 9 sp versions, to which SRAM/Shimano replied "Hah, eat a d!ck and go buy 10 sp." Everyone was up in arms at the time, and now no one cares in the least. I'm just glad they exist and dropped chains are a distant, nearly irrecollectable memory.

  102. #102
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    I needed headsets and bottom brackets before, and I need them now too. It just is, its not better or worse, just simply is. Its completely inconsequential to me to pay 20 bucks for a pressfit BB, or 20 bucks for a old threaded 73mm bb.

    My new crank needs rings and I have to buy them, just like my old crank. They're completely and widely available.

    Why would the bottom bracket or headset your bike takes being different than mine, make any difference to me? I dont really understand your angle on that one. I dont even understand how you think its jerking you around.

    I have 4 different BB tools. Thats pretty awesome that just 4 tools can cover basically any bike made in the last 50 years. The compatibility has been incredible and largely unchanging, for a loooooong time.

    If suddenly bikes needed TWO cranksets for some bizarre reason, that would be a pain in the ass. I only had to buy one crank before, I dont want to run 2. I dont want 4 seats on my bike, or suddenly have two rear wheels. But none of that is happening, so honestly whats different? I needed all these parts before, and I need them just the same now and I seem to buy them with similar frequency.

    If you just buy new complete bikes (or custom built with all new parts) and do not try to move your components from one bike or frame to another, then changing standards do not really make much of a difference, for the reasons you point out.

    However, if you are someone (like many enthusiasts) that likes to upgrade what you have with the latest tech, OR if you like to move components from your old bike to a new one (like a wheelset you spent a bunch of money on) or simply like to tinker with your setup, then changing standards DO make things harder. This is not theoretical, it is my experience.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  103. #103
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    De facto standard. How many clutched 8/9sp RDs do SRAM and Shimano make?
    No, it is not a "standard". I think you are miss-understanding what "standard" means in the context of this thread.

    In fact, the clutch is a perfect example of an improvement in components that did NOT involve the introduction of a new standard.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  104. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Sidewalk View Post
    Oh my god! Four tools!

    I work in HVACR. It is a VERY slow evolving industry. I still use 3-4 gauge sets at roughly $150 each (for cheap ones). Come back to me when you have spent $600 on cheap tools to do BASIC diagnosis.

    I have had R22, R410a, R134a, R407, R404 in my van just for basic service work. None of those refrigerants are odd or unusual, just regular refrigerants I will see daily. That is five 25-30 pound refrigerant bottles just for ADDING refrigerant. If I want a recovery bottle, and a reuse bottle post repair, I need TWO more 30 pound bottles in my van.

    I don't know what you do for a living. But if it is EASIER than working on bicycles, then you really shouldn't be arguing about how complicated it is. Imagine being in software and having to learn a whole new coding language every other week.

    Edit: I recently went to Raceface cranks so I can run their power meters. Yes, that is progress. I can now run a powermeter that has a long life USB rechargeable battery in my bottom bracket! Oh deer god, I had to buy new chainrings too! Oh no! But I got to use the same chain, same pedals, and the cranks will last virtually forever (Turbines). But oh no, I wasted $40 on a chainring (which, I went from a 28 to a 32 anyway) and needed a new $30 BB! Now I am broke!

    I am actually downgrading my XC bike though. Going back to hardtail with 135QR and 11s. I hope I can find parts!
    You're missing the point entirely. Just because we are socilaized to accept the Apple power cord business model doesn't mean it makes sense. I know there are plenty of other examples of similar incompatibility in other markets but we are talking about bikes. I have RF cranks too, do you really think their Cinch spline is better than Sram's, or Shimano's spline? In what way is having multiple splines progress? It's not about progress which I'm sure you understand, it's about you having to buy Cinch spline compatible rings. BMX has used DM rings for ages, but they didn't create tons of spilnes because it doesn't progress anything. Shimano just put out a new freehub that does the same thing as sram's XD which is open pattent. Is Shimano's new freebub body progress? If you think so please explain becase all I see is this is how they force you to buy their stuff. Both XD and Shimano's design proivde space for a 10t. Neither does this better. It's not progress, it's business.

    Let me give you a few more examples: we have countless shock mounting hardware sizes and there's no enginnering justification for this. Shops are unlikely to have what you need unless they are a dealer for your brand. The indusry could have settled on 22x8 and 22x6 for every bike from XC to DH very easily which would help shops, and make life easier for riders. The same could be said about BB's, headsets, axles.... It's not progress to have so many sizes forcing shops to guess what's going stick around the longerst and be the most popular size. For the most part shops just give up and say "we can order it for you." It's a circle jerk! You're still living in the Matrix. I took the red pill and know what's up. #wokeAF

  105. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by Sidewalk View Post

    ...I can now run a powermeter that has a long life USB rechargeable battery in my bottom bracket! Oh deer god, I had to buy new chainrings too! Oh no! But I got to use the same chain, same pedals, and the cranks will last virtually forever (Turbines). But oh no, I wasted $40 on a chainring (which, I went from a 28 to a 32 anyway) and needed a new $30 BB! Now I am broke!
    You can run a power meter, for now. Those Turbines will last forever...unless they stop making chainrings for them. These are (hypothetical) changes that people in this thread are talking about.

    If I weren’t so jaded, a $1500 carbon wheel set might be in my future (not really) and for many people an upgrade like that is an investment that “should” last many years... unless the standards change again.

    There’s no point in buying high dollar quality parts when standards change so rapidly. The brands who lose are the high end / boutique, small businesses.

  106. #106
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Comparisons to other industries is largely irrelevant. Completely different expectations, and rightfully so. Think of how badly people would flip out if they needed to replace the gears in their automobile transmissions as often as with mountain bikes. I am picturing a conversation:

    "This sucks, my tranny is worn out in 20K miles".
    "Well don't complain, MTB drivetrains last under 10K"
    "Oh, then I guess it is not so bad".


    Yes, there may be 17 different bolt patters for 5 bolt wheels. But if 10 years ago there were basically 2 or 3, and people were often switching wheels between cars and buying new wheels for them, they probably WOULD be irritated about there now being 17.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  107. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    No, it is not a "standard". I think you are miss-understanding what "standard" means in the context of this thread.

    In fact, the clutch is a perfect example of an improvement in components that did NOT involve the introduction of a new standard.
    See my follow-up. They were used as leverage to push people out of 8/9 sp.

