[Closed] What happened to the mountain bike industry?

HO makes the rails come alive more than OO though.

[img] [/img]

😆 wonderful!

SERIOUSLY...WTF

WTF is all this 'yeah we dug our heels in, didn't buy into 29" & 27.5" and now the industry is on its arse'....utter rubbish! (no one noticed you spat your dummy out)

Road is booming - great!

mtbing doesn't look in decline to me!

come on, there's more choice than ever. surly thats a good thing.

I changed a 26" xc bike to a 29" xc bike...and its better IMO. I'm happy.

does everyone curse the car industry each time a new model comes out?

its just the way it is...and in the long run all these marginal improvements equate to faster, stronger, lighter, more reliable etc bike.

BUT....I think some of the pricing seems really excessive (for both road and mtb's) but I have no idea about manufacturing, importing etc. £100 for cassettes just seems very expensive.

SERIOUSLY...WTF

WTF is all this 'yeah we dug our heels in, didn't buy into 29" & 27.5" and now the industry is on its arse'....utter rubbish! (no one noticed you spat your dummy out)

Road is booming - great!

mtbing doesn't look in decline to me!

come on, there's more choice than ever. surly thats a good thing.

I changed a 26" xc bike to a 29" xc bike...and its better IMO. I'm happy.

does everyone curse the car industry each time a new model comes out?

its just the way it is...and in the long run all these marginal improvements equate to faster, stronger, lighter, more reliable etc bike.

BUT....I think some of the pricing seems really excessive (for both road and mtb's) but I have no idea about manufacturing, importing etc. £100 for cassettes just seems very expensive.

^^This. A few whiners on a forum is definitely not representative of the industry or the sport as a whole. Rock up at any trail centre, popular riding spot or event and you'll see plenty of new bikes in among older models too.

Look on any MTB group on Facebook and you'll pick up a real buzz of positivity and fun, not tinfoil hat conspiracies about the lizard rulers of the bike industry forcing people to buy things - people like spending money on their hobby, but equally, you can still buy bloody good cheaper parts and bikes too. Just look at the awesome Calibre Bossnut - a banger of a full sus trail bike, with good Rock Shox suspension, WTB wheels and tyres (proper ones, tubeless) and sorted drivetrain, with spot on geometry. It's a grand. That is ridiculously good value, and coupled with the Cycle to Work initiative, means it is well within the reach of most people getting into MTB.

I think it's important that the bike media, the bike brands, the distributors, the retailers and their staff all start telling the good news stories, stop the doom and gloom or else you create a self perpetuating cycle. Create a buzz around the sport again and maybe more mainstream coverage will follow like in the 90's, and with that, a further influx of new/returning riders and the resultant sales that come with it.

In summary: cheer up - bikes and riding have never been so good 🙂

All wrong. N guage pisses all over O/OO, brings the tracks alive it does.

last time I went to grizedale I couldn't believe the amount of people on new carbon FS bikes (3-5k bikes)!

..maybe they didn't hear about the veto?

...suppose every place offers 0% finance these days.

andyrm,

I agree, we have never had it so good and yet there is still distain.

ONE of the reasons there is so much choice is because of the difference in US "The Rider"
Like the post above from sefton, went from a 26" wheeled XC Bike to a 29" XC bike, he was able to do that because the choice was there. That's great for him, But some one wanting to move up from 26" wheeled bikes for DH wouldn't choose a 29er for all the reasons that made it a good buy for sefton to ride XC, So naturally they would purchase what they feel best fits the requirement. Some folk probably never knew they needed 650B, well now they have stopped making 26" wheeled MTB's the decision has been made for you.

A bit like the Raleigh BOMBER< "Showing my age here" This was the first time i had seen a bike that looked like it could survive Off road, No one whinged when they dropped the size of the bike and the frame, Now ironically the wheel size has gone back up, how come they got it right first time in the 80's AND is that the Turning Point? The front tyre on MTB's was generally twice as fat on the front as the back, "Pre Suspension" era, Now the tyres are that wide. I remember some one once telling me Disc Brakes on road bikes, Never happen, Well it has now.

WHY?

Because my bike doesn't have them. I'm pretty sure I don't need them, i'm certain that Santa Cruz Stigmata i keep looking at is going to end up in my garage, I'm sure i'm not the only one who thinks their rim braked bike needs replacing? Or am i?

I don't think anyone said there was a conspiracy....

More, a case of the fact that the market introduced 2 new wheel sizes in a relatively short space of time, then proceeded to phase out the old one.

Was the old one so bad it needed to be disposed of? A quite categorical no.

Then why try to ditch it so quickly if it wasn't an attempt to force people onto a new size & make new purchases?

Are the new sizes better? Maybe, possibly but not by an awful lot. Certainly my 26" wheels are as round as 650b & 29".

My perception is that the industry bought in some clever marketing, some smart engineers & came up with what we have now to boost sales. What they didn't do is care too hard about their market. Feed us some blurb about how the trails "come alive" & your new "enduro sled" & we'll lap it up like a bunch of mugs....remember Kashima & how it was % more buttery? Turned out the bike industry had been using it for years & it was now just a different colour.

What they forgot was that if it aint broke don't fix it.

MTB wasn't dead & didn't need quite the revolution (pardon the pun). Progress yes, but don't go kicking loyal customers & enthusiasts in the chops along the way..

