[Closed] What happened to the mountain bike industry?

More choice is a good thing.

The BS on you can't get this or that when wait a minute you can

*and can we have a moments silence for the passing of UN7* bottom brackets please.

you can have a moment silence for the passing of DuraAce spec BB's of that era. but I think if running 1980's DuraAce on such a retro bike you'll probably not be too sad at having to downgrade to a UN5* part (I assume it's a downgrade if the number is smaller). still readily available from bike24, the very first webby I bothered looked at to check.

It'll outlast the bike anyway.

do need to pay attention with 7sp though now since there's 7sp and newer DH 7sp that's really 9 or 10 with some cogs missing.

If I look in the bike shed, all the Decathlon and Rockriders and no name bikes are all running 6-7sp, and I can safely say they are not 20 years old. So stuff is still being made, just not XTR/DuraAce.

Can someone make a video of a group of people riding together on different bikes? Just to show that you really can ride most trails on most bikes, and you don't NEED anything specific.

On more than one group ride we've managed to tick the following boxes:

26, 27.5, 29, 26 fat and 29+ tyres.
Rigid, hardtail, full-sus.
Steel, al alloy, titanium, carbon.
100mm - 160mm travel.

And there's always a pretty big mix of the above on every ride.

if some in the handle bar thread were in charge we would all still be using 680mm bars.

But changing the handlebar width doesn't require a new frame, fork or whatever, it's a "soft" change. Even changing the bar diameter only means getting a new stem.

Compare that with a "hard" change like tapered steerers, wheel size, drop out spacing or even <wash mouth out> press fit BBs</wash mouth out>.

Things move on, as they should, and there will always be a transition period before things settle down but at the minute it seems more like constant change as the major players try to come up with something that ties you in to their system. Things like Boost, etc aren't "standards", they are just a specification, they'll only become a standard when you can take any 29" wheel and put it in any 29" frame.

As DONK says, it must be a PITA for shops to have to stock all this.

After reading all this and posting, or not, has a single person changed their opinion?

i confess that i'm boost curious...

(not enough to sell all my bikes and start again, but it seems a sensible change. at some point i'll be building a new rear wheel, if i had the option of buying a new boost compatible swingarm at the same time, i'd think about it)

a multitude of standards is confusing/[b]pita to stock for[/b].

no doubt on that one, it's a flipping nightmare trying to cater for everyone, which I guess is why a lot of shops don't bother beyond what they know they can shift locally, specialise, or order on demand.

There's a whole another discussion there though about how the distributors and industry could better support smaller shops with more flexible ordering* and delivery options*

and can we have a moments silence for the passing of UN7* bottom brackets please.

indeed, I'm down to my last 3 in the cupboard and then I'll be back to heavy old UN5Xs which don't seem as robust either, or have to bite the bullet for SKF.

* should add a few are very good with this, others not so much, and as always *someone* has to pay for delivery costs at some point and the smaller the order the bigger it is as a %age.

Double post.

[i] Junkyard - lazarus

pretty hard to get a range of forks in 1/1/8 straight steerer flavour. [/i]

This. Just the other day I decided I would look into a new carbon fork for the commuter. I have Enve 2 on the road bike, so I wondered if Enve make a disc brake fork, for road..... The only disc brake, road fork by Enve, that I could find, came in tapered steerer flavour!

I read comments from the interviews posted earlier. Two things, not all riders need super stiff front ends on their bikes, which appears to be the justification for larger Dia head tubes, facilitating the use of larger Dia down tubes, etc. Secondly, Manufacturers state that "developments" reduce cost of manufacture, but I'm failing to see that cost save filter through to the customer....

I'm not impressed with fully integrated HS, imo, it kind of negates having higher front end, frame, stiffness (ooo, err).

Press fit BB, yes, should be cheaper to manufacture, but I'm happy with the threaded, external cups, for which I have invested in tooling to be able to order and fit myself.

Developments for ease of / reduced cost of manufacture aren't always in my interests, as a cyclist.

i confess that i'm boost curious...

mostly, i'm thinking about the rear wheel, where the drive-side spokes are nearly vertical, a bit more spacing makes a bit of sense.

like i said, i'm not going to do sell/buy any bikes/forks because of boost.

but, seeing as you mention the front wheel... both my fork, and front wheel, are a bit crap. i'll be replacing them at some point, why not choose boost?