    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    You're missing the point entirely. Just because we are socilaized to accept the Apple power cord business model doesn't mean it makes sense. I know there are plenty of other examples of similar incompatibility in other markets but we are talking about bikes. I have RF cranks too, do you really think their Cinch spline is better than Sram's, or Shimano's spline? In what way is having multiple splines progress? It's not about progress which I'm sure you understand, it's about you having to buy Cinch spline compatible rings. BMX has used DM rings for ages, but they didn't create tons of spilnes because it doesn't progress anything. Shimano just put out a new freehub that does the same thing as sram's XD which is open pattent. Is Shimano's new freebub body progress? If you think so please explain becase all I see is this is how they force you to buy their stuff. Both XD and Shimano's design proivde space for a 10t. Neither does this better. It's not progress, it's business.
    So, what's you're proposed solution? Because, from where I sit, it would take draconian regulation.

    It's funny, the guy I know who complains the most about this stuff is an ultra-libertarian who hates regulation of any kind and thinks free market-driven innovation can and will solve all problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    You're still living in the Matrix. I took the red pill and know what's up. #wokeAF
    Quoted for eternal preservation of teh lulz.

  108. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    If you just buy new complete bikes (or custom built with all new parts) and do not try to move your components from one bike or frame to another, then changing standards do not really make much of a difference, for the reasons you point out.

    However, if you are someone (like many enthusiasts) that likes to upgrade what you have with the latest tech, OR if you like to move components from your old bike to a new one (like a wheelset you spent a bunch of money on) or simply like to tinker with your setup, then changing standards DO make things harder. This is not theoretical, it is my experience.
    Which standards? You new bike comes with BB30? Your old 24mm still fits, its actually more versatile than any previous standard (sram stuff fits).

    Boost? Your old wheels fit with a spacer, and nearly every hub has the kit available for cheap.

    The tapered forks is really about it... but after nearly 10 years, I think everyone had a fair time span to deal with going to a tapered frame.

  109. #109
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    See my follow-up. They were used as leverage to push people out of 8/9 sp.
    Yes, we all agree about that.


    A feature was introduced, and a 'standard' was introduced at the same time. You had to adopt the 'standard' to gain access to the feature. The smart folks here recognize that shifting the 'standards' force users to buy a bunch of superfluous crap if they want a new feature. This is an old old old trick. Why aren't you keeping up?
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  110. #110
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    See my follow-up. They were used as leverage to push people out of 8/9 sp.
    .
    Yes, I saw that. Two things....

    1- Your claim is conjecture.
    2- Even if your claim is accurate, it is still irrelevant. Clutch is NOT a standard and is a pointless example to use in the way you are trying to use it.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  111. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    So, what's you're proposed solution? Because, from where I sit, it would take draconian regulation.
    There is no solution. My initial premise was that many folks who’ve been burned by the constant standards change will stop spending money on luxury upgrades and high-end, high dollar components. I also think that when the greater mtb population jumps on the bandwagon due to some marketing hype, it helps the big brands and hurts the small business.

  112. #112
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    Which standards? You new bike comes with BB30? Your old 24mm still fits, its actually more versatile than any previous standard (sram stuff fits).

    Boost? Your old wheels fit with a spacer, and nearly every hub has the kit available for cheap.

    The tapered forks is really about it... but after nearly 10 years, I think everyone had a fair time span to deal with going to a tapered frame.
    What standards are causing me issues?

    Lets see... getting my Hope XC 20mm x 100 TA front hub to fit a 15mm x 110 boost fork.

    Or a wheel of a different size to fit anything.

    Or a fork of a different wheel size.

    Or any of the dozen non-DM MTB rings I have in my parts box to fit the DM crank that I want to replace the ring on. Same with the weird bolt pattern on my 105 crank... I have a bunch of older shimano road rings that are useless.

    Regarding the tapered steerers, read my previous comment on that. it was not 10 years. Within 2 years of straight steerers going away on MTBs, all high end forks were strictly tapered. Yes, you can use external cup adapters, but it raises the front end.

    Also, it used to be a lot easier to mix and match road and mtb RDs and shifters, and also shifters/RDs of different speeds.

    If your new frame and rear wheel is boost spacing, and you have an older crank, it can be a hassle to get the chain-line right. Or in my case, using a 8/9/10 speed hub, 9 speed crank, and a new 11 speed mtb cassette, it was a royal b!itch to get the chain-line of that right (I needed to find 8mm chainring spacers).

    I'm not saying these changes were all bad ideas, and some were unavoidable (like the cassette width for 11 speed). But they absolutely DO cause issues if you are not buying complete bikes.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  113. #113
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    My initial premise was that many folks who’ve been burned by the constant standards change will stop spending money on luxury upgrades and high-end, high dollar components.
    Yes, I think people keep forgetting that this was the point of the thread.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  114. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    There is no solution. My initial premise was that many folks who’ve been burned by the constant standards change will stop spending money on luxury upgrades and high-end, high dollar components. I also think that when the greater mtb population jumps on the bandwagon due to some marketing hype, it helps the big brands and hurts the small business.
    Many people buy brand new gear every year. Its always been that way. Nothing to do with standards, people just like bikes. I think its hard to say that every few years you get "burned" when people are willingly changing out perfectly good stuff, for the next year model, just because.

    I've always made out like a bandit buying peoples near-new takeoffs for >50% off.

    For every person feeling forced out of their standard, 100 are buying new crap anyway, just because its new.

    I'm on my 3rd high end boost hub on the same bike in a year. Just because. Cant really say anything forced my hand and made me buy anything, its not even to a different standard.

  115. #115
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    Many people buy brand new gear every year. Its always been that way. Nothing to do with standards, people just like bikes. I think its hard to say that every few years you get "burned" when people are willingly changing out perfectly good stuff, for the next year model, just because.

    I've always made out like a bandit buying peoples near-new takeoffs for >50% off.

    For every person feeling forced out of their standard, 100 are buying new crap anyway, just because its new.

    I'm on my 3rd high end boost hub on the same bike in a year. Just because. Cant really say anything forced my hand and made me buy anything, its not even to a different standard.
    He did not say "all" people. He said "many" people.

    You are not one of those people.

    Got it.
    Last edited by kapusta; 06-07-2019 at 06:35 PM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  116. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    There is no solution. My initial premise was that many folks who’ve been burned by the constant standards change will stop spending money on luxury upgrades and high-end, high dollar components. I also think that when the greater mtb population jumps on the bandwagon due to some marketing hype, it helps the big brands and hurts the small business.
    The solution is quite simple. We only have two standards for mounting rotors. If we can stick to 6 bolt international rotors/hubs why can't we stick to other standards? Shimano tried to improve upon 6 bolt and it was mostly rejected though I like what they did. At least center lock is an innovative design and not just shimano's proprietary bolt pattern. If they changed the bolt pattern to 5, or 7, or spaced the current 6 slightly differently, nothing would improve. We've had a whole lot of that over the past decade! It's amazing we've stuck with rotor standards but not with anything else? No overseeing body was needed to get the industry to stick to 6 bolt rotors. Because of that there's no reason to think an overseeing body would be needed to stick to any other standard.