Road cycling has taken off because it is infinitely more accessible & that's really the sole reason. In time some of those roadies will make their way to cross & maybe onto MTB.

This thread says more about SingletrackWorld than the bike industry.

When I stated using SingletrackWorld world 15 years ago I was 21 single and excited about almost any development in MTBing, was looking forward to many more exciting MTB adventures.

If any MTB parts broke I had plenty of time to fix them and was excited to try something new.

Im now 36 have a house and kid, really what I want is a MTB (or 2 really), that just works and keep working and is working when I try to take it out of the garage.

Everytime something breaks its a fuss to repair or source new parts.

Aslo even though Im looking forward to much more MTBing and still enjoy a "GOOD" ride as much as possible, some of the initial excitement, discovery and enjoyment has faded.

Therefore in the wet winter months I've been doing alot more road cycling.

As some one states above if you log into any MTB group on facebook there is still "real buzz of positivity and fun".

Alot of the singletrackworld users are older riders and alot has been on this site for many many years, hence we've turned into a bunch of jaded cynical miserable old g*ts.

I don't quite get what the problem is.....

We've got more choice than ever, there's a niche to suit everyone, a level of componentry to suit most budgets, loads of disciplines within MTB'ing - and hundreds of bikes suitable for all - available at the click of a button.

The only slight frustration is new straight steerer forks disappearing from stock, for me. But I managed to swap my straight steerer'd frame for a tapered one the same (Soul) and all it cost me was a lower bearing and adapter, now I could use it indefinitely.

LBS' I do fear for, but the good ones will survive, particularly those who keep themselves up to date with current standards and run a good workshop. I know a couple of shops who are ditching bike sales or vastly reducing them to focus on expanding their workshops as they're stacked out, and what's making the money.

Just buy the bike(s) that suit the riding you do. I've got a 26" soul for long days out off road, trail centres etc. A 29" Scandal for mixed rides, XC races/'marathon' events, and now an old CX bike for the terrible roads around where I live.

I'll have a full sus in the next 2 years, and it'll be 650b, just because I'd like a complete new bike that just works for a change........

we've turned into a bunch of jaded cynical miserable old g*ts.

+1

Plus the weather is sh*te and the trails a bog fest.

Saying that this obsession with 'standards' is a joke, wish the jurno's would stop parroting the line that they are standards, when they aren't in a the majority of cases.

BD nails it really, in the eyes of the general public, road bikes are more cool. I've many friends in the running world, who are happy to try out road biking as an alternate sport, but the idea of MTB just doesn't appeal. I've seen it in the floor space given over to them in a lot of the shops that used to be more or less exclusively mountain bike based. (the exception to this is in areas where the mountain biking is exceptional) Just look at the different treatment of two world champions, Lizzie Armistead, and Rachel Atherton for conformation, one invited to be a contender for SPOTY, the other.....

On the wheel debate, I think it's a function of the way our particular market works. The UK is pretty unique in the way we buy and build bikes. Buying a frame and then separate components, is exactly opposite to how the two largest bike buying markets operate (Germany and the USA) where the norm is to buy a new complete bike every few years, so the idea of a different wheel size or axle standard is less of a problem

Since when is road biking cool??

Its only done when its too crappy to ride your MTB or to do some stealth training!

Since when is road biking cool??

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

The 2 things road has is the TdF and track cycling yep indoor road riding....
what makes them so popular? 5 rings - until we started smashing the world at the Olympics and every 4 years the bike programme actually delivered most people in the street would have no idea. The kick on to the TdF and the Team Sky thing have lifted it right up, at the front of this were 2 massive personalities who helped capture the imagination
[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]

Doing the one is better than the other crap is a little dull, one gets a bigger profile MTB is still booming, compared to when I started and you would hardly meet another rider some days on a busy day I see loads. UK was busy with riders, Utah was heaving with them, NZ is, Aus has them all over. All just getting out and riding. Not bemoaning the great conspiracy to end 8sp and Sq taper BB's (which you can still probably buy)
[img] [/img]

What they forgot was that if it aint broke don't fix it.

rubbish...its all about progress.

would anyone buy a 26" wheel bike today next to an identically specced & priced 27 or 29" bike....honestly?

If you're a bike manufacturer, importer or bike shop (today) would you put your money into 26" bikes?

if you have spent 12 months developing new bikes / components and god knows how much $$$ would you market your new product as...'slightly better'?

we are old enough to see through most of the marketing and should be wise enough to make a calculated decision when buying new stuff.

I started with a Raleigh Bomber, snapped the frame twice. Rejoined the off road worship some years later and have done so for the last 25 years. What I like about mtb is that it's f*****g hard. Not as in 100's of miles of riding until your arse melts climbing Welsh mountains in sportives I mean as in a two hour ride has you fighting the bike, dabbing your feet and scaring yourself when you nearly fall off (or fall off). When you ride back through a city centre after a muddy ride and when at traffic lights "youths" make comment about your obvious awesomeness. When you get home you breath a sigh of relief that you made it in one piece and think to yourself how great that 2 hour ride was. Road ride for 2 hours? Stay clean? Different market altogether, different people and I for one am happy to see it that way, keeps the trails empty for my perverse fun. People who buy into mtbing with 6k bikes rarely last long and gravitate to road for the reasons above I reckon.

