You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Stuff that's become standard when that before it was perfectly fine.
My list:
15mm
tapered steerers
bolt through rear axle
What have I missed?
At least some crap seems to have died out - eg 35mm bars
I'd love to agree with you. But a good carbon dirty road bike should have all those features.
However, my Dads Fatty has non of those and works great.
non-QR front dropouts seem a good idea generally IMO and especially with discs, regardless of which way the slots point. I suppose you could extend that to rears but it's a bit less of an issue to me at least.
15mm vs 20, though - pointless tinkering
tapered steerers don't seem to me to make much difference but, meh
Disc brakes .
Threadless headsets .
Tubeless .
Cranks, chains and the like, there was sod all wrong with the dandy horse.
I like bolt through rear axles, belt and braces maybe but definitely peace of mind for me.
Agree with 15mm & 20mm axles, the industry needs to all fall into line and have one or the other!
Sort of agree with the tapered steerer thing but for different reasons, a straight steerer into a 44mm headtube gives so many more options re. external or internal cups, stack height, anglesets etc etc....a tapered steerer takes up too much room in the headtube and limits your options in my opinion.
brant - MemberI'd love to agree with you. But [s]a good carbon dirty road bike should have all those features. [/s] [u]I design bikes for a living so I can't diss this stuff[/u]
FTFY, are you having a laugh?
What benefits are there to bolt through on a road bike that outweigh the compatability issues? (OK I can just about see tapered steerers having some benefit)
No need AT ALL for bolt through with disc brakes - there is a simple way around it that barely anyone adopted.
As for disc brakes and aheadsets, you forgot suspension clipless pedals and pneumatic tyres 😛
External bbs
... on mountain bikes. The external BB's on my road bikes last for an absolute age. This has to be down to the fact that my winter bike has full length guards and the BB is protected from the wet stuff. My summer bike does dry rides only. My mountain bike is a completely different kettle of fish. If I have clocked 800 miles on it in the last four years then I would be surprised however it is on it's 3rd BB. All Shimano.External bbs
After changing fsa bbs about every 3/4 months on my cx I aquired an old, very neat, Hope titanium sqr taper bb and a s/h pair of Middleburn cranks - now costs £10 to replace the bearings rather than £60 plus and they have been changed once in 12 months and then only because I was bored and not that they really needed changing.
As for disc brakes and aheadsets, you forgot suspension clipless pedals and pneumatic tyres
[img]
[/img]
No need AT ALL for bolt through with disc brakes - there is a simple way around it that barely anyone adopted
Suit yourself al - Not sure what you mean. I know there's ways of avoiding the resultant force from pushing the wheel out directly but I [b]ASSUME[/b] that the underlying fault that seemed to involve QRs magically undoing due to braking forces will still happen if the slots point forwards and that's something I'll happily avoid. (I know it's probably dependent on the brand, to an extent at least, but it's also something that needs checking every now & then and I'm lazy and forgetful so I'm out)
Whether there are any real benefits from a stiffness pov, I've no real idea (I have a shiver sc on an old bike that's supposedly prone to swivelling the wheel through 360 degrees as if it was in the exorcist but I liked it apart from the weight)
If I have clocked 800 miles on it in the last four years then I would be surprised however it is on it's 3rd BB.
Therein could lie your problem, water getting down the seat post tube, even a few drops every now and then will lead to dampness sitting in the bb shell to fester away at your bearings as the mtb sits unloved for weeks at a time.
[i]Use it or lose it[/i] scenario i bet.
What improved products piss me off?…..
All washing powders, home cleaners, hair products etc…etc…in fact the entire **** chemical industry of enhanced house and personal hygiene product lines.
herein could lie your problem, water getting down the seat post tube,
It's a 2004 spesh enduro. If water does get down the seat tube its going to be dripping on the shock.
Internal cable routing.
Press fit BB,s
Bb30
Integrated headsets
Straight pull spokes (all proprietary spokes).
Most advancements are actually bi-products of making things easier and therefore cheaper to mass produce.
tapered steerers
Naaa, we're riding around on forks that are stiffer than the original pikes (with the almost solid steerer) but weigh less than their contemporary manitou minutes (that flexed enough to wear the steerer against the inside of the headtube).
Pressfit BBs - a marketing solution to a cost of manufacturing problem
Tubeless.
Never suffered from pinch flats/punctures, in terms of performance not noticed any difference, in my case they're a solution to a problem that never existed.