  117. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,558
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    You didn't notice because flex happens in the rim/tire and rear triangle/linkage, not axle/frame interface. Rob Roskopp, former owner of santa cruz said in an interview when 142 first came out that he found no rigidity benefits over 135. He said anyone that wants an axle can run 135x10 on all their QR frames. Of course he capitulated when the market demanded the new standard. This is why SC was 2 years behind in adopting 142. They learned to not miss the boat so they adopt early now. I remember people questioning the 2011 Nomad for still using 135. I owned the 2011 nomad2 alloy, 2012 nomad carbon, and now 2016 nomad3. 142 was a great standard because it's more secure and easier to use, but it doesn't do anything in regards to riding characteristics. My Nomad3 has a little more flex than my Nomad2. Mostly because of the rear wheel I'm running I"m sure, and maybe SC designed in a little more compliance which is a popular thing these days. We want some flex in the rear triangle. Helps the rear wheel track and not deflect as much. All the new boost frames have designed in flex, just like 35mm bars have designing in flex. We learned a long time ago that the goal isn't to make everything as stiff as possible, but when it comes to marketing, people eat up the wider and stiffer is better rhetoric.
    I had put a 135x10 axle on my old 2004 Enduro. Had the bike for 10 years. When I made the change I noticed a difference, not game changing for me like a dropper post, but noticeable. When I went to a 142 frame it seemed like it flexed and bounced more but I attributed it to frame design. It was easier to get the rear wheel off with the 142, that’s about it.

    Overall, I don’t fret the “standards” when i buy a bike. In fact, I want something new, different as part of it, and better, if possible.

    The things I like most over the changes past 10 years, are 29er wheels, slacker HA/steeper SA, wider rims/tires, and dropper posts


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  118. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    De facto standard. How many clutched 8/9sp RDs do SRAM and Shimano make?
    You're confusing standards with innovations.

    This is what the whole argument is about that so many like yourself don't seem to understand? A standard is 6 bolt international rotors, 9/16 pedals. Unfortunately I can't continue with examples because actual standards end there. I kind of tested the knowledge of riders like your self with one of my posts by bringing up shock hardware standards. No one called me out that the industry is moving towards that right now. Metric shocks will reduced shock hardware sizes dramatically so we might actually be able to add shock hardware as a true standard. In 5 to 10 years sourcing non metric sized shocks will be an ebay search for used and old stock, but maybe just maybe we will actually have shock hardware standards. The same needs to happen to headtube ID's, BB's, axle thread pitches, chain ring splines/bolt patters.... Do you see the difference between standards and innovations now? I don't mean to sound condescending but this isn't hard to understand.

  119. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by RMCDan View Post
    Anyone involved in automotive repair/racing/etc. probably finds the demands for standardization in bikes pretty hilarious. Hell, there are 17 different lug bolt patterns for 5-lug wheels (https://www.discounttire.com/learn/bolt-pattern).
    Bikes aren't complicated. Comparing somethign so simple to the auto indusry is like comparing an abacus to a computer. Anyway, just because there's a mess of standards in other markets doesn't mean the bike indusry should do that same. If the bike industry can settle on 9/16th pedals, and 6 bolt rotors, they can settle on every other size for the limited components on a bike. I could care less if 1/2 pedals caught on instead of 9/16th. Just pick one because it doesn't matter one way or the other! At least the indusry did that so we can buy pedals from any company to go on any companies cranks. Wouldn't that be nice for eveything! Why are you fighting aginst this! Join the revolution! Take the red pill!

  120. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    You're selling it like the industry is doing absolutely nothing different except changing dimensions. No one is simply respacing the bolt circles on rotors, or anything similar to that.

    PF bb's are lighter and stiffer. Boost wheels are stiffer and more durable. 12mm axles are easier to use. Tapered is stiffer and lighter. 27.5 hangs up just a little bit less.

    Even something that seems like a pain in the ass change, like a headset standard changing, has allowed for lower stacks and changes in design. You still have to buy a headset no matter what, that sort of change just is.

  121. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    You're selling it like the industry is doing absolutely nothing different except changing dimensions. No one is simply respacing the bolt circles on rotors, or anything similar to that.

    PF bb's are lighter and stiffer. Boost wheels are stiffer and more durable. 12mm axles are easier to use. Tapered is stiffer and lighter. 27.5 hangs up just a little bit less.

    Even something that seems like a pain in the ass change, like a headset standard changing, has allowed for lower stacks and changes in design. You still have to buy a headset no matter what, that sort of change just is.


    I'm starting to sound like a broken record so I'm not going to reiterate stuff I've already said but I do want to speak to your headset example:

    You say we need multiple headset standards for lower stack heights and design changes? Tapered headtubes have been the standard for a decade, the internal diameter doesn't need to change to allow for different stack height headsets. Only one ID is needed and wall thickness can vary on the outside. The stack height of the head tube isn't relevant to the ID. There's no engineering justification for all the head tube ID's we have. It's not about having to buy another headset or not, it's about all headsets fitting the same ID headtubes. This would not restric headset design, or headtube stack height. It's like you guys that think the current standards mess we have today is the only way to progress bikes. Proper standards do not restric anything. Have 6 bolt international rotors held back brake developemt? Have 9/16 pedals held back pedal evolution? Would a direct mount ring spline standard restric chain ring devolpement? Would one thead pitch for all axles restric axles? Well shi!, I am a broken record!

  122. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    132
    Having multiple bikes is fun. So just do both like I did.

    Old main bike was a 2009 yeti 575 with many upgrades.
    New bike is 2019 Whyte t130s.

    Both ride great but the new stuff is a bit better. Still ride both.

    I look for deals all the time. My hard tail is an On One Evo456 it’s a 26er but with all new components 1x11 SLX, XT brakes, magic cross ride rims. All the parts were new and cheap. Excellent build for maybe $800 all in.

    Just picked up a 2010 yeti 575 frame with tapered head tube for 400 shipped. That one is set with a 160mm pike up front with a 27.5 wheel and 26 rear. Use this more for bike parks rather than beat up my new bike.

    I just have a hierarchy of bikes, when I upgrade a part on a higher bike, the older part goes to a lower bike if it’s better and lighter.