Well the jump from 135 to 142 was bigger and I've noticed naff all difference, and the only front wheels I've destroyed and been due to crap rims....

but, seeing as you mention the front wheel... both my fork, and front wheel, are a bit crap. i'll be replacing them at some point, why not choose boost?

wrecker - Member
Well the jump from 135 to 142 was bigger and I've noticed naff all difference,

i thought that 135 to 142 was in effect the same thing, sort of, just the way it was measured had changed?

ie. 135 is measured over the nuts, but the 142 axle extends into the frame...?

(but i haven't paid much attention if i'm honest, i'm not the bike nerd i used to be)

i've seen some boost hubs that don't seem to take advantage of the extra width, which seems daft to me.

WTF is boost?

the jump from 135 to 142 was actually 0

135 to 142 added dimensions at the end caps
142 to 148 adds dimension between spoke flanges to be 6mm wider than 135

[quote=ahwiles ]i confess that i'm boost curious...
Boost also enables the use of a 3" rear tyre and double chainrings. 8)

Then go read the B+ thread and the issue with mud clearance that non-Boost forks have where it's all a bit of a lottery.

6 millimeters. 6. FFS.

@Solo, that's not really representative, you went to one specific manufacturer*, and they don't offer the exact model you want, but that's hardly the same as there not being a range of options.

The only disc brake, road fork by Enve, that I could find, came in tapered steerer flavour!

That's also hardly surprising as discs on road are quite a recent thing, so most disc braked road frames are likely to have been made with tapered front ends anyway, so that's not evidence of dropping of a standard, it's a case of newer tech mating with newer tech.

* of top end, very modern kit only, so I'm not surprised they're not catering for older or mid-range stuff.

Amedias.

My anecdote was confirming Junkyard's quite valid observation. Yes, I went to one manuf, one I had already "invested" in and was disappointed.

But the Earth will continue to spin-on. So, yes, I may or may not find the fork I'm looking for. Conversely, I'm not going to swap-out my frame and HS on the basis that 1 1/8" steerers may be in decline with some manufs. As much as the industry might like me to do so.

Furthermore, I believe the Industry currently thinks it's ok to drive obsolescence as hard as they dare, in favour of selling us newer stuff.

To balance this, I suspect there may always be folk who will be tempted to take up any "slack" if sufficient demand persists for certain items.

Example, I do not wish to own another frame which requires a fully integrated HS. I will avoid this feature in all my future frame purchases. As a consequence of my decision, already I am noticing that my choices for a new frame that still uses 1 /18" steerer forks [b]with[/b] external cup HS are dwindling. But I suspect someone will still continue to provide such a widely appreciated standard in frame design and manufacture.
😉

This thread can continue to discuss specific kit, scenarios, whatever. For me, I sense that recently the industry's drive to render our current kit obsolete in the hope we will replace at significant expense to ourselves. Has gone up, noticeably, a gear or two, recently. And it's that attitude within the industry which I dislike.

Change based upon real, technical, merit, is a good and welcome thing.
Whether that applies to all the changes we see in the design, manufacture and assembly of bikes and there components today, is another matter.

It'll outlast the bike anyway.

do need to pay attention with 7sp though now since there's 7sp and newer DH 7sp that's really 9 or 10 with some cogs missing.

mountain of bikes

For me, I sense that recently the industry's drive to render our current kit obsolete....

We could be getting worried about nothing (I hope so) and for me as I'm getting older there may a rose tinted specs element. We shall see what the future brings.

WTF is boost?

Have you ever destroyed a front wheel with an extra few mm in hub width would have prevented? Have you ever thought "my wheels are really flexy/weak, how can I get stiffer/stronger wheels?".
It's a completely pointless change which 99.9% of riders will never get any benefit from.

That's not really the point of boost though. The point is to get that pesky chain thing out of the way of the bigger tyres people want to run.

I sense that recently the industry's drive to render our current kit obsolete in the hope we will replace at significant expense to ourselves. Has gone up, noticeably, a gear or two, recently. And it's that attitude within the industry which I dislike

See that's the bit I disagree with. I may just be living in naive cuckoo land but I don't think anyone is being called into a 9am strokey-beard meetings to discuss how to make last years bike obsolete.

I think people are being called into such meetings to discuss how to make last years bike better, or to see if they can predict/drive the next advances in order to have an edge over competitors, but I don't think its a concious, pre-meditated drive to make old things go away.

I think it's possibly (and indeed likely) that not enough attention is being paid to supporting existing and popular standards, and not enough attention being paid to making sure that new ideas are genuinely worthwhile and offer significant benefits to warrant a change.

