After reading this I see its not just me and the people I ride with who had stopped buying since wheelgate. All that crap just gave me the hump and now im not buying anything unless something brakes.

I would have been in the market for a frame change by now but you know what bollox to them. I would need new wheels and a set of forks and that’s not happening.

Even though I can afford it I don’t want to, and now im not buying anything bike related and plenty of others feel the same.

I opened my shop at the beginning of summer, was rather busy but tailed off towards the end of the holidays and when the kids went back to school. Sales however haven’t been stellar compared with industry benchmarks but despite new bikes coming out, most sales will be prior to the spring.

Blimey! A dyslexic stonemason; he can’t get much business…

I would never have guessed you were homophonic.

Two outdated bikes in 12 months

how are they outdated?

I only got back into MTB-ing a few years ago. I didn’t and in fact still don’t really know about all the standards. What I do know, is it’s confusing and alienating for people getting into it, or trying to get into it. The cost of everything in the industry is way OTT. I can’t begin to imagine ever spending thousands on a mountain bike. I could never justify that to myself unless I was seriously minted. Even then, the mark up and profit is at greedy levels which annoys me.

The wheel size thing is a genuine frustration for many, myself included. Nobody wants to be left holding an out of date standard that nobody will buy and that becomes worthless. It doesn’t mean they become a bad bike overnight, no, nobody is saying that. It’s that as consumers, if we are left holding on to older standards, we get hit with lack of availability, higher prices and lack of development and innovation. We buy new tech and we get hit with more price premiums that are simply unaffordable, and it’s too much of an expense to gamble as to which ones remain supported and backed by “the industry”. Then the cycle starts again…

For me there is too much greed. What justification is there for some components to cost what they do? A single piece of machined aluminium with a logo on that takes 1 minute to make…that’ll be £175 please.

ohnohesback – Member

Sounds like a first world problem, head turned by marketing bs

Said this before but it actually doesn’t seem to be like that… Santa Cruz were one of the first companies to really get into 650b and they’ve said that they did it because of public pressure- and interestingly, public pressure from people who’ve never ridden a 650b bike. So sure, they’re selling us the emperor’s new clothes but it doesn’t seem to be marketing or even particularily industry led. At least, not initially.

Not to say there’s not a huge amount of marketing bullshit involved. Giant’s was genius “That 29er Giant you love? It’s AWFUL. Why did you buy that? You moron.”

Why were we asking for a bike with a wheel size that did not exist that we had not tried?
IT was BS with them trying to say they were serving us

In all honesty I have never heard anyone demand a new wheel size before the industry started it. I doubt any of us did.

Well these threads do remind me how much STW is a magnet for grumpy old men in rose tinted specs..

“I’ll never buy a new bike again after how they treated me”
“it’s all just marketing BS to steal my money from me”
“Road’s where it’s at”
“CX’s where is’s at”
“Commuting’s where it’s at”

blah blah blah

Personally like innovation, better ranges of gears, engineering out the front mech, wider bars, innovation from different sources not Road or maybe a bit of XC racing.
Yes 650b has been a right balls up and has stopped the new 26″ market but it will pass and we will get over it, in a few years you will still get rubber and rims for 26, forks might be harder but things will space to fit. People will replace what they have because it’s old and tired or knackered.
When they do they might get a shock that the 10 year old wonder bike they had could have been improved on.
And while were here whats with the fixation on picking the most expensive version of a bike and declaring they all cost that? Cars don’t all cost Ferrari money bikes don’t all cost £7k. The modern bike world is providing some real quality at the cheaper end with reliability and spares that were not there historically.
On price the likes of Superstar etc. have kind of turned the component market a bit upside down, simply copying stuff or buying stuff to be branded up with no R&D etc. means they can undercut people. Just means they don’t have anything to give back to come up with something new themselves. The French and German sellers in the race to the bottom on pricing will do each other out of business or pressure from the rest of the retail sector will cut off their supply of very cheap parts – would you rather your LBS had access to the parts at those prices?

Mikewsmith, if ever a nail has had its head hit more accurately, lasers must have been used.

Junkyard – lazarus

Why were we asking for a bike with a wheel size that did not exist that we had not tried?

Because we’re muppets. Or, well, more specifically the US market are muppets since that’s what drove it. 29ers created the interest but people were nervous of such a big change, even now people still say “oh they’re cumbersome/can’t do corners/only for XC”.

So 650b is the option that offers all of the novelty, and much less actual change- perfect. “I want bigger wheels because 26 inch is boring, but I’m worried I’ll notice”

better ranges of gears, engineering out the front mech,

It has not done the former- you have to buy after market larger cogs for this and even then the range is still less than a 2 x 7 never mind a 2 x 9. As for the later you sacrifice gears for what purpose? Its not like a front mech is a pain.
IMHO Superstar have done a 1/10 th of what On one have [ or merlin or riblle or CRC] and are not innovative in any way shape or form. IMHO they are not even all that cheap either.
Innovation is great but this is change that adds at best, what Brailsford would call, “marginal gains”. They are not game changers like STI was for road or Disc brakes or suspension that worked was for MTB. If it excites you fine but it is done to generate sales rather than make your riding better,safer or more fun.