    I admit I am a bit addicted as I have bought old 26 frames ar great deals for both my kids and wife and built them up so nice. For the riding they do the bikes are more capable than them. I mean I own 5 Yetis that work great for way less then the cheapest new Yeti.

    Investing parts in an old 26er is still worth it. Only potential issue is forks. Keeping the old forks going with straight steerer is the only thing that is harder to find.

  123. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    132
    I would also add that killing it on the trail on an old 26er impresses people. At my recent trails some new guys were lost, so I gave them the complete tour. They all had brand new 29er full suspension- all decked out with gear. I showed them every drop and jump and cleared everything on my old 2004 heckler. They could not believe that a 15 year old bike was that good. Sure it’s not as good as my whyte but it’s plenty capable.

  124. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,005
    Where is everyone finding these awesome 26er frame deals? I’m not being sarcastic - please point me in the right direction. I’d gladly pick up another or two.

    All the 26ers I see are beat to hell and look sketch, or they have mediocre builds and the seller wants $2k for an 8+ year old bike.

  125. #125
    damned rocks...
    Reputation: Aglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,269
    You have to keep looking and hope for some luck, a friend saw a practically new Specialized Epic carbon frame from 2012 for 250€, only problem it was that the frame was an M and he's 184cm tall.

  126. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    Where is everyone finding these awesome 26er frame deals? I’m not being sarcastic - please point me in the right direction. I’d gladly pick up another or two.

    All the 26ers I see are beat to hell and look sketch, or they have mediocre builds and the seller wants $2k for an 8+ year old bike.
    Pinkbike and eBay. Lots of people put them on both. I lost many deals. The one that got away was a 2014 Yeti SB66 with two air shocks all in good condition for $500. Still don’t know why I did not buy it.

  127. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    Where is everyone finding these awesome 26er frame deals? I’m not being sarcastic - please point me in the right direction. I’d gladly pick up another or two.

    All the 26ers I see are beat to hell and look sketch, or they have mediocre builds and the seller wants $2k for an 8+ year old bike.
    The gravy days of killer deals on a surplus of nice 26'ers are coming to and end. There are more 650b's on the used market than 26'ers which is nuts considering 650b has only been popular since 2013. You should still be able to find a good deal on something clean, but in another 5 years? I've got a 2012 ibis HD size M frame for sale if interested. May or may not come with an angleset. Depends on whether it will fit my TRC or not. Knowing the bike industry, not lol!

  128. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    Where is everyone finding these awesome 26er frame deals? I’m not being sarcastic - please point me in the right direction. I’d gladly pick up another or two.

    All the 26ers I see are beat to hell and look sketch, or they have mediocre builds and the seller wants $2k for an 8+ year old bike.
    Here is a Turner 5-Spot - the guy is running 27.5 wheels but might have the 26" wheels as well.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/2011-Turner...cAAOSwzFRc9ae1

    And here is a nice Blur LT that could work as well:

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/2010-Santa-...UAAOSwp9Bcz6PJ

    They are all over $1000, which to me is not worth it. So I think I agree with you....
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  129. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,558
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    Where is everyone finding these awesome 26er frame deals? I’m not being sarcastic - please point me in the right direction. I’d gladly pick up another or two.

    All the 26ers I see are beat to hell and look sketch, or they have mediocre builds and the seller wants $2k for an 8+ year old bike.
    Sounds like typical Craigslist fantasy sellers.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  130. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,558
    Given how this thread is evolving, pointing out that there used to be some very long and contentious threads on MTBR regarding the “wheel size wars.”

    Despite how much a few prefer something, when given the choice, the riders/market chose to abandon 26” wheels.

    Still, if 26” is your thing and you get over on a bike 15+ years old—that’s awesome. More power to you.




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  131. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,093
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post

    The reality of it though, is that often this new stuff IS better, you just dont like the degree in which its better. My first FS bike in 07 was 29 pounds, had 100mm of travel and top of the line stuff. It actually was a pretty flexy bike with clunky gear, poor damping, and a drivetrain that slapped all over. My new bike is 160mm, 28lb and plain works better. New standards? Sure, but its a package and all together the net difference is substantial.
    It depends what you rode then too. I have 2006 Enduro that has 150mm of travel, 20mm front axle that weighs 31lbs.
    I have 2014 Enduro with 170mm of travel that weighs 30lbs.
    Both are 2x, both have wide, decent tires, wide bars and big brakes.
    The only difference in speed for me is seat angle. It's more pleasant on my newer bike.

  132. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by cjsb View Post
    Given how this thread is evolving, pointing out that there used to be some very long and contentious threads on MTBR regarding the “wheel size wars.”

    Despite how much a few prefer something, when given the choice, the riders/market chose to abandon 26” wheels.

    Still, if 26” is your thing and you get over on a bike 15+ years old—that’s awesome. More power to you.




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    "rider's chose to abandon 26" Is that the way you remember it? Riders had about as much choice as with any other standards change. The industry invested big money in new mold tires, rims, forks, and frames basically overnight. 26" was killed by the industry the second all that money was invested. We didn't even get one year where we had equal options. If you wanted 26" in 2014 your options were about 10% that of 650b with almost no newer geo options.

    The only choice we had to keep 26" around was to not buy 650b, but anyone buying a new bike had no choice. I've bought tons of standards I don't want like 30mm cranks, 650b, 15mm forks.. In the end the house always wins! Had we been giving the choice I think 650b would have out sold 26" by a mile but we'll never know because we weren't given the choice.

  133. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,558
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    "rider's chose to abandon 26" Is that the way you remember it? Riders had about as much choice as with any other standards change. The industry invested big money in new mold tires, rims, forks, and frames basically overnight. 26" was killed by the industry the second all that money was invested. We didn't even get one year where we had equal options. If you wanted 26" in 2014 your options were about 10% that of 650b with almost no newer geo options.

    The only choice we had to keep 26" around was to not buy 650b, but anyone buying a new bike had no choice. I've bought tons of standards I don't want like 30mm cranks, 650b, 15mm forks.. In the end the house always wins! Had we been giving the choice I think 650b would have out sold 26" by a mile but we'll never know because we weren't given the choice.
    Dream on...

    Most of industry resisted 29 over several years and customers had choice between 29/26. Just look at the stupid 29 Component thread on MTBR.

    Anyway, sales of 29 killed 26, because the mass market of customers rejected 26.

    Then you had smaller companies like Jamis, with their global influence offering 27.5--the nerve.

    Same thing with frame materials. Customers prefer carbon. You should go to the Turner forum and look up the threads on why he moved to carbon, just as an example.