@David taylforth

Too much rubbish (niche) - people just need to start riding bikes again. Preferably single speeds or fat bikes

I don't see an industry in decline and I suspect you see what you want to. I see one which has a rich rainbow of choice - 4x/freeride/jump/xc/HT/FS/enduro/allmountain/DH/Fatbikes/SS

Road = CX or well, road and that is it - you could add touring I suppose but I see that as a transportation choice rather than a "sport cum hobby"

would anyone buy a 26" wheel bike today next to an identically specced & priced 27 or 29" bike....honestly?

Yeah.

Me.

Saved myself over £1000 on a bike. I've a new carbon framed 150mm fs bike (to replace a stolen Blur LT) specced with xt, tubeless Mavic rims, Revelation DP Air & a few other nice bits.

The newer standard would have cost me a lot more. Are my wheels still round? Yes. Am I still having fun? Yes. Have I saved myself a lot of money? Yes. Would I be having any more fun on different sized wheels? Most definitely questionable..

You can keep your progress if it saves me money & I'm having fun at your expense....

would anyone buy a 26" wheel bike today [b]next to an identically specced & priced 27 or 29" bike[/b]....honestly?

Yeah.

Me.

Saved myself over £1000 on a bike. I've a new carbon framed 150mm fs bike (to replace a stolen Blur LT) specced with xt, tubeless Mavic rims, Revelation DP Air & a few other nice bits.

The newer standard would have cost me a lot more.

So you got something better for cheaper which wasn't the question. If they were the same spec and price would your choice have been the same.

well you won't see an identically specced 26, 27.5 and 29

29 is more likely to be an xc (race/tour) bike, 27.5 a trail/dh bike, and I'd buy (or more likely build) the one that would suit what I want it for.

the whole thing is/was self-selecting statistics, and self fulfilling prophecy.
I held off buying at least one bike, because I didn't want 650b, and wanted to let the market sort itself out. Of course buy not buying a 26er, and mfrs only putting 650b on the market, to them "people only want 650b". Now 26er's are dead, and may as well have square wheels, if I buy a new bike, it may reluctantly be 650b, helping confirm that 650b was the right marketing move.

of course now just at the point where wheel diameter has just about sorted itself, and X12 (or similar) just about become the rear axle standard, someone comes along and creates hubs a few mm wider, probably because some German company is getting patent royalties rather than Trek/Spesh. So now what do I do? Buy 650b/X12? or wait to see if a fractionally wider hub spacing becomes standard? rinse and repeat.

My 2007 26er Soul with 120mm forks 1 1/8th straight steerer and QR dropouts both ends, funnily enough, still works exactly like it did in 2007/2008.

Yeah.

Me.

great, glad your happy...now go spend the cash you saved on a awesome coffee machine or get a log burner installed! haha

I think a newcomer looking for a first mtb must get confused...its a minefield!

road bikes are simple...race or relaxed geo. more cash means lighter. thats about it. simples.

PS and yes I am holding off at least a year on a new road/cx bike specifically to let the disc brake fitting standard, fork QR standard etc. sort itself out.
But at least as an MTBer I'll be more pro disc brake than a typical roadie might be, several/most of whom are probably at that point where they're still wondering "what's the point?".
So that's 2 bikes the industry haven't sold, because of marketing, or change.

I think a newcomer looking for a first mtb must get confused...its a minefield!

Not really, they'll go into a bike shop and get offered a bike, if it's fits and it's about what they want to spend, they'll buy it.

It's only complex on forums.

For me ultimately, its down to the fact that Road cycling has maintained its history, the races, events, and even the wheel size.

when mountain biking was popular, road cycling didnt decline, just a lot of road guys bought mountain bikes.

But where mountain biking ultimately has gone wrong is that there have never been clubs, classic races, or culture and history that have been maintained, everything is always changing and people are bored of all the change.
it doesnt know what it wants to be, the manufacturers are trying to be all things to all people and are constantly dividing the market in to more and more niche segments.

This is good and bad, but ultimately from what I see, its killing the industry.
As for the major brands, when me and my mates were discussing a new bike this year, none of us had anything on our list that we were excited about. We have good bikes and nothing new is standing out as any better than what we have, I am going for a custom carbon 650b full sus as there isnt anything that I want from the brands.

But also the people who grew up with mountain biking like me are now well past 40 and arent looking to really advance our jump skills or looking for ever more tech. its simply about a good day out on the bike and all you need for that is a good hardtail. A bit like 25 years ago.
The appeal of the road is that you can go with a club and meet hundreds of people, stop at nice cafes and have a social life.

IMO

Not really, they'll go into a bike shop and get offered a bike, if it's fits and it's about what they want to spend, they'll buy it

If they were the same spec and price would your choice have been the same.

That's not possible though is it?

I can't answer an impossible question can I!

mrlebowski - Member
That's not possible though is it?

I can't answer an impossible question can I?

Well hello Mr Dude, I guess you can't but maybe just maybe you could imagine the situation like the choice between brown bread or white bread for lunch, same sandwich just you have always had white bread, this new stuff is meant to better..