No need AT ALL for bolt through with disc brakes - there is a simple way around it that barely anyone adopted
Forward angled dropouts? Which I think first appeared on the On-One Carbon forks I designed about a zillion years ago.
Maybe, don't think so much of experts like you, think of people who struggle with things more. Bolt through is so much more secure for everyone.
This years colours. Last years colours were perfectly adequate.
[i] Tubeless.
Never suffered from pinch flats/punctures, in terms of performance not noticed any difference, in my case they're a solution to a problem that never existed.[/i]
dirtydog wins the thread 😀
[img] 
[/img]
The rear end of my last non maxel FS flexed noticeably, the two maxel rear FS that have followed have been much better. How is that not an improvement?
Because having a maxle wasn't the only difference so you're confusing coincidence with causation.
Completely agree with roscharch many of the improvements were aimed at reducing cost of manufacture - threadless steerer's, internal headsets, cartridge BBs, press fit BBs all make a bike quicker and cheaper to build.
Because having a maxle wasn't the only difference so you're confusing coincidence with causation.
The first maxel bike was a bolt through version of the qr bike. Thanks for trying to tell me what I know though.
threadless reduced weight and made adjustment/servicing easier
dirtydog wins the thread
Knew it would be controversial, not much in the way of backlash yet.
Must admit that I struggle to see the point of tubeless or at least justify the cost to change from my current set up.
650b
After many years using Halo Hex, i've just invested in a Hope [i]bolt in[/i] rear hub, QRs are just so antiquated on a MTB.
My list is an amalgamation of many above
Tapered steerers
15mm front bolt through
Rear bolt through
Internal routing
Any BB that doesn't screw into the frame
Any headset that isn't external to the frame
Bigger crank axles than ht2
Bigger bars than 25.4
650b
Probably 29ers
All of it is nonsense and a waste of time and money. The majority of riders can't tell the difference and without fail they have all made life more difficult for the consumer.
threadless reduced weight and made adjustment/servicing easier
how is removing a stem and moving a limited number of spacers around easier than undoing one allen bolt and raising a quill stem as far as you need it?
Any advantages (eg servicing) are secondary to the real reason they were introduced.
The first maxel bike was a bolt through version of the qr bike
And the second? My Alpine is the only maxle rear Ive had in 20 years of almost exclusive FS ownership and the only bike that was more flexible was a Trek Y bike from IIRC 1996.
That's not the Maxle on your Alpine but the long swing arm held in place by just a single pivot exhibiting the well known flex characteristics of Orange's design.
Personally not a problem, the motorcycle industry went through the whole 'stiffer the better' phase a while ago and found the bikes to be harsh, jittery and difficult to ride...they now engineer a certain amount of flex into the chassis as they realise the suspension can't deal with everything, particularly not loads coming at the forks when they're not in the optimum vertical position.
I don't know what came first but 15mm is a downgrade from 20mm.
Bolt-through rear axles, depends on the bike, nothing stopping a company making a stiff QR reared bike but in theory it's a weight reduction, for equivalent stiffness. In practice, most bikes seem to be designed so they're fine with QR rears, then have bolt-through as an option for people who're too #enduro for QR.
If your QR rear end is too flexy it's because the bike was made that way, not the QR. And stiffer isn't necesarily better. And honetly I think for most riders, a sticker that says "STIFFER" will make just as much difference to the ride
And honetly I think for most riders, a sticker that says "STIFFY" will make just as much difference to the ride
😯
Northwind - Member
I don't know what came first but 15mm is a downgrade from 20mm.Bolt-through rear axles, depends on the bike, nothing stopping a company making a stiff QR reared bike but in theory it's a weight reduction, for equivalent stiffness. In practice, most bikes seem to be designed so they're fine with QR rears, then have bolt-through as an option for people who're too #enduro for QR.
If your QR rear end is too flexy it's because the bike was made that way, not the QR. And stiffer isn't necesarily better. And honetly I think for most riders, a sticker that says "STIFFER" will make just as much difference to the ride
I dunno - if a through axle is a good ideal for forks, then it's a good idea for the rear of the bike too - they're more or less the same structure. The way 142 locates the wheel in the dropout is nice too - won't change your life, but a nice fringe benefit.
I'm wondering how much of the new generation of light 160 forks - Pike being a pound lighter than a lyrik, for example - is down to tapered steerers.
And the second?
29" version of the others.
Were moving all our bikes to tubeless as default rather than tubed (currently the lowest end are tubed) because it's so much less hassle than fitting tubes irrespective of any other benefits.