    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

  134. #134
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901

    My thoughts on “new” standards

    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    "rider's chose to abandon 26" Is that the way you remember it? Riders had about as much choice as with any other standards change. The industry invested big money in new mold tires, rims, forks, and frames basically overnight. 26" was killed by the industry the second all that money was invested. We didn't even get one year where we had equal options. If you wanted 26" in 2014 your options were about 10% that of 650b with almost no newer geo options.

    The only choice we had to keep 26" around was to not buy 650b, but anyone buying a new bike had no choice. I've bought tons of standards I don't want like 30mm cranks, 650b, 15mm forks.. In the end the house always wins! Had we been giving the choice I think 650b would have out sold 26" by a mile but we'll never know because we weren't given the choice.
    Yes, riders abandoned 26”.

    Just ask Dave Turner. Once he introduced the Burner -which is for all intents and purposes a 27.5 version of the 5-Spot - It was all he could do to GIVE 5-Spot frames away. There were deeply discounted 2011 and 2012 5-spot frames available for quite a long time, while the Burners sold like hotcakes.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  135. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8,697
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    "rider's chose to abandon 26" Is that the way you remember it? Riders had about as much choice as with any other standards change. The industry invested big money in new mold tires, rims, forks, and frames basically overnight. 26" was killed by the industry the second all that money was invested. We didn't even get one year where we had equal options. If you wanted 26" in 2014 your options were about 10% that of 650b with almost no newer geo options.

    The only choice we had to keep 26" around was to not buy 650b, but anyone buying a new bike had no choice. I've bought tons of standards I don't want like 30mm cranks, 650b, 15mm forks.. In the end the house always wins! Had we been giving the choice I think 650b would have out sold 26" by a mile but we'll never know because we weren't given the choice.
    You're rewriting MTB history to cater to your argument

    Pacenti came out with a limited run of 650b rims and people dove in like crazy to adopt it early. we all still had 26ers. There were basically no tires except one in 2.1 or something with tiny volume that typically fit a 26er frames.

    People worked out this big list of max 650b rims and tires that fit all the existing 26er forks. The whole thing was homegrown and rider driven, and people wanted more and more 650b rims and tires.

    Eventually, the industry agreed to push the whole thing forward after they saw how massively popular the concept was.

    You make it seem like industry insiders knocked us all off our 26ers at knife point and stole cash out of our wallets to fund the changeover. 650b was a huge homegrown conversion that became a standard. Rider driven.

    When it really comes down to it, as in time to spend money and replace parts, I've never seen anyone actually struggle with standards. There might be 5 minutes of confusion that is *easily* sorted out by a google search, and then off you go to order up your part. The ones who complain the loudest about how difficult dealing with standards are, seem to be the people not dealing with standards.
    Last edited by One Pivot; 06-10-2019 at 01:23 PM.

  136. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rev Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,905
    My simple answer to your question. I have no trouble with new standards.

  137. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Yes, riders abandoned 26”.

    Just ask Dave Turner. Once he introduced the Burner -which is for all intents and purposes a 27.5 version of the 5-Spot - It was all he could do to GIVE 5-Spot frames away. There were deeply discounted 2011 and 2012 5-spot frames available for quite a long time, while the Burners sold like hotcakes.
    Honestly, in 2011, before Turner had even come up with a 27.5" burner, he was giving the 5-spot away. They were on Blue-sky cycling for $1200. That bike got killed because it was aluminum in the time of carbon.
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  138. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    You're rewriting MTB history to cater to your argument

    Pacenti came out with a limited run of 650b rims and people dove in like crazy to adopt it early. we all still had 26ers. There were basically no tires except one in 2.1 or something with tiny volume that typically fit a 26er frames.

    People worked out this big list of max 650b rims and tires that fit all the existing 26er forks. The whole thing was homegrown and rider driven, and people wanted more and more 650b rims and tires.

    Eventually, the industry agreed to push the whole thing forward after they saw how massively popular the concept was.

    You make it seem like industry insiders knocked us all off our 26ers at knife point and stole cash out of our wallets to fund the changeover. 650b was a huge homegrown conversion that became a standard. Rider driven.

    When it really comes down to it, as in time to spend money and replace parts, I've never seen anyone actually struggle with standards. There might be 5 minutes of confusion that is *easily* sorted out by a google search, and then off you go to order up your part. The ones who complain the loudest about how difficult dealing with standards are, seem to be the people not dealing with standards.

    So you're saying the industry gave riders the choice to buy 26'ers with the same geo, wheels and tires as 650b, and riders chose 650b?

    Yes there was grassroots interest in 650b that the industry took notice of and ran with. My point is by 2014 we were starting to see lots of geo changes, new mold tires and rims, and almost none of it was available in 26". If you wanted the newer geo and components you didn't have a choice. I'm not saying riders wouldn't have abandoned 26", just stating the fact that we never had equal choices.

    You can say riders were abandoing 26" before 650b even became a thing, but you would probably have to say the same thing about 650b right now considering the sales percentages of 26 vs 29 in 2013 are starting to look a lot like 650b vs 29 in 2019.

  139. #139
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    Honestly, in 2011, before Turner had even come up with a 27.5" burner, he was giving the 5-spot away. They were on Blue-sky cycling for $1200. That bike got killed because it was aluminum in the time of carbon.
    Yet the first Burners we Al and they were in demand.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  140. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation: unicrown junkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    882
    Nothing has changed, not a single damn bit. Chainring BCD all over the board as usual, cassettes in how many flavors vs freewheels from the 80s, same. Hell, we finally have a gazillion tire choices but my fave Ritchey Omegabite is long gone. Same for the SpecialEd Tr-Cross made in '85.

    Wheels? How 'bout when Canyonsnail ran 24 in back w/26 up front. Or take my Ibis TrialsComp with 24 front and 20 rear. What standards are we talking about exactly here?

    In '89 Shimano redesigned the freehub body with a wider spline, only two years after introducing XT and Deore clickable systems in 87, relegating the older "standard" to the shelf. Do you guys have both the four-spline and two-spline Suntour freewheel tools? How many of you even have Suntour stuff left? I mean original, as in 80-90s.

    Things change and that's about it. I wish 130mm square taper spindles were made along with my favorite Sugino AT crank in 180, that was one hell of a combination on my '86 Rockhopper. Oh yeah right, frames changed too. Where were those "standards" back in '86? They weren't......they still aren't now....it's an industry trying to make money and we are the suckers sending them cash.
    Good friction shifting is getting hard to find nowadays....

  141. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Yes, riders abandoned 26”.