Even the UCI (and Olympics) can't make up its mind.
Olympics only has one discipline plus BMX. UCI dropped about the only potentially televisable (exciting) form of MTBing (aka 4X), and Olympics aren't going to do 4X and BMX, since they're the same apart from wheel size, number of competitors, and smoothness or track.
XCE was a waste of time.
Enduro has changed so much that it's NOT "just going for a ride like what we do" any more, and is inherently not televiseable.
DH is only on redbull etc. so has status like XGames, and not "proper" sport, even if UCI sanctioned with rainbow stripes technically carry same status as those won by the likes of Cav. Outside of MTB forums, I doubt if anyone even knew how many medals were won by Brits in recent years. 5 out of 6 in DH 2 years ago, with a female podium clean sweep? I call that pretty damn good for the UK bike industry. Shame that it barely even got a mention on BBC website, unlike every Gold of a track cycling championships.
And with Sky/TeamGB track so dominant a few years back, sadly the only way is down (even if we do still have some ace riders).

rubbish...its all about progress

And the opposite of the jaded old cynic is the enthusiast who thinks every change is "progress".

And you can still buy square taper, so I'm happy.

Well hello Mr Dude, I guess you can't but maybe just maybe you could imagine the situation like the choice between brown bread or white bread for lunch, same sandwich just you have always had white bread, this new stuff is meant to better..

But I can go out & buy a loaf of white or a loaf of brown for the same money with similar quality....

I can't do that with 26/650/29 can I..

Ask me a question that is answerable in the real world & with some practical application. Not something that is hypothetical!

Though, as an intellectual exercise I'll answer your question:

Maybe. I'm not convinced of the "progress" that's been made with the new wheel size standards & since all my other bikes are 26 it makes no sense to add another size to complicate matters.

sefton - Member

rubbish...its all about progress.

Some things are about process. Marginally different wheelsizes aren't. They're about offering something that's functionally almost identical but with a veneer of exciting newness, so that you tweak all your existing products slightly and make them "new" rather than actually designing new things.

Which ironically held back progress, because much of the effort that could have gone into real innovation instead went into making things a little bit bigger. Hey, tyre designer, what did you do today? I invented the highroller. And what was the hardest thing about that? Making it work exactly the same as the old highroller. Hey, engineer, what did you do today? I redesigned this fork for a slightly different axle. Why? I don't really know. How about that upgraded lighter stronger chassis? Didn't have time.

The irony is just blaming "the bike industry" for this, because it works. This sort of marginal change sells tons of bikes. People aren't being duped, they're being given what they want. Turns out the bike buying public don't care that much about progress- most of them just want to buy a bike and the rest want 1 more gear and a chart that says you're rolling over things better even if you can't feel it.

After riding it from new, I've just stripped downn my '98 Hei Hei and put the parts on a 2010 Handjob. I can apreciate the difference in geometry and also the advantages of the 15mm axle I upgraded to last year, so I'm not averse to change despite riding 'out of date' bikes.
Having ridden 29er's I can also see that a different wheel size can make a difference - but Boost? I'm sorry, that whole concept is a load of money making pony and has stopped me buying a new frame for the next couple of years.
I don't think the sport is in terminal decline, it's just returning to normal levels after a bit of a surge.

Good multi-faceted read (skimmed..) of some takes on the MTB world as a whole, made my coffee break ..

Was the old one so bad it needed to be disposed of? A quite categorical no.

Then why try to ditch it so quickly if it wasn't an attempt to force people onto a new size & make new purchases?

I've said it before but I don't think that's the aim, it may be the effect and perception though. In general from talking to product managers and OE parts makers etc, I'd say the 'industry' is a load of brands scrambling to keep up with whatever they see as the big thing for the next 2-3 years and it's as much guesswork from them as it is us, or us as it is you - not sure where I stand there, I'd say a rider first and I'm not working on top-end tech (thankfully?) either so can sit back and observe a lot of this scrambling while thinking it through with a little more time to play with. Much of the product change-rate is due to the worry that since buyers are sharp and demanding if you don't move on you'll lose out.
Most of us don't totally understand all the options or know what we want next so we want to try different stuff, neither do/so do the bike brands. There's a hope it all lines up and settles then someone fires out some new-tech and there's a scramble to follow, or not, depending on competition, strategy etc, or just how your current line-up sits in it's life cyle.
There's been alienation as a side-effect of product people wanting to use what they see as the best option (commercially and in use) for the near future. Pros and cons of development. If you're a big, influential catch-all brand you need to cover most likely customer-demand bases and protect your position - that's where it gets difficult as the effect of that influences smaller brands and then buyers.

I have a lot of respect for brands that show some consistency or don't move with the times every time there's a trend shift. Specialists, often. Some of those brands also are way ahead on a few trends but not many. They tend to be the things they truly believe in and have been working on well in advance of the market rather than a PM being assigned to "do the next big thing that everyone's onto for 2018".

In my eyes (many others will not see it) this is progress.
My first MTB was an Alu Orange HT that snapped, I bent the forks that were on it landing a small jump, I cracked the rims after lots of gritty v braked rides, it wouldn't fit a decent width tyre, the wheels flexed massively into corners and I got a lot of punctures if I didn't run super high pressures. I had massive fun on that bike.

Now I have reliable disc brakes that don't need bled monthly.
Tubeless Tyres
Wide Rims
a great range of gears running from a single chain ring that needs no chain device
a 140mm bike that comes in around 28lb with nowt that special on it
Seat posts that go up and down
Stiffer wheels with ridiculously easy to use axles
Bars in a choice of width
Suspension that works really well

This sort of marginal change sells tons of bikes. People aren't being duped, they're being given what they want. Turns out the bike buying public don't care that much about progress- most of them just want to buy a bike and the rest want 1 more gear and a chart that says you're rolling over things better even if you can't feel it.

If that's the case, then we aren't as smart as we think we are..