I disagree with the points about bolt-thru axles not being an improvement. Someone mentioned earlier that any perceived benefits are down to other frame changes, rather than the bolt-thru system.
While I see where you're coming from, if you take a bike that has the option to go between a qr and a 142x12 axle, the difference is definitely noticeable.
Take for example my old asr-5. I rode it for ages with a QR thinking it was absolutely fine, and it was. However, I made the switch to 142x12 (same frame, same wheel, just changed the dropouts & axle) and it completely transformed the bike, making it even awesome-er.
Aside from the stiffness benefit, it's just so much bloody easier than faffing about with fiddly qr skewers.
Lots of the 'new' and 'improved' clothing.
honourablegeorge - MemberThe way 142 locates the wheel in the dropout is nice too - won't change your life, but a nice fringe benefit.
142 is an honest to god upgrade on 135x12. But only really regains what 135x12 lost over QR. So it's a bit horses for courses. It's one of those awkward things where if they'd got it right first time it'd be great but instead we've gone clumsily into a flawed standard which had drawbacks obvious the first time you used it, but waited years to change it, then just as soon as it got some traction made it obsolete with the part it should have been in the first place. Because the bike industry (manufacturers and shoppers) don't actually like standards at all, both prefer novelty and shiny new things.
I take it that nobody else has come across the new 148mm (nope, not the old 150mm) rear hub yet.
Is that the Trek **** you all?
650b
This. Apparently the slowest wheel size, excuse me while I pmsl 😆
This. Apparently the slowest wheel size, excuse me while I pmsl
50 seconds in - no difference. That should of been the end of the video.
15mm front axles definitely get my vote, nothing wrong with 20mm, possibly even a downgrade.
Pressfit BBs also get my vote, no need at all, maybe easier for manufactures, but a pain in the arse for consumers, and I doubt many folk will notice any increased bb stiffness.
Disc brakes on road bikes - no need at all. Get ride of them and you also don't need through axles or any other nonsense.
I'd beg to differ........Disc brakes on road bikes offer consistent braking in use, independent of weather conditions. Press fit bb's could be said to come about due to a move away from the standard round tubed triple triangle frame design towards the modern multi pivot full suspension design with its need for increasing stiffness, larger seat and down tubing needs a larger BB Area to weld to, that's not to say some variants of press fit designs are not sub par but the underlying concept of a larger crank axle is valid.
I could offer an opinion regarding axle size but [i]shrug[/i]............
Were moving all our bikes to tubeless as default rather than tubed (currently the lowest end are tubed) because it's so much less hassle than fitting tubes irrespective of any other benefits
I thought they were much more hassle to fit than tubes
Compressor or track pump to get them seated etc
front and rear maxles definitely make a difference. I run a Trek Remedy and I've tried a QR rear end and a maxle rear end, with everything else the same, and you could easily tell the improvement.
What I think is a duffer is split gear cable outers. Why not run a full length? This is what I now do on all my bikes and it's tons better.
External bb designs
Press fit bottom brackets
Press fit headsets
1 x 10 or 11 dedicated chainsets
Mahoosive rear rings the size of a traditional big ring
Electric shifting
Enduro specific saddles
On the positive side, things that I think are a good thing are and a real improvement
Wider rims
TRP Cable disc brakes
Wider handlebars
Cheers
Sanny
stuff that annoys HR
-press fit BBs
-customisable geometry (e.g. anglesets)
-tubeless
-super thin inner tubes
-15mm and 20mm hubs. I have a wheelset for each, qould prefer just one
stuff that pleases HR
-external threaded BBs
-marzocchi suspension
-regular inner tubes
-bolt thru axles
[img] 
?w=2000&h=2000&a=7[/img]
if you don't notice the improvement with tubeless, your pressures are wrong.
Used to run 25f/30r psi with tubes, any lower and I would be at serious risk of pinch flatting/denting rim, now I've gone tubeless I run 25f/30r, any lower and I would be at serious risk of denting the rims.
Christ, I could take my bike on Antiques Roadshow.
I don't even have QR skewers, nutted axles here. No suspension, 25.4 bars, straight steerer, skinny steel frame, threaded BB, & my brakes work via a cable.
I need to get with the in-crowd. 😀
Used to run 25f/30r psi with tubes, any lower and I would be at serious risk of pinch flatting, now I've gone tubeless I run 25f/30r, any lower and I would be at serious risk of denting the rims
I struggle not to see the adadvantages, I used to find dozens of thorns when seasonally changing my tyres in lincs and now in the peaks I spend my time either getting bitten to death my midges in the summer or freezing my as off in the winter waiting around for people with punctures.