    Just ask Dave Turner. Once he introduced the Burner -which is for all intents and purposes a 27.5 version of the 5-Spot - It was all he could do to GIVE 5-Spot frames away. There were deeply discounted 2011 and 2012 5-spot frames available for quite a long time, while the Burners sold like hotcakes.
    I'm not saying 26" sales weren't falling off a cliff, or that 650b was totally driven by the industry and not rider interest. I'm just saying the industry did not give us equal options in both sizes so we really can't say how that would have played out. They saw crap sales of 26'ers, people putting 650b wheels in their 26'ers, hot 29'er sales, and they went all in. I get how you would say riders abandoned 26" if you go by low sales, and hack job 650b conversions, but I say we can't conclude rider's abonded 26" when we never got an oportunity to buy bikes identical to the new 650b bikes only with 1" smaller wheels. I think the indusry knew if they did provide that option people would have questioned the whole point. In the end it's not 25mm taller wheels that make newer bikes good. Have you rode a 65 HA, 75 ST, 13.4 BB, long reach 26'er? I know I haven't because the indusry never gave me a chance to see if I would like that better than my current 650b with those numbers.

  142. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Yet the first Burners we Al and they were in demand.
    Yeah, but I don't think from a numbers point of view, he sold nearly the number of burners as he did 5-spots. His issue was probably a production problem that he addressed with the Burner. Simple supply and demand.

    Crazy thing about Turner is that I don't see any on the trail anymore. Heck, I have been to many places where nobody has even heard of a Turner. Very sad in my book. And I have yet to see a Czar, RFX or carbon Flux in the wild, which is nuts because you see Ibis, Pivot, and Intense bikes everywhere.
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  143. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    86
    I think that many (and that includes me) are amazed at the scale of the change to the standards, over the past 10 years. Change is not new in mountain biking, but in the past the changes impacted few components, the chassis for the most part remained the same - from the ability to interchange parts on it. While I have no issue with the new standards being offered, I do question the purpose behind purposeful elimination of 26er as an option. Why replace it with 27.5 standard? This is particularly puzzling, since 26ers have been prevalent since mountain biking begun, and there must still be millions of those bikes out there.
    I've been mountain biking since 1992 - starting on a Huffy with no suspension, probably a 45 pound bike... and let me tell you, back then I loved that thing. It was an 18 speed, with horrible components, but the satisfaction I got from riding technical trails on it was tremendous, the brakes on it were so bad. Later I upgraded to my first real mountain bike... a Schwinn S94.2 (I think), and from then on I just kept riding. When the V-brakes arrived - I was psyched to put them on - and they were great - then the disc brakes and full suspension - tried both and loved it in that I could still ride the challenging trail, with a little more comfort, and descent with a little more control. Then the 31.8 handlebar arrived... and I thought to myself - what's wrong with 25.4 standard? But ok... folks started buying the raiser bars (I tried them but did not like them - they seemed too wide). Then the wheels got bigger and the bars got wider, and now the frames are wide too. People say the new bikes with "modern" geometry, big wheels, and wide bars are better... but better at what? Better for whom? Back in the early 2000's the hot topic was US made vs. Taiwan...with the main selling point of made in Taiwan, that this approach makes the prices are affordable, since then much of the production is in China, yet the prices keep climbing.
    The reason why I never switched to the big wheeled bikes, is that the rationale behind the new bikes never resonanted with me, I never raced, never cared how fast I ride... I always rode for fun, to work out, to see how far I can go on a rocky trail, I never even noticed the bike when riding (unless something crapped out). One bike owner told me that I should get the big wheel bike because it makes riding so much easier - he told me these bikes are "cheater bikes", because you can ride stuff on them that you wouldn't be able to on a 26er. Well... that's cool, maybe I'll get one when I'm old.

  144. #144
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    I think that many (and that includes me) are amazed at the scale of the change to the standards, over the past 10 years. Change is not new in mountain biking, but in the past the changes impacted few components, the chassis for the most part remained the same - from the ability to interchange parts on it. While I have no issue with the new standards being offered, I do question the purpose behind purposeful elimination of 26er as an option. Why replace it with 27.5 standard? This is particularly puzzling, since 26ers have been prevalent since mountain biking begun, and there must still be millions of those bikes out there.
    I've been mountain biking since 1992 - starting on a Huffy with no suspension, probably a 45 pound bike... and let me tell you, back then I loved that thing. It was an 18 speed, with horrible components, but the satisfaction I got from riding technical trails on it was tremendous, the brakes on it were so bad. Later I upgraded to my first real mountain bike... a Schwinn S94.2 (I think), and from then on I just kept riding. When the V-brakes arrived - I was psyched to put them on - and they were great - then the disc brakes and full suspension - tried both and loved it in that I could still ride the challenging trail, with a little more comfort, and descent with a little more control. Then the 31.8 handlebar arrived... and I thought to myself - what's wrong with 25.4 standard? But ok... folks started buying the raiser bars (I tried them but did not like them - they seemed too wide). Then the wheels got bigger and the bars got wider, and now the frames are wide too. People say the new bikes with "modern" geometry, big wheels, and wide bars are better... but better at what? Better for whom? Back in the early 2000's the hot topic was US made vs. Taiwan...with the main selling point of made in Taiwan, that this approach makes the prices are affordable, since then much of the production is in China, yet the prices keep climbing.
    The reason why I never switched to the big wheeled bikes, is that the rationale behind the new bikes never resonanted with me, I never raced, never cared how fast I ride... I always rode for fun, to work out, to see how far I can go on a rocky trail, I never even noticed the bike when riding (unless something crapped out). One bike owner told me that I should get the big wheel bike because it makes riding so much easier - he told me these bikes are "cheater bikes", because you can ride stuff on them that you wouldn't be able to on a 26er. Well... that's cool, maybe I'll get one when I'm old.
    It sounds like your central idea is that since you don't understand something, then it doesn't need to exist.



    Regarding your points--

    -650b and 26" are close enough that you can run either size in most frames, so that's how it got started. Nowadays, why get a 26" when a 650b bike is the same thing with more tire clearance?

    -wider handlebars allow a bike to have more trail without the wheel flop making the bike cumbersome. Higher trail has a bunch of well-established benefits. If you're using a low-trail mtb then you won't necessarily benefit from wide bars; they're both parts of the steering system.

    -Big wheel bikes make terrain easier to ride. How is that change different from your moving to the v-brakes, or to the schwinn?





    It sounds like you're old already.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  145. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    It sounds like your central idea is that since you don't understand something, then it doesn't need to exist.



    Regarding your points--

    -650b and 26" are close enough that you can run either size in most frames, so that's how it got started. Nowadays, why get a 26" when a 650b bike is the same thing with more tire clearance?