But that's two different things.

I also think that is the job* of the industry to push things forward, sometimes theere will be dead ends, sometimes there will be mistakes, there will be periods of rapid change, there will be periods of stability, and there sometimes there will be upset along the way, but the overall result is better bikes.

'The Industry' is also a lot bigger than just the few top brands pushing the latest thing, for every new Trekalizediant wonder bike with 28.3 inch wheels and 1.62 inch steerers and 153.6mm wide hubs sold there are 100 workhorse hybrids with more traditioanl and well supported components sold by GenericBikeCo to Mr Average for transport and leisure, and they're getting better and better.

*not the [i]sole [/i]job, obviously they need to cater for the middle ground and workhorse market, but they also very much should be at the bleeding edge of new developments.

What many are missing is that the industry couldn't care less about those who get grumpy. I would guess that most of us change bikes reasonably often (2-5yrs?) and usually want the latest thing so will buy what is necessary. I know I binned my 26" FS a couple of years ago so I could try 29" FS. If I go back it'll be to 650b instead of 26". So what?

Those who just change frames will be a bit grumpy but many will just use it as an excuse to 'upgrade' wheels, forks or whatever. Same if you want to change forks. Most parts last a long time if you look after them so it's more likely to 'want' to change rather than 'need' to.

That leaves those who rarely change bikes and rarely change the bits on them. I can't imagine you are high up the list of priorities for people who's job it is to sell stuff. What percentage of the market do you actually represent? Oh, and you can still keep your bike on the road anyway.

So what?

Because a lot of us DO NOT want to change our bikes all the time, and cannot afford do - so we don't want to be forced to do it!

That's a pretty big what! We might not high up on their list of priorities, and this is exactly what we're pissed off about.

That's not really the point of boost though. The point is to get that pesky chain thing out of the way of the bigger tyres people want to run.

Then why roll it out on normal trail bikes? keep if for the niche 650+ stuff.

I remember reading an interview with an industry person who said that 650 came about as "the euros" didn't get on board with 29 like they wanted us to. 650 had been around for a long time before it made the trail come alive. It was nothing but an effort to make us ditch all of our kit rather than refresh it.

[quote=wrecker ]

That's not really the point of boost though. The point is to get that pesky chain thing out of the way of the bigger tyres people want to run.

See - complain when there are to many systems, complain when the industry is trying to reduce them.... 🙂

That would be fair if 650+ weren't going to die in a year or two... 😉

Have you ever destroyed a front wheel with an extra few mm in hub width would have prevented? Have you ever thought "my wheels are really flexy/weak, how can I get stiffer/stronger wheels?".
It's a completely pointless change which 99.9% of riders will never get any benefit from.

Because introducing it across-the-board means fewer ongoing standards.

Not really up on all these different standards but wasn't there already 150mm hubs on downhill bikes?

Surely 2mm less for Boost could've been avoided and 150mm used.

I am not an engineer so any explanation about why it wouldn't work will need to be in very simple terms.

Not really up on all these different standards but wasn't there already 150mm hubs on downhill bikes?

that was list wider rear ends/axles, but the flange spacing didn't change so didn't really do anything for wheel stiffness or drivetrain clearance

Just take a look at a 150mm DH hub and look at the massive gap between the left flange and the disk spider mounts!

Ah.

That explains it.

Thanks.

Almost every change to hub sizes could have been avoided if we ran gearboxes instead of mechs.

The only improvement I want to see on mountain bikes is gearboxes. Instead I have to put up with turd polishing making it more difficult to source parts for my bikes.

[i] molgrips - Member

So what?
so we don't want to be forced to do it!

We might not high up on their list of priorities, and this is exactly what we're pissed off about. [/i]

I think I agree with the sentiment. It's one thing if you feel the need to change your kit.

It's another thing entirely to feel you're being forced to change your kit.

It's another thing entirely to [b]feel[/b] you're being [b]forced [/b]to change your kit.

one very sujective word, and one very strong word ^

Are you really being [b]forced[/b], like really, you have no option but to change your kit?

I don't [b]feel [/b]like anyone is pushing me into anything, you obviously feel different. I wonder why that is?

^ that's a genuine question there BTW, I'm not trying to be inflammatory, I just wonder what the difference in our circumstances is that means I feel one way and you feel the other. I'm sure it's a mix of things like how and where we ride, how often we change bikes, our outlook etc. (all the things discussed in this thread already really), but I guess that just goes to show how subjective things are and how easily opinions can differ...