For the record I agree with pretty much all of your post. The MTB industry has largely followed pretty much standard marketing strategy.

I don't mind new tech, but I'll never have a press fit bottom bracket! (work of the devil I tell you!)

Thing is everyone grumbles about wheel sizes changing, but 29ers are an improvement, and if it hadn't been chance could well have been the original wheel size anyway.

If only Trek, Spesh, Giant, Shimano and SRAM sat down and agreed some proper standards then things would be great.

My bike is less than 3 years old and hasn't yet been ridden enough justify replacing it. Fortunately it is a tremendously capable machine - despite its 26" wheels - and I don't seem to be anywhere near getting bored of it, breaking it or outgrowing it. I'll continue to spend money on components as they wear out but I've got over my faux-anger at ever-changing standards.

I rode in Australia back in October and they laugh at us UK lot getting hung up about our precious 26ers 🙂

would anyone buy a 26" wheel bike today next to an identically specced & priced 27 or 29" bike....honestly?

dragon - Member

Thing is everyone grumbles about wheel sizes changing, but 29ers are an improvement, and if it hadn't been chance could well have been the original wheel size anyway.

I don't think that many people grumble about 29ers- that genuinely did add choice and something pretty different.

but I'll never have a press fit bottom bracket! (work of the devil I tell you!)

just found a possible 650b (29er would have been better), 3x8/9/10/11 capable bike with 73mm BSA, that might be my late christmas present to myself.

It's a tough one - I used to get quite worked up over the wheelsize debate but realised that I was swimming against the tide because one way or another, 26inch has more or less been killed off. I've since had two 650b hardtails and you know what? I really liked them. Both Switchbacks - one steel then I went N-1, selling that and my Banshee for the Ti version.

Is 650b worlds apart from 26inch? No. Is it better? Possibly. Am I still having fun? Yes. I've come to realise that a good bike is a good bike.

Some of the tinkering with long established 'standards' is annoying though - BB's, headtubes, axle sizes, boost etc.

I think that it is down to companies trying to improve things for us plus breathe life into a mature market. The tech we take for granted these days is pretty impressive and can be cheap. Look at disc brakes - I remember how much a pair of Hope C2's cost when then first came out. Compare that to a pair of Deore brakes that work better and cost bobbins.

As said before, road cycling is more accessible so is easy to grow plus it has the Tour, Olympics etc to promote it. There are also an awful of MTBers now dabbling / crossing over.

If you travel to palces like Cannock, 'Degla, FOD there are often lots of shiney, new, high end bikes out. What I have noticed is that there are an awful lot of things like YT Capras being ridden so maybe buying habits are changing to direct sales as people look for better value because prices do seem to be ever increasing. We are also really lucky with lots of purpose built trails - I remember spending a lot of time building trails and them only for them to be torn down because they weren't sanctioned.

Boost? I'm sorry, that whole concept is a load of money making pony and has stopped me buying a new frame for the next couple of years.

Hmmmm, the "problem" with 29er wheels is how stiff they're not. Boost is an attempt to over come that, and TBH, as annoying as it is, I'd rather all the wheel and axle sizes get sorted out, and that IS beginning to happen finally. I can run my frankly more than capable 26" into so much carbon paste for the next couple of years, and then change the whole blinking lot.

Ok - tried skimming this, it hasn't worked. Can someone sum it up for me?
Q's
1 - is MTB really in decline?
2 - Is the perceived/real decline in consumer spend OR people out MTBing?

3 STW is not representative of the real world

Press fit is progress of sorts, as it is cheaper to make press fit fames and hence good for the manufacturers. There was a good article on Bottom Brackets in Cyclist magazine a while back.

A yes Hope C2's they scared the sh*t out of me on a big road descent in the rockies, I'd have taken a set of V's or road calipers over them in those circumstances. Thankfully disc brakes have improved considerably since.

prices do seem to be ever increasing

I wonder how much this has to do with things. Top end bikes have always been expensive, but when a top end bike approaches the cost of a brand new car then things are out of hand IMO.

does it matter if MTB is in decline? I'm nearly 40 so i'm in decline too. i`m still out in the local woods in the pissing rain, going sideways, and having more fun than is appropriate. if less people are biking this is a good thing as i get more of the place to myself.

i'm not fussed with new kit though so maybe i'm just weird.

prices do seem to be ever increasing

I wonder how much this has to do with things. Top end bikes have always been expensive, but when a top end bike approaches the cost of a brand new car then things are out of hand IMO.

prices do seem to be ever increasing

I wonder how much this has to do with things. Top end bikes have always been expensive, but when a top end bike approaches the cost of a brand new car then things are out of hand IMO.

I often wonder how true this is, it should also always be accompanied by a pic of an EWS style pro rider specced SANTA CRUZ with the implication that all bikes cost that much and it's the only one they sell.

The price range has probably increased more and the value has significantly increased at the entry level, things like SLX were a bit of a game changer there, solid, dependable, non flashy good value.
Spec start at 2k for a FS bike these days with the camber having some decent kit on it
http://www.specialized.com/gb/gb/bikes/mountain/camber/camber-comp-650b
back in 04 when I was buying my Enduro I think the base model was around 1300-1500,
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/education/Pages/resources/inflationtools/calculator/flash/default.aspx
Bang that through an inflation calculator and 1500 in 04 comes out as 2057 in 2014.