    -wider handlebars allow a bike to have more trail without the wheel flop making the bike cumbersome. Higher trail has a bunch of well-established benefits. If you're using a low-trail mtb then you won't necessarily benefit from wide bars; they're both parts of the steering system.

    -Big wheel bikes make terrain easier to ride. How is that change different from your moving to the v-brakes, or to the schwinn?





    It sounds like you're old already.
    Wide bars allow a bike to have more trail? Bar width is not relevent to trail. Trail is a product of fork offset, head angle and wheel size. I think all the standards these days have you confused.

  146. #146
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    Wide bars allow a bike to have more trail? Bar width is not relevent to trail. Trail is a product of fork offset, head angle and wheel size. I think all the standards these days have you confused.
    It's weird that you understand that yet don't understand how it relates to hand position. A handlebar is a lever.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  147. #147
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    Wide bars allow a bike to have more trail? Bar width is not relevent to trail. Trail is a product of fork offset, head angle and wheel size. I think all the standards these days have you confused.
    I think there is some confusion about what he meant.

    He said wide bars ALLOW more trail. He did not say that wide bars CAUSE more trail.

    Whether that is true I really have not thought about, but that is what was meant, I believe.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  148. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    I think there is some confusion about what he meant.

    He said wide bars ALLOW more trail. He did not say that wide bars CAUSE more trail.

    Whether that is true I really have not thought about, but that is what was meant, I believe.
    I misunderstood the comment. My bad.

  149. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    646
    So of the new standards are good IMO. Some I don't get. The one that I have always questioned the most is 148mm boost. Why didn't the bike industry just use the already existing 150mm standard? What does 2mm less in hub width buy you?

    Honestly most things are easy enough to find still. It isn't like you suddenly can't buy 26in rims or tires. People still make non boost hubs. IMO the only thing that is hard to find is 26in forks but 27.5 can work.
    Ragley Big Wig, Sunday Soundwave (BMX), Nashbar CXSS (workout)

  150. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by 93EXCivic View Post
    So of the new standards are good IMO. Some I don't get. The one that I have always questioned the most is 148mm boost. Why didn't the bike industry just use the already existing 150mm standard? What does 2mm less in hub width buy you?

    Honestly most things are easy enough to find still. It isn't like you suddenly can't buy 26in rims or tires. People still make non boost hubs. IMO the only thing that is hard to find is 26in forks but 27.5 can work.
    Yeah, I am sure the marketing guys had something to do with that...
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  151. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    646
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    Yeah, I am sure the marketing guys had something to do with that...
    I didn't say they did.... Doesn't make it make sense...
    Ragley Big Wig, Sunday Soundwave (BMX), Nashbar CXSS (workout)

  152. #152
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by 93EXCivic View Post
    So of the new standards are good IMO. Some I don't get. The one that I have always questioned the most is 148mm boost. Why didn't the bike industry just use the already existing 150mm standard? What does 2mm less in hub width buy you?
    150mm hubs don't have any flanges, and are much wider than the apparent 2mm. More accurate to compare 148 to 157.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  153. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    It sounds like your central idea is that since you don't understand something, then it doesn't need to exist.

    Regarding your points--

    -650b and 26" are close enough that you can run either size in most frames, so that's how it got started. Nowadays, why get a 26" when a 650b bike is the same thing with more tire clearance?

    -wider handlebars allow a bike to have more trail without the wheel flop making the bike cumbersome. Higher trail has a bunch of well-established benefits. If you're using a low-trail mtb then you won't necessarily benefit from wide bars; they're both parts of the steering system.

    -Big wheel bikes make terrain easier to ride. How is that change different from your moving to the v-brakes, or to the schwinn?

    It sounds like you're old already.
    Yeah - I'm pretty sure you missed my central idea, but that's ok.

    27.5 size gives you more tire clearance than a 26er? How is that? And what are you on about a high and low trail? I love how you threw in there the "well-established benefits" I'm sure the marketers and the influencers established them quite well. I get that the big wheels make the bike easier to ride, so is riding on a gravel road. Just because something is easier to do, doesn't make it better. I'm sure an escalator to Mt. Everest would be the best way to go, yet people would rather die trying to climb it. There are many things out there we're convinced we need - but we don't actually. All these standards make bikes more complex, not simpler - quite the opposite of the quote you've got on there.

  154. #154
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    Yeah - I'm pretty sure you missed my central idea, but that's ok.

    27.5 size gives you more tire clearance than a 26er? How is that? And what are you on about a high and low trail? I love how you threw in there the "well-established benefits" I'm sure the marketers and the influencers established them quite well. I get that the big wheels make the bike easier to ride, so is riding on a gravel road. Just because something is easier to do, doesn't make it better. I'm sure an escalator to Mt. Everest would be the best way to go, yet people would rather die trying to climb it. There are many things out there we're convinced we need - but we don't actually. All these standards make bikes more complex, not simpler - quite the opposite of the quote you've got on there.
    I'm pretty sure i understood your central point, and agree. My impression was that you stopped paying attention a decade ago, and thus didn't represent your point very well. I was just trying to clear up or provide context for some trends that you complained about.


    You're not the first one to not follow my previous post, so that's on me.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  155. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,736
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    150mm hubs don't have any flanges, and are much wider than the apparent 2mm. More accurate to compare 148 to 157.
    No flanges? Now I don't feel as bad about misreading your comment about bar width and trail. I know you're talking about flange width but many will be confused by your comment.

    Wider flanges make sense for 29'ers, but it's a joke for 27". It's funny when boost first came out it was said to only be for 29'ers then the industry went all in? So ironic new flange widths came with rims designed for "compliance" because wheels were too stiff. Kind of like how 35mm bars have more designed in flex now even though the whole point of 35mm was to add rigidity.

    Bitching about all this is just for fun. The industry will keep doing its thing. Bikes will continue to ride great, but be a total cluster fuk of incompatibility.

  156. #156
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    No flanges? Now I don't feel as bad about misreading your comment about bar width and trail. I know you're talking about flange width but many will be confused by your comment.

    Lol fair point! Word soup.


    150 and 157 hubs are the same width, but the 157 extends in to the frame, while a 150 hub floats between the dropouts.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  157. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,658
    When I was a kid we had this white GE refrigerator, I'm pretty sure we got it before I was in school, it certainly moved with us numerous times, never missed a beat, finally gave it away after it ran without complaint for fifteen years. Downside: It was certainly an energy hog.

    As an adult I have experienced a fair amount of what I would call "designed obsolescence", however, this can be looked at in a different way:

    What if what we perceive as a shortened life span for products is the result of a increase in the rate of innovation or perhaps designing at a higher level that makes products more prone to failure?