If my 1 1/8" forks break and there are no 160mm forks with 20mm axles available then yes, I'll be [b]forced[/b] to change my perfectly good frame.

Or quit mountain biking.

Edit to add: This isn't a hypothetical. I can't find any 1 1/8" 20mm forks anywhere so if they do go I'll have to stick my 2007 Santa Cruz Nomad in a skip.

[i] amedias - Member
that's a genuine question there BTW, I'm not trying to be inflammatory[/i]

No probs here, we're just debating a topic 🙂

I think Bruce's example ^^ helps describe my view. But my view is no more valid than yours. I'm just calling it as I see it.

Going back to fully integrated HS, that was clearly a manufacturing driven change and if one was to go so far as to read what Chris King has said about FiHS. Then FiHSs aren't helping front end rigidity. Is my read.

Right, got to go now.
Cheers.
😀

I can't find any 1 1/8" 20mm forks anywhere

I'm in a similar position - Patriot has 140-180mm forks on it with 20mm axle and a 1/8 steerer. I brought this up with Mojo when I was in there getting bushings. They assured me they'd be able to make something up, so if you do get stuck give them a call.

It is 'forcing' in a way, because the things you need to replace might not be avaiable.

I can't find any 1 1/8" 20mm forks anywhere so if they do go I'll have to stick my 2007 Santa Cruz Nomad in a skip.

Was beaten to it re 135mm vs 142mm. They are the same thing, the extra 7mm is simply an additional tab to locate the hub in the dropout. Anyone who's ever owned a bike with an 135x12 axle will know just what a PITA it is to replace a wheel in the near dark.

Boost vexes me. It's now 148mm (I assume this includes the locating tabs as per 142mm), but I don't understand why they didn't opt for the full fat 150mm standard with corresponding wider crank interface, thus making for a stronger frame that takes advantage of an existing standard...

...maybe that's the point. Speccing aftermarket parts is an effing nightmare...

http://www.bike24.com/1.php?content=7&navigation=1&menu=1000%2C2%2C121&__qf_form-filter=&pgc [14697]=14700&pgc[5416]=5417&pgc[14696]=14708
(hoping that link works - grr, no it doesn't, it dumps the filters, but they're easy to choose from the menu)

blimey, there's even 2016 model Rockshox DH forks in 26er, 1 1/8 straight steerer, with 20mm thru axle

get em in now before you're "forced" to replace with a 15mm thru axle version, and be forced to buy different end caps for the hubs.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Rockshox-Lyrik-RC-170mm-Solo-Air-/151900147151

Brand new 170mm (will come with the spacer to reduce) 1 1/8" 20mm axle Lyriks. I have a pair of the RC2DH on my Pitch, they're great 🙂

My 26" frame broke and was replaced with a 650B as they no longer made 26ers. It was a very expensive warranty replacement, I can tell you.
Wha gwan?

If my 1 1/8" forks break and there are no 160mm forks with 20mm axles available then yes, I'll be forced to change my perfectly good frame.

I'm sure we did this a few pages back. You've being overly dramatic. Not to mention worrying about a situation that hasn't happened, are you a regular fork breaker? If you break your 1 1/8th forks then you have several options:

> fix them! Depending on what 'broke' this may be easy, new seals, new cartridges, new uppers, new lowers, new stanchions, the parts are available if you ask/look.
> Replace them with 1 1-8th 15mm or QR forks, and convert your wheel, you might have preferred the 20mm axle but you *can* replace the forks
> buy NOS, there are forks out there, stock sitting on shelves etc.*
> buy a 2nd hand fork, not ideal if you want new, but it is an option if none of the above are feasible.

Or quit mountain biking.

Edit to add: This isn't a hypothetical. I can't find any 1 1/8" 20mm forks anywhere so if they do go I'll have to stick my 2007 Santa Cruz Nomad in a skip.

If it happens (fork breaking) then put your money where your mouth is.
If it'll be so impossible to get bits for and presumably worthless then buy all means give your (9 years old) Nomad to me, I'll even pay postage 😉

*this goes back to my point about people being influenced by what they see on CRC, Wiggle etc. You said you can't find them [b]anywhere[/b], go into your LBS and ask if they could get any from the supplier/distributor? ring around some shops to see what stock they have in the back room? ask the servicing/repairs places if they have any stock? just because something isn't available in under 3 clicks form google doesn't mean its not available.