STW is not representative of the real world

this, a thousand times this.

normal people don't upgrade/build/change their bikes, they generally fall into 1 of 2 camps

1. buy a new bike, ride it and then buy a new one after a year or two/when the finance paid off. new standards have little impact as their bikes are still new enough and nothing major gets replaced in the time they ride it they're gonna change it soon regardless

2. buy a new bike, ride it for years and years and years until its utterly shagged. standards have little impact as the only things they replace are consumable parts (which are all still available) as their bike will pretty much remain in OEM spec until something breaks.

Then you have the 'enthusiast' in camp 3, bike builders, frame swappers with serial upgraditis who fall into that trap of either having stuff that's so new it's hard to get bits for and wont work with our other N bikes, or stuff that's a few years old that we want to update, all the consumables are available but more major or structural parts (which camp 1. dont care about as they've swapped before 'old', and camp 2. don't care about because they're still using the OEM fitted bits anyway) are harder to 'upgrade' as all the new stuff is for new standards.

There's also very few 'standards' which have actually got tot he point where it's properly obsolete and you'd have to bin a bike because you can't get parts. You mgiht not be able to walk into an LBS and pick them up off the shelf but parts to keep most bikes form the last 50 years going are available from suppliers on order or via the internet, the only exceptions really are manufacturer proprietary parts, but that's a different ball game regardless of standards, and even then NOS and 2nd hand is an option.

The standards and compatibility issue only becomes an issue if you intend to upgrade parts or change stuff, most people don't, they buy a bike, with the parts it comes with and then ride it.

27.5/650B annoys me in principle for being somewhat forced, but in reality it will have zero impact on me. All my bikes are 26 at the moment, but the 26 specific parts (tyres, rims, er...*) will still be available so no issue there, if/when I replace the bikes then it'll probably be 650B as that's what 'new' bikes will be, but then that'll be fine as I'll start buying 650B tyres instead.

* I look after my forks so can keep them going without much bother, and worst case there's 2nd hand, or NOS, or use a 650B fork if I absolutely must, it'll still work.

Some things are about process. Marginally different wheelsizes aren't. They're about offering something that's functionally almost identical but with a veneer of exciting newness, so that you tweak all your existing products slightly and make them "new" rather than actually designing new things.

in my experience changing from a 26" xc bike to a 29" xc bike is an improvement. in fact I think the bigger wheels are much better

cant comment on 27.5 (my gut says the real world difference between 26 & 27.5 must be tiny)

my new mtb was high spec...now its a little outdated stood next to the new model...this hurts the ego

prices do seem to be ever increasing

they're really not.

back in the day (summer of 1994, to be precise), a decent hardtail was about £700.

(Orange clockwork, Rocky Mountain Hammer, etc.)

that's about £1200 in today's money. except now you can get forks and brakes that actually work, on a bike that still costs £700.

bikes have never been cheaper, or better.

in a way, i'm sort of amazed that mtb's are still selling. Let's go back to 1994, to the Nationals at Malvern, i'll even put '2 Princes' on the tape player.....

(wibbly-wobbly time-travel special effects)

see how crap the bikes are?

see how easy the course is? - it would be considered easy for a cross race these days. But here and now, in 1994, it's the pinnacle of national mtb, there's even a Dh race, it'll be won by someone riding a rigid klein*.

but it's still more interesting/difficult/fun than the trails most people have access to back home in 2015.

modern mtb's are now so good that they're kind of pointless for the off-road adventures experienced by most people, but still they sell.

because they're ****ing awesome, and great fun, and cheap.

(*or was that 1992?)

oh look at the CRC add below...11spd sram cassette £195...jesus!

Haven't used my MTB in a couple of years now. Mostly because of relocation but also, I became fed-up with driving to ride.

As for kit, I smelt marketing BS as soon as I started seeing reviews of 29ers. The impression I got with the introduction of 29ers was that it was an industry driven product to sell to all of us, an additional bike.
Then there was the tapered fork stuff and now I basically view the movement away from common component geometric standards as another lever to have me open up my wallet, etc. Some may argue it's part of business to innovate new ways to get the public to spend. It certainly doesn't seem to have hurt Apple, for example.

On the technical front, IIRC the justification for a larger wheel was "better" roll-over on certain types of terrain. However, I view longer forks and rear triangle as potentially providing more "flex".

I'll keep my 26" wheel MTB, I'm impervious to MTB snobbery, so were I to ride with folk who used carbon 29ers, it wouldn't bother me one jot!

In the meanwhile, my relocation means road is easier, it's straight out the door and I simply enjoy road more at the moment.

And if that isn't good enough for you lot.... I blame Lance!
😆

As for kit, I smelt marketing BS as soon as I started seeing reviews of 29ers. The impression I got with the introduction of 29ers was that it was an industry driven product to sell to all of us, an additional bike.

...
I'll keep my 26" wheel MTB, I'm impervious to MTB snobbery, so were I to ride with folk who used carbon 29ers, it wouldn't bother me one jot!

Or in summary, didn't bother trying one but knows they are pointless.

Love my 29r XC bike excellent what it does, rolls better, bit quicker and very fit for purpose.

Can anyone (who doesn't work in the industry) justify 650b?

i'll have a go...

my wife has noticed (more than once) that i'm able to freewheel along trails that require her to pedal.

(me on a 29er, her on a 26er, both hardtails, yes i know there's much more to it than that, but it must be frustrating for her)

if 650b allows for a good chunk of the extra rollability, but in a wheelsize that can be packaged in a frame small enough for a 5footer, then it's got to be worth a go.