From my experiance in the last 5 years I have only had one puncture and that was when I was using a spare wheel with a tube in it.
I feel genuinely sorry for all the bike component designers and manufacturers if this is what their customers actually think of their efforts. These people actually put a lot of passion into making great products so we can have more fun for longer.
Luckily you lot just represent a small section of luddite curmudgeons.
Its all about incremental gains, each small thing seems like not much, but when you add together modern geom and components you get incredible bikes.
If you put Fabien Barel on a bike from 2005 and one of todays wonder machines he would be light years faster on the new bike.
There's a balance to be made between a technically perfect solution; one that can be manufactured at a reasonable cost; one that is maintainable and one that is usable.
The first attempt at something is rarely perfect, I can think of only one product in that category that I've used (the Petzl Zoom headtorch) and it's hardly changed in 30 years. Any changes have been down to consumer feedback rather than marketing hype.
Every manufacturer would like their product to become the standard, ideally of course with everyone else paying them royalty fees to use it. Unfortunately while they are all jostling for position we, the consumer, are left in the fall out zone. Some changes are [b]hard[/b] in that you can't retro-fit them to an existing bike/frame: tapered headsets would be an example. Others are [b]soft[/b] in that they require little change on our part: tubeless tyres; wider handlebars.
Unless we, the consumer, say "hang on, this is a pile of .." then the cr*p will prevail.
I feel genuinely sorry for all the bike component designers and manufacturers if this is what their customers actually think of their efforts. These people actually put a lot of passion into making great products so we can have more fun for longer.
I want to see whoever it was who decided we needed another front axle standard (15mmx100mm instead of the 20mmx110mm that's been around for yonks) put in the stocks. I'd also like to see the waste of a job who's now decided that we need 15x110 front axles - remember that 20mmx110mm is going to be stiffer - removed from the industry in disgrace.
I don't mind new standards and improvements if they genuinely bring benefit, however just lately we're having things foisted upon us that are extremely cynical attempts at planned obsolescence at worst or extremely poorly contrived marketing at best. No-one wins, least of all the likes of Giant, Trek and SRAM who are on my "avoid" list.
[quote=Northwind ]And honetly I think for most riders, a sticker that says "STIFFER" will make just as much difference to the ride
Yeah, and a sticker which says "COMFIER" on hardtails.
Regardless of the size (I have both 15mm and 20mm), screw through, quick release axles are a vast improvement on QRs. Stiffness is a secondary issue IMO.
Mate with a new bike with press fit BB.
me: "what's so good about it?"
him: "It's stiffer so you get better power transfer."
me: "So, can you tell the difference?"
him: "Err, no"
Emperor's new clothes ...
Some of these things work better for me, personally than others. Not saying it's true for everyone!
* tapered steerers - I'm riding around on a 160mm fork that weighs as much as a cross-country fork from 2005 and as stiff as a downhill fork from the same era. If the tapered headset is an enabler of this, I'm in!
* thru-axles / maxles (front or rear) - all good with me, it's a much better engineered system. No longer do I get that 'zing-zing' of the disc rubbing at the back. No stupid little spring to lose if you accidentally undo the QR too far when changing a puncture on the trail.
* external BBs - I'll take the trade-off reduced life-span for for the simplicity in fitting. No-more crank pullers, no risk of the mounting surface wearing and the crank constantly coming loose. I spend many times more every year on tyres than I do on BBs.
* tubeless - again, another win for me personally. Almost never puncture these days, where I used to get a lot of thorns.
Not a fan of push-fit BBs. Doesn't seem to be any longevity advantage and replacing them is terrifying.
Tapered? Works well for me +1 for mtbtom's comments about 160mm forks out performing old DH for old XC weights.
Thru Axles? Simplicity of them is great though the 1/4 turn one in the Manitou is taking a bit of getting used to. 15mm? Works fine for me too
Ext BB's moving on from Shimano to Hope has removed any of the wearing out problems.
Tubeless? Slow to get to but never going back, real TR rubber and real rims make a difference.
My bars are wide and stiff, it feels much better than the pokey 680mm bars I had, if I hadn't tried them I wouldn't be able to appreciate how much better they are.
Dropper posts - no brainer
1x with a 10-42 range it hits what a lot of bikers need and want.
It's all going well for me.
any lower and I would be at serious risk of denting the rims.
Are you riding on road bike tyres?
Nearly everything in this thread is of huge benefit to cycling.
Especially tubeless.