Ok then what should I replace my 66s with if they break unfixably?

160mm or 170mm travel (although I like the adjustable ones), air, 36mm stanchions, 1 1/8 straight steerer.

if they break unfixably?

Well, fist you're gonna have to come up with some actual idea of how that might happen, short of snapping them into a million pieces. as a side note there seems to be a strange idea from a lot of people that everything needs replacing rather than repairing.

Anyway, some links provided, helpfully by others above, or you could look into the last two options on my list, and look for some NOS of the same model, or whatever was competing with that model when they were new (so Lyrics, Fox 36's, BOS, other 66's, Xfusion ? etc.), or 2nd hand.

I just think all this "OMG I'm gonna have to give up and my bike is going in the bin" stuff is a bit over the top.

if you snap a pair of 160-180mm forks, then I'd be more concerned about a good dentist initially. forks can wait, but 3 clicks will get you Rockshox, BOS or Fox.

> fix them! Depending on what 'broke' this may be easy, new seals, new cartridges, new uppers, new lowers, new stanchions, the parts are available if you ask/look.

While there are many things you can fix (I've already 'fixed' the two step air spring by replacing it with a coil) I think it's a bit of a leap to say that you can fix any damage the fork might end up with. For example, there is definitely some play that wasn't there before which suggests to me that the bushings might be on the way out. I could replace the lowers but if the stanchions are also gouged then it's worth getting new uppers as well. While you [i]can[/i] get the parts there comes a point where you just have to say enough is enough.

> Replace them with 1 1-8th 15mm or QR forks, and convert your wheel, you might have preferred the 20mm axle but you *can* replace the forks

I'm still being [i]forced[/i] to change something. Even then, 1 1/8" with 15mm is going to become less common pretty soon if all new bikes are tapered.

> buy NOS, there are forks out there, stock sitting on shelves etc.*

The problem with NOS is that there is a finite amount. The price only goes up as it gets rarer.

> buy a 2nd hand fork, not ideal if you want new, but it is an option if none of the above are feasible.

Again, the number of 2nd hand forks that are still serviceable is only going to decrease.

None of your points change the fact that an old frame is going to become uneconomical to maintain eventually. Constantly changing standards is only going to accelerate that process.

I could replace the lowers but if the stanchions are also gouged then it's worth getting new uppers as well. While you can get the parts there comes a point where you just have to say enough is enough.

Indeed the repair cost versus replacement cost is always going to be an issue, but that is an issue regardless of age, and is a question of (personal) economics, not really a question of availability. You'd be in the same predicament if your 18month old 15mm tapered forks had worn bushings and stanchions.

The problem with NOS is that there is a finite amount. The price only goes up as it gets rarer.

or drops as less people want them and shops left with stock on the shelves, it swings both ways, same with 2nd hand too, but you're now offering ever more hypothetical secenarios.

[b]if[/b] I break my forks [b]and [/b] the repair is too expensive, [b]and [/b]I can't find a new one, [b]and [/b]there are no NOS forks available, [b]and [/b]there's no 2nd hand ones available.

which is a bit different to your original statement of bike going in the skip if your fork breaks.

I really do get what you're concerned about, I'm just hammering home the point that I think the perception of the problem exceeds the reality of the problem.

an old frame is going to become uneconomical to maintain eventually

To be fair all round, that's normal for anything. Cars, boilers, etc. It's simply getting towards the old-age of its 'realistic lifespan' and little to do with forced obsoloscence. It's great that you've run it for so long, I'm all for not replacing stuff for the sake of it, but fatigue, wear and tear etc - 9 years is already good going.

Well, fist you're gonna have to come up with some actual idea of how that might happen,

Why is this such a strange concept?

Let me give you an example. I snapped the valve off the bottom of the 66s through overtightening and fatigue. The part's not made any more, fortunately Windwave looked in their spares bin and found two, which they sent to me FoC because they were worthless as far as they were concerned. There's also a little bit of string in them which was notorious for breaking, and this isn't available any more. I had to make my own, which wasn't easy, finding the right stuff. I ended up buying a bow string, untwisting it and re-twisting and binding it into the right shape.

There's two issues, and I was lucky both times I think.

What does NOS mean?