[i] mikewsmith - Member

Or in summary, didn't bother trying one but knows they are pointless.[/i]

Ah, you seem to have convinced yourself that I've never tried a 29er.
Go you! 😉

[i]Love my 29r XC bike excellent what it does, rolls better, bit quicker and very fit for purpose. [/i]
And I'm genuinely happy for you. Enjoy.
😀

well all your grumbling did seem based on speculation and reading too much STW... in many ways wheel size is irrelevant and to bang on about it so much is just a bit dull. Next bike I buy won't be selected by wheel size but just by demoing them and seeing what I like the best.

I don't think it's right that 29ers were some industry-led super plan. They've always been around in one form or another and smaller players (Surly, Niner etc) had been doing OK with them. From that, many riders were finding they worked better for their style of riding and the larger manufacturers just started to reflect that.

650B is a bit more difficult to justify. Calling it 27.5 was definitely a marketing ploy. However, with that step we might never have had B+ and that may be a case where the end justifies the means.

There's also very few 'standards' which have actually got tot he point where it's properly obsolete and you'd have to bin a bike because you can't get parts. You mgiht not be able to walk into an LBS and pick them up off the shelf but parts to keep most bikes form the last 50 years going are available from suppliers on order or via the internet

In fact has this ever happened??? I think some folk confuse obsolete with "can't buy the newest and shiniest for my 8 year old frame"

ahwiles interesting you pick that price point comparison as I had a 1994 Orange Clockwork with STX on it. Jump to today and I have a 29er hardtail that was around £1300 with SRAM X5 - which I'd consider worse than STX level. However, I accept that the brakes are better now and the RockSox Reba is massively better than the Orange's twangy steel fork (which wasn't great at the time!).

Is my modern 29er better than my old Orange then yes. Was it cheaper also well that depends on how you measure it but not massively.

If 650b disappears in favour of whatever (plus etc etc), I'll sack MTB off completely once my current bike dies. Just not prepared to be had over again.

BillOddie - Member
In fact has this ever happened???

i couldn't find a new headset for a 1.5" steerer + 44mm headtube combo...

Scotrouts, I agree that + might be a happy unintended consequence of 650b.

It doesn't change the fact that the introduction of 650b was a cynical, rapacious, greedy and entirely unjustified marketing exercise.

'We' fell for if.
Now the floodgates are open.

It's a trust thing - many people have lost that trust in the industry and the media that promotes it.

And don't you work in the industry?
🙂

Just not prepared to be had over again.

[i] mikewsmith - Member

well all your grumbling did seem based on speculation and reading too much STW... in many ways wheel size is irrelevant and to bang on about it so much is just a bit dull.[/i]

😆 I convey my view and experience of recent changes in the MTB sector and that's your response.

On the STW trying to start an argument scale I'll be kind and give you 1/10. Wind your neck in.
🙂

Edit:
[i] Rusty Spanner - Member
It's a trust thing - many people have lost that trust in the industry [b]and the media[/b] that promotes it.[/i]

A bit of this too, for me.

Well over 90% of mountain bikes in use must be straight steerer and 26.

Withdrawing the majority of after sales support for those bikes is indicative of how the 'community' stuff spouted by the industry is mostly bullshit.

From an interview with Steven Shand (of Shand bikes):

" It's easy to be an old crusty curmudgeon and moan about all these new 'advances' so I need to be careful here. There are certain things that are clearly driven by the need to streamline manufacturing processes and as a manufacturer myself, I can understand the desire for that. If it helps to bring down costs and doesn't negatively impact on a bicycle design then I can sort of live with it. If you're asking me if oversized BB shells make a bike better then no, I don't believe they do. I would go as far as to say that particular 'advancement' has meant less choice for the public as the big brands battle it out over the 'best' standard.

There's certain things I don't really understand and have given up trying to. Take tapered fork steerers for example. You have a fork that could be 500mm+ long, on the end is a wheel held together by a bunch of spokes and on the end of that you have a rubber tyre full of air at 50psi. Now someone's decided that the fork isn't stiff enough and that the best candidate for improvement is the 150mm long steerer that's supported by bearings at both ends? Really?? And it just so happens that in order to take advantage of this you need either a new frame, a new fork or probably both.
My final point on this is that while the engineering principals governing some of the latest changes are perfectly sound, the implementation is often poor. External bearing bottom brackets are a prime example here. If you move the bearings further apart and make them bigger, It doesn't take a genius to work out that that is 'a good thing'. But why don't bottom brackets last as long as they used to? Because they're mostly put together with shitty parts to hit a price point. The consumer thinks they're getting a better product because of the advances in technology but they're not reaping the benefits they should be. Up until about 2 years ago I was running a square taper WTB GreaseGuard bottom bracket in one of my bikes. It was running as smoothly when I removed it as it was when I first installed it in a bike 20 years ago. Why did I remove it? Because I needed a new crank and couldn't get what I needed in square taper anymore 🙂 "

had over? How exactly? Have all 26" parts been obliterated, have they all been banned?

On the STW trying to start an argument scale I'll be kind and give you 1/10. Wind your neck in.

Rusty Spanner - Member
Well over 90% of mountain bikes in use must be straight steerer and 26.

I can still get rubber, rims and spokes for 26" so how has "the majority of aftersales support" been withdrawn?