    Certainly when it comes to high tech, there are few people who would argue that a cell phone should last five years, though I'm sure there are phones that still work after five years, but the hardware is not able to run newer software/apps.

    So when you talk about sporting goods lasting five years with regular use, sporting goods that are complicated, ie drivetrains, brake systems, suspension, frame, etc... it's not like we're talking about a soccer ball. Things wear out, technology improves, and the world moves on.

    If the OP is so worried about his money being well spent, then don't ride a mountain bike or at least pick a bike that is less complicated. If you really want to future proof your purchases, buy an extra frame/parts, or consider looking at used bike gear so you can replace what you have.

    Your (the OP) problem has little to do with new bike standards, it seems more likely that you want things to last longer than intended and you aren't seeing the forest through the trees.

    Rant over
    Guerilla Gravity Shred Dogg
    Fezzari Signal Peak (For Sale)
    Pivot Shuttle (wife's)

  158. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    603
    You (OP) know what they say, don't you? Advice you receive on an internet forum is worth every cent you pay for it!

  159. #159
    VENI VEDI BIKI
    Reputation: skankingbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    838
    Soooo.....back issues are leading me to look at full suspension..... I have a shit ton of parts in a bin and a set of 26 bonty tubeless wheels. I am going back and forth between dropping dough on a "new geo" 27.5 or snatching up a 26 Motobecane fantom ds elite frameset from Bikeland.......

    I never found a 29er that truly "fit" me, as I am a short dude.

    The newer bikes look and ride nice, but I have trouble justifying $2000 + on a bike to ride through the woods.

    I am older 42, don't race, and love assembling/tweaking bikes.

    I have never felt the need for a dropper post; don't want to mess around with bleeding hydros, and want something I can work on myself.

    The biggest "advantage" I have experienced with the "next gen" stuff is the wider front hub reduces tire rub when nailing turns, and the more upright geo is better on my low back....although I do not really care for the "chopper" feeling of the new style bikes.

    I like my Pugsley 29+ conversion, but that just rolls over everything like a monster truck.....kinda takes the fun out of some courses.
    Veni Vidi Biki

    I came, I saw, I biked.

  160. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,048
    Quote Originally Posted by skankingbiker View Post
    The biggest "advantage" I have experienced with the "next gen" stuff is the wider front hub reduces tire rub when nailing turns,
    I can't recall a bike I've ever owned where the front tire rubbed against the fork legs when turning. Do you run huge tires on old narrow and flexy forks?
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  161. #161
    VENI VEDI BIKI
    Reputation: skankingbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    838
    2.3 bonty team something or other with RS solo recon air fork
    Veni Vidi Biki

    I came, I saw, I biked.

  162. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,093
    Quote Originally Posted by skankingbiker View Post

    I have never felt the need for a dropper post; don't want to mess around with bleeding hydros, and want something I can work on myself.

    The biggest "advantage" I have experienced with the "next gen" stuff is the wider front hub reduces tire rub when nailing turns
    Even on my old bikes (2004,2005, 2006) I've never had a tire rub. And they all fit 2.5 tires (Maxxis measurement mind). Hydro brakes are pretty bullet proof. I have a set of SLX that have been bled once in perhaps ten years. And I would say they perform so closely to my Saints it was a little depressing.
    Same goes for a dropper, I was a hold out for a long time. Sure you don't need one, but it's nice in other ways, I drop it often for corners too.

  163. #163
    slow
    Reputation: sgltrak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,216
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    I can't recall a bike I've ever owned where the front tire rubbed against the fork legs when turning. Do you run huge tires on old narrow and flexy forks?
    I had 2.1 tires rubbing on my old SID and my old Manitou Skareb in hard cornering. The Skareb was especially flexy. I didn't have as much of an issue when I went to the Fox RL100.

  164. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,048
    Quote Originally Posted by sgltrak View Post
    I had 2.1 tires rubbing on my old SID and my old Manitou Skareb in hard cornering. The Skareb was especially flexy. I didn't have as much of an issue when I went to the Fox RL100.
    Yeah, I was gonna say, this sounds a lot more like a noodly fork/wheel issue than a hub width thing. I never ran uber-light (or cheap) forks and never had my front tire rub a leg. That's a crazy amount of flex.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  165. #165
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by skankingbiker View Post
    I have never felt the need for a dropper post; don't want to mess around with bleeding hydros, and want something I can work on myself.
    Gravity Dropper. Nothing to bleed, nothing to leak. Totally user serviceable. Mine is almost 14 years old.

    The term “game changer“ gets used WAY too often in mountain biking. However, in the case of remote-activated dropper posts, the term is very much appropriate.

    BTW, 42 is younger not older.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  166. #166
    VENI VEDI BIKI
    Reputation: skankingbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Gravity Dropper. Nothing to bleed, nothing to leak. Totally user serviceable. Mine is almost 14 years old.

    The term “game changer“ gets used WAY too often in mountain biking. However, in the case of remote-activated dropper posts, the term is very much appropriate.

    BTW, 42 is younger not older.
    When you have 2 bulging discs that are only getting worse, are overweight, and are barely able to get out.......you feel old.
    Veni Vidi Biki

    I came, I saw, I biked.

  167. #167
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,901
    Quote Originally Posted by skankingbiker View Post
    When you have 2 bulging discs that are only getting worse, are overweight, and are barely able to get out.......you feel old.
    Oh, I hear you. Nonetheless, when you are 52 (like me) you will look at 42 with longing.

    Bulging discs.... sorry to hear that. Been dealing with a bad couple discs in my lower back since my mid 30s. One bulged enough a few years ago to pinch a nerve and cause awful leg pain. That led to 1-1/2 years off the mtb. Got a microdiscectomy and that helped, but what really helps is serious core strengthening. For many years I’ve done core work, but in retrospect I was pretty a half-assed about it. Now I do about 45 minutes worth 3-4 times a week, and it really makes a huge difference. If I start to slack off I know it. I also focus a lot on stretching my hamstrings, which lets me pivot at the hip easier, which allows me to tilt my pelvis forward and keep my lower back flat on the bike, which seems to make riding much easier on my back.

    I do find FS to help.

    Anyway, I wish you the best of luck with your back.

    Sorry to go so off topic.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-25-2017, 01:00 PM
  2. Too many new fat "standards"...help?
    By SJDude in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 09-15-2015, 04:54 PM
  3. New "standards" - what is wrong with us???
    By mnigro in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 12-21-2013, 06:39 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-19-2013, 04:40 AM
  5. New BB 'standards' - which one would you choose?
    By Joe Nation in forum Frame Building
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-06-2011, 03:58 PM

Members who have read this thread: 371

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.