I'm just hammering home the point that I think the perception of the problem

I'm not saying I have a problem - I don't, currently. However I may if something else breaks on those forks. Obsolescence has always been an issue in anything technical, the problem is (with wheels and forks in particular) that the bike industry seem to be making it a lot worse. Now much of that is due to progress, of course, but people are a little bit cross when it could make obsolescence worse for little actual benefit. People *feel* like they are being played. This always annoys people in any market not just bikes.

if they break unfixably?

Well, fist you're gonna have to come up with some actual idea of how that might happen, short of snapping them into a million pieces

So I asked for an example of how you could break your fork unfixably, and you respond with two times you were able to fix it? 😕

What does NOS mean?

New Old Stock,

ie: parts that are no longer produced but there is still stock available.

I'm just hammering home the point that I think the perception of the problem

I'm not saying I have a problem - I don't, currently. However I may if something else breaks on those forks

I wasn't directly responding to you, it was in response to Bruce, but that's it again, you are worrying about future events, we're just trying to reassure you that perhaps it's not as bad as you fear.

So I asked for an example of how you could break your fork unfixably, and you respond with two times you were able to fix it?

It doesn't take much to work out what happens if someone else breaks their valve given that I have the last two in existence? Do you not get my point? Spares are no longer made. You must understand that when spares are no longer made this makes repairing things a lot harder!

To be fair all round, that's normal for anything. Cars, boilers, etc. It's simply getting towards the old-age of its 'realistic lifespan' and little to do with forced obsoloscence. It's great that you've run it for so long, I'm all for not replacing stuff for the sake of it, but fatigue, wear and tear etc - 9 years is already good going.

As a tight fisted Yorkshireman these things irk me - realistic lifespan's seem to be reducing all the time and do smell of forced obsoloscence - not specifically in the bike industry but all round.

Small leak on seal on electric kettle thats only 15 months old - can't get parts so had to buy new kettle.

Microwave packing in after only 3 years - ffs it only does about an hours work a year as we barely use it. Part availalble but at twice the price of buying a new microwave.

Perfectly good cars scrapped cos minor electronic problems are unfixable.

List goes on and on with items being discarded after a relatively short lifespan, only to be replaced by another one shipped from the other side of the world.

Then we ban free carrier bags as it's bad for the environment.

Right. I'll **** off now, moaning and grumbling old git that I am.

It doesn't take much to work out what happens if someone else breaks their valve given that I have the last two in existence? Do you not get my point? Spares are no longer made. You must understand that when spares are no longer made this makes repairing things a lot harder!

I do, I really really do get it, but there may also be spares with other distributors or shops that you don't know about, there might not, but you're not giving an example of forced obsolescence there, you're giving an example of natural lifetime of parts availability. as James said above, keeping old stuff going is always going to become trickier as time goes on, but that isn't planned obsolescence or some industry conspiracy, which was what was being put forwards. If you product does reach the end of its natural lifespan and is not repairable, that's when you fall back current alternative forks, or NOS forks, or 2nd hand etc.

I get that it might be a tiny bit more tricky to find the bits, yes you might even not be able to fix your [b]fork [/b],but with people making comments about bikes going in skips, giving up, not being able to fix their [b]bike[/b]'s then that's where it gets silly.

** Disclaaimer **

I'm not someone who buys new bikes every year with the latest tech, I have bikes ranging from 2-30 years old, across road, MTB, tourer etc, but do have a fair bit of modern kit as well.

I have not yet come across a problem that means any of them are no longer viable or repairable, specific parts maybe harder to find or I might have to use an alternative but nothing has been consigned to the scrapheap due to a simple lack of parts.

I also help to run a local cycling charity where we have a recycling and re-use workshop so probably spend a fair bit more time than most having to repair odd, unusual, out of production models and parts, you'd think if we were going to run into issues of obsolescence it would be here. People donate things all the time that are 'beyond repair' or that they think they can't get parts for, 99% of it isn't a problem for us.

We are even restoring a <1940 travel tandem that can completely disassemble and fit into a suitcase, parts are available, we have 1950s and 60s roadsters being fixed, we even have some pretty obscure propriety things come through (80s Klein anyone?) that are not not problems.

If anything I don't want to argue with people, I want to reassure them that it's not as bad as they fear!

but you're not giving an example of forced obsolescence there, you're giving an example of natural lifetime of parts availability.

I didn't say they were forcing us deliberately, I said we might be forced. All the new standards make it much harder to find support.

But the argument's not about repairing the forks, it's about replacing them if they cannot be repaired. Which is not uncommon. If all forks still had 1 1/8 steerers it'd be a piece of cake to get new forks, but thanks to new standards there's now far less choice.