Shit, even press-fit BB's. Yes, they lower manufacturing costs. Yes, they require an additional special tool to remove/affix. Yes, they reduce wear and tear on BB's so they last longer. Yes, your new bike is now cheaper to buy as some of the manufacturing costs saved are passed on to the buyer. How do you think that is a bad thing you moron?
I feel genuinely sorry for all the bike component designers and manufacturers if this is what their customers actually think of their efforts. These [s]people[/s] companies actually put a lot of [s]passion[/s]time and marketing into making [s]great[/s] slightly different products so [s]we can have more fun[/s] they can make more money for longer.
These people companies actually put a lot of passiontime and marketing into making great slightly different products so we can have more fun they can make more money for longer.
My mech snaps or wears out, now I can have one with a clutch and improved range over one that was available in 1990. Life is crap isn't it.
On the disc brake road / cx thing, bolt through front is one solution, the other is simply mount the brake on the right hand leg, forward of the fork instead, like Cotic used to do. IMO it's a neater solution and gives a cleaner cable run also.
I've never actually heard of a front wheel being ejected under braking force, but don't want to experience one. Through axle front on a CX looks like a PITA compared to a Shimano skewer and sensible design, to me...
Yes, they reduce wear and tear on BB's so they last longer.
Nope. I've killed the press fit BB on my new Stumpy in fewer than four months.
I even managed to eke out longer from a Race Face BB, which hitherto set the brown standard in BB longevity of five months. Shimano XT BBs last me upwards of eighteen months.
Nope. I've killed the press fit BB on my new Stumpy in fewer than four months.I even managed to eke out longer from a Race Face BB, which hitherto set the brown standard in BB longevity of five months. Shimano XT BBs last me upwards of eighteen months.
Guys! Listen! I'm one guy in a mass of satisfied customers! If I had a problem it has to be the norm! My opinion is important!
Think about it for one second. The same bottom bracket can be made to press fit into a shell as one that screws in. The only thing that changes is where the BB is mounted. In one, it is away from muck, sand, water and shit - on the other, it is right in the firing line.
Still a moron.
im feeling happy no one has said anything bad about my fattie within the first few posts yet
I think if there's one thing you can't say about fatties it's that they 'make **** all difference' 🙂
I thought most BB issues came down to care (pressure washing) or installation?
I've had no real issue with RF or Shimano external bb's, and when the plastic pressfit in my Zesty finally gave up way after everyone said it would, I got a Hope PF, although I know there are others with similar metal not plastic solutions for this.
Garmin software updates...
strava off road. all it has done is show land owners the routes we use when possibly we should not
Press fit BB's. Anyone who thinks they're good has never owned one.
vincienup - MemberI thought most BB issues came down to care (pressure washing) or installation?
You must not have owned a Truvativ BB
48h Deodorant not any better than claimed 24h stuff.
[i]Press fit BB's. Anyone who thinks they're good has never owned one[/i]
[shrugs]
there's one on my Shan. I've not noticed any change over my last ext.BB. genuinely can't get bothered about it.
Jordie's been watching too much Dave Gorman.
Tubeless is great - noticably faster for me. And no more trouble than tubes IF you have the right setup.
I actually insisted on 15mm maxle for the bike I just built up. Would rather have the extra security now it's available.
Nope. I've killed the press fit BB on my new Stumpy in fewer than four months.
I even managed to eke out longer from a Race Face BB, which hitherto set the brown standard in BB longevity of five months. Shimano XT BBs last me upwards of eighteen months.
Guys! Listen! I'm one guy in a mass of satisfied customers! If I had a problem it has to be the norm! My opinion is important!Think about it for one second. The same bottom bracket can be made to press fit into a shell as one that screws in. The only thing that changes is where the BB is mounted. In one, it is away from muck, sand, water and shit - on the other, it is right in the firing line.
Still a moron.
Not sure why I'm a moron - is it because I've killed a bearing in four months, or that I don't happen to agree with your expert analysis of the engineering superiority SRAM PF30 bottom bracket?
For the record, the bearing is held in place with a plastic retainer, which flexes - hence the well known issues of creaky cranks and bearing wear.
Or of course, you could have used Google
[url= http://forums.mtbr.com/29er-components/sram-truvativ-pf30-bottom-bracket-failures-768131.html ]Here, for example.[/url]
And yes, when I've spent upwards of £2.5k on a bike then I do feel that my point [i]does[/i] matter especially when it seems to be shared with a number of individuals.
Unlike you, I'll refrain from personal insult, so I sincerely hope that your experience with PF/BB30 is better than mine.