[quote=Rusty Spanner ]It's a trust thing - [s]many people [/s]a few folk whining on STW have lost that trust in the industry and the media that promotes it.
FTFY

And don't you work in the industry?

" It's easy to be an old crusty curmudgeon and moan about all these new 'advances' so I need to be careful here. There are certain things that are clearly driven by the need to streamline manufacturing processes and as a manufacturer myself, I can understand the desire for that. If it helps to bring down costs and doesn't negatively impact on a bicycle design then I can sort of live with it. If you're asking me if oversized BB shells make a bike better then no, I don't believe they do. I would go as far as to say that particular 'advancement' has meant less choice for the public as the big brands battle it out over the 'best' standard.

There's certain things I don't really understand and have given up trying to. Take tapered fork steerers for example. You have a fork that could be 500mm+ long, on the end is a wheel held together by a bunch of spokes and on the end of that you have a rubber tyre full of air at 50psi. Now someone's decided that the fork isn't stiff enough and that the best candidate for improvement is the 150mm long steerer that's supported by bearings at both ends? Really?? And it just so happens that in order to take advantage of this you need either a new frame, a new fork or probably both.
My final point on this is that while the engineering principals governing some of the latest changes are perfectly sound, the implementation is often poor. External bearing bottom brackets are a prime example here. If you move the bearings further apart and make them bigger, It doesn't take a genius to work out that that is 'a good thing'. But why don't bottom brackets last as long as they used to? Because they're mostly put together with shitty parts to hit a price point. The consumer thinks they're getting a better product because of the advances in technology but they're not reaping the benefits they should be. Up until about 2 years ago I was running a square taper WTB GreaseGuard bottom bracket in one of my bikes. It was running as smoothly when I removed it as it was when I first installed it in a bike 20 years ago. Why did I remove it? Because I needed a new crank and couldn't get what I needed in square taper anymore "

Everything he ever says is correct. Part of the reason I bought my current road bike is because almost all the others available have tapered steerers, which I personally think look ****, especially on a steel road bike.

The majority of people I ride with and see on the trails are still on those bikes.
That's based on MY experience, which is equally as valid as yours.

3-4 years?
That's the life expectancy of a bike, is it?

Maybe in your world, not in mine.

And don't you work in the industry?

I've worked in bike shops......

3-4 years?
That's the life expectancy of a bike, is it?

Maybe in your world, not in mine.

As said a lot in this thread STW seems to have a very select group of people who don't really align with the majority of the bike riding public, the great industry conspiracy doesn't seem to phase them or bother them.

Top kit has always been pricey, but £4k was the ceiling for a long time. There are plenty of bikes beyond this nowadays and you actually see them!

Things like forks seem a massively expensive upgrade now but maybe I'm stuck in 2005 when a top end set of forks werwe £500 or so.

One thing that I think may challenge the industry is the inroduction of younger riders. Where I ride, I don't see that many.

[quote=Rusty Spanner ]
And don't you work in the industry?

I've worked in bike shops......

Best I've managed was 5 1/2 before snapping...

Some of us can't afford to replace bikes that often.
Perhaps we're a just a

very select group of people who don't really align with the majority of the bike riding public

the question?
The majority of people on bikes I meet don't give a shit about the wheel size debate, the end of square taper, they don't bang on about being done over by "the industry" or trust or being conned. They ride the bikes they like, enjoy riding them and don't get all hung up on it. Most are younger or newer to riding and are not clinging to the we were here first/invented it "OUR SPORT" mentality that comes out in these sort of threads. I've been lucky enough to ride with loads of people over the world and most of the time the only real wheel size/standards/conned/had over conversations are held in jest over a beer.

A different take on the tapered steerer topic from Singular (thanks to barty "I'm the designer" p and his custom ti thread for the link!)

"Many fork manufacturers are now producing high end forks in a tapered version, sometimes *only* in a tapered version. There is only one real benefit to having a tapered fork and by extension a larger diameter head-tube. It allows you to join larger gauge tubes to it. Using larger diameter top and down-tubes and not needing much/any manipulation to join them to the head-tube, and not having them interfere with one another, makes for a potentially stiffer front end, rather than anything to do with an increase in stiffness of the fork steerer and crown.

So when we talk about a bike like the Swift, much of the reason for its vaunted ride quality and and smoothness is the profile of those top and down tubes. Large enough to be stiff under power, slim enough and with appropriate wall thicknesses to give a smooth ride and a frame which has a bit of give and doesn’t ‘ping’ off every bump and rock. So other than suspension fork compatibility (and we can only hope the big manufacturers will see the error of their ways before long) there is no reason to add a 44mm head tube to the Swift. Plus it would also look horribly out of proportion against the gauge of the top and down tubes.

For these reasons the forthcoming Buzzard will get a 44mm ID head-tube. That frame is designed for the kind of riding where it will be pushed a lot harder and have a lot more stress put through it. The difference in front end stiffness from the much larger diameter top and down tubes over the Swift is enormous. This is very noticeable whether using a 1 1/8? or tapered steerer fork.

So why are all the big manufacturers going to tapered? Because they need something new in order to sell bikes. It’s an easy thing for shop staff to sell; q. “why do I need a tapered steerer?” – a. “because it’s stiffer!”. No question as to whether it really is ‘stiffer’, or if so whether that stiffness is desirable for the intended use of the frame – but that’s perhaps a topic for another post…."