As I said there are still options - for now. If I keep the bike long enough then there won't be, and the bike will indeed be thrown away. The question is when will that be? I hope it's later rather than sooner.

And NOS/eBay isn't a solution, it's a compromise. There's no question that users of old bikes are worse off, and we're going to get worse off still as time goes on.

Now as I said, there are good reasons for tapered forks, and I understand this. 27.5 and boost are the things that have annoyed people the most. However this is not YET a problem.

But there are also other annoyances. My LBS is the same size as it always was, and their tyre display is the same size, but now 26" tyres only occupy a third of the display so there are a third as many tyres in stock. So if I go in needing a tyre straight away, I am less likely to find something like I want. So I have to compromise - say, I might have to get the cheap compound, or a wire bead. So then in a small way I've had to downgrade my bike. It's an annoyance.

I will just continue riding my 10 year old 26" wheeled bike around and deal with any issues when they occur. Much bigger things to worry about that what may or may not break on my bike and whether I could fix it or get a replacement part....

I also don't think this golden age when everything was interchangeable and standardised actually existed. Look back from the turn of the century (the last one 1900, not 2000), and things have been changing at pace all along, it was even worse back in the British vs French vs Italian vs American days, nothing ever stays static for more than a few years, some things last longer than others I'll grant you, but with the variety of stuff I come into contact with if anything modern bikes are easier to deal with.

case in point:

But the argument's not about repairing the forks, it's about replacing them if they cannot be repaired. Which is not uncommon. If all forks still had 1 1/8 steerers it'd be a piece of cake to get new forks, but thanks to new standards there's now far less choice

they never did ALL have 1 1/8th, it was the dominant standard for a while, but you're repeating the same things people said 20-30 years ago with 1 inch, in 20 years people will be wishing it was back in the good old days when everything used the tapered standard.

This becomes a bigger deal at the transition point, and I agree that we are currently in one with respect to fork steerers, and some other areas too maybe, but this isn't a [b]new [/b]problem.

And as I said back on the previous pages I don't think this is a deliberate industry conspiracy to make old stuff obsolete, it's a by-product of progress, doesn't mean more attention couldn't be paid to backwards compatability mind 😉

Anyways, round and round in circles we go, the upshot being that you cna all carry on being worried and annoyed, I'll be in happy lala land not giving two hoots fixing and repairing bikes. 🙂

Much bigger things to worry about that what may or may not break on my bike and whether I could fix it or get a replacement part

EDIT - looks like I'll have company 🙂

I admit that throwing my bike in a skip was an exaggeration (I actually have a set of Fox 36s that are sitting on the wall ready to spring into service if the Lyriks decide to die on me and I can't repair them).

I think what is annoying me, and probably a lot of other people, is that these changes are being brought in in the name of (questionable) performance benefits while causing an explosion in the number of standars. The end consumer doesn't benefit and the LBSs certainly don't. The only people benefiting are the online stores since they can carry all the various standards and people are being forced into using them since the LBSs simply can't carry the stock for every customer anymore.

If my 1 1/8" forks break and there are no 160mm forks with 20mm axles available then yes, I'll be forced to change my perfectly good frame.

But you can't have it both ways. You've been riding 1-1/8", 160mm travel forks with 20mm axles. If we followed some of the reasoning going on in this thread, you should have been riding 1", 80mm forks with 9mm QRs. That's if you graduated away from rigid forks at all?

You'd be hard pressed to find a 1" steerer but there are plenty of forks with 9mm QR and 80-100mm travel out there.

Funnily enough I've actually got a set of Z2s with a 1" steerer sitting in the garage. They're off my 1997 P7 which was probably the last 'proper' mountain bike to still run a 1" steerer. I put the rigid forks back on it though because these days I mostly use it as a commuter and suspension seems a bit unnecessary.

The real question is did we actually need anything between 9mm QR and 20mm?

but you're repeating the same things people said 20-30 years ago with 1 inch

Well not quite because there's more to my point. Whilst we've always had changing standards, and we've lived with that, but now there have been so many changes so quickly, all of which are incompatible with previous frames (despite not appearing to make a lot of difference to the ride), that people have begun to feel the industry is taking the piss.

It's the implications and frequency that's the issue.

Anyway that's all I'm going to say on that. I do like innovation, generally - but it'd have been nice if they could ahve saved it all up and released a new MTB designed from the ground up all in one go.

It's the implications and frequency that's the issue.

+1.

@dangerousbeans - Member you are totally on the money.

Microwave packing in after only 3 years - ffs it only does about an hours work a year as we barely use it. Part availalble but at twice the price of buying a new microwave.

What was it?

I've fixed loads of stuff in our house, because I'm able to buy the parts of ebay - this was never possible in the old days. Turntable motor went in ours, fiver for a new one.

Anyway - what's the most modern bike available, with all the new standards?

It'd have to have:

820mm bars
0mm stem
Boost hubs
Tapered steerer
NW chainring
1x11

What else?

915mm bars surely.

Definitely not a gearbox.

That's not the kind of innovation we need round these parts.

Whilst we've always had changing standards, and we've lived with that, but now there have been so many changes so quickly, all of which are incompatible with previous frames

I do know what you mean, I had some of the same thoughts for a while but when I think back on it and reflect properly I don't think it is actually any worse than it has been in the last 20 odd years.

I wonder if some aspect of it comes from modern media, especially social media like STW where new innovations (worthwhile or not!) are so much more visible and in your face than they ever were?

20, (even 10 years ago maybe?) most of the exposure you'd have to new stuff was either through monthly magazines, or your LBS and you didn't get to see such a broad spectrum of things, nor was it so rammed down your throat over and over with video sand articles. But I think they were always there, just much more localised and perhaps manufacturer-centric for a while, things get 'out' and shared lots more now, maybe there's some truth in this, maybe not, just musing out loud 🙂

Anyway - what's the most modern bike available, with all the new standards?

It'd have to have:

[s]820mm bars
0mm stem[/s]
Boost hubs
Tapered steerer
[s]NW chainring
1x11[/s]

What else?

By your own criteria though it would have to be stuff that can't be retro-fitted to old bikes, so your bars, stem, 1x11 and NW chainring are out as I can happily fit them to anything.

I'll throw in:

- pressfit BB*
- integrated headsets*
- direct mount front mech
- flat-mount roadie discs
- stupid new BCD chainrings

*modern versions, cos they're not new innovations by a long shot!

No I meant most modern and new-fangled. Those bars with the dent in the back that you need for a 0mm stem.

58 degree head angle
3 metre top tube

I was going to do a long winded response but amedias said it all and I agree with everything he says.

If you want to keep a older bike running you will be able to. Yes, all these daft new 'standards' are a pita but most pass without the majority of us needing to get involved.

BruceWee - Member

The real question is did we actually need anything between 9mm QR and 20mm?

15mm is one of the better examples I reckon. All that effort down the years dedicated to attacking an existing, superior standard.

agreed, 20mm was already wider, well supported, and in a lot of cases lighter.

If you want to keep a older bike running you will be able to.

You might be able to get A part for it, but your choice will be crap. This is already happening to an extent.

The change from 26 to 27.5 seems on the face of it a cynical cash-in by large manufacturers, designed to encourage higher margin new bike sales that suit them, their group brands and distribution network rather than real progress. I can't tell the difference between the ones I've ridden!

I've ridden two 29'ers and the things that stood out as most different was feeling taller and needing more man handling in tight turns. Didn't ride either long enough to make a conclusive decision whether it was better as a whole riding experience or not.

The MTB fashion tax added to lubricants clothing and generic Chinese components is insulting. The misleading way manufacturers attempt to dupe consumers into paying over the odds for low spec parts, using marketing bullshit, made up proprietary technologies, imaginary RRP's & sales, similar looks and oblique specs to higher end products is laughable.

The cringe worthy corporate slogans plastered all over some bikes/parts is so cheesy and smacks of trying too hard.

Increased cost for reduced spec, plastic wear parts where metal once was, cheaper tubing etc is a blatant piss take.

Apart from the above it's cool.

chestercopperpot - Member

The MTB fashion tax added to lubricants

Fox red oil- about £20
Silkolene rsf- about £10
What causes the £10 difference? The label

[quote=amedias ]
- direct mount front mechYou can get an adapter for that

Any example where bikes have increased in cost with worse specs is simply down to exchange rate movements - you are buying items which are manufactured in USD trading countries - when GBP is strong against USD us in the UK get more bikes for our money - and vice versa. If you don't want it to be like that then you'll need to get used to paying UK labour costs to have everything made here...

Regarding bike parts and obsolescence, I remember my Dad moaning about ever changing standards at some point in the late '80s or early '90s, so it's not exactly a new thing!

Stop playing my own game against me Scotroutes!