NW I do not believe that explanation for one second – I assume you are saying what they say rather than what you think.

Yeah, that’s what I do 😆

I’ve never heard anyone in the industry describe it tthe way I do tbh but it seems pretty clear. If it’d been industry led like most people believe, how is it that most of the industry was caught so much on the hop? None of the biggest manufacturers had a 650b product ready to go.

I am tired and my senses are dulled…… I still cannot tell if it is sarcasm 😳

I think there’s a basic truth that I know now if I buy a bike, the industry won’t let me upgrade it. By the time I want new forks, the headtube will be wrong, seat tube obsolete ect ect.

So why not stick with what I have, given it too is obsolete, but at least lasted me 10+ years, whereas this years new model will be largely obsolete in 5 if the current trends persist.

Greedy manufatureers, looking to bolster mature markets by introducing the one thing that was constant, ie standards, are to blame. I’m also a smaller kind of guy – 26 make sense to me in a way new ones dont. You can always make a small bike bigger. (stem, post) you can’t make a big bike smaller without taking lumps out of the frame.

Greed killed enthusiasm with see through marketing ploys. We’re not as daft as the manufacturers would have us believe.

It has not done the former- you have to buy after market larger cogs for this and even then the range is still less than a 2 x 7 never mind a 2 x 9. As for the later you sacrifice gears for what purpose? Its not like a front mech is a pain.

I’ll accept you are tired but there was a comma in there to separate the 2, 10 sp delivered a 11-36t expanding the range (usable on 3x if you really want). SRAM 1×11 delivered a reduced but still massive range from a single ring option with NW/Clutch to remove the need for chain devices and front mechs dropping a nice amount of weight off a bike. For some that has been a great step forward, remember the bike industry is not manufacturing just for you it’s doing it for a huge range of customers with a variety of demands. the XX1 adoption I have seen among racers tells me there is something in it.

there was a comma in there to separate the 2

Probably why I called them the former and the later and addressed them separately.
I am sure we can all produce the same amount of watts as a racer and are as interested in weight. You also forgot the fact the bigger wheels are heavier whilst telling us about weight saving gains.
Still at least we agree dropping a front mech results in having a smaller range. If you wish to call this

a great step forward

then who am I to disagree.
I am not even sure it is a marginal gain tbh as you sacrifice range to secure some minimal weight gains [ about 200- 300 grams] assuming you do not use an extender at the rear.

My super scientific analysis.

I used to have 1×9, and was jiggered at the top of climbs
I then went to 3×9, and was knackered at the top of climbs, but slightly less so.
Then I moved to 1×11. I’m still just as knackered at the top of climbs as I was with 3×9, but less jiggered than 1×9, but my bike is lighter, the chain never comes off and there is less to go wrong than 3×9.

1×11 wins.

Genuine q How is 1 x 11 lighter than 1 x 9 given it has more chain rings on the cassette and a larger one at the back ?
Clearly you can make 9 rings weigh less than 11 as you just remove two from the 11

Genuine q How is 1 x 11 lighter than 1 x 9 given it has more chain rings on the cassette and a larger one at the back ?
Clearly you can make 9 rings weigh less than 11 as you just remove two from the 11

Advances in design? This wasn’t an over night change, probably 5 years between ditching 1×9 and getting 1×11. Admittedly going from LX/XT level to XX1 will have helped. Though a quick google suggests that the base level 11s cassette (x1) is only 15g heavier than a 9s XT. 315g plays 300g.

Did he say that?

but my bike is lighter, the chain never comes off and there is less to go wrong than 3×9

I infer that either:

– the bike, which happens to have 1×11 is lighter than the one which happened to have 1×9
– 1×11 is lighter than 3×9

You are correct that all things being equal 1×9 will be lighter than 1×11 – an XG999 9 speed cassette is 175g, an XX1 is 260g, an XD driver is lighter, 11 speed chains are lighter. Rear mech was 197g for 9 speed medium X.0 and 220g for XX1, so it gets quite close. XX1 will be lighter than a Deore (or even XT) 1×9 set up.

1×11’s not lighter than 1×9 but it has less drawbacks too. Singlespeed’s lighter than 1x but it’s not a real alternative to 2x for most folks.

1x’s kind of an interesting one just because it’s different, not better. I like it, because the drawbacks of it kind of suit me (in the same way as some folks like singlespeed) and I like the simplicity and quiet of it, and the chain retention/security, and the better mud manners. The weight reduction’s just a wee bonus. But it’s not better than 2x

It’s also let manufacturers do some things with frame design that aren’t possible with multiple rings, which I’m a wee bit ambivalent about but it certainly adds options.

OTOH I know people who declare it perfect for their riding and just seem to conveniently forget all the times they end up walking.

I wasnt really looking for people to slate the current vogues in mountain bike technology!!
As was really after comments from other folks that were in the trade ,a comparison of whos busy etc.

Read this on the first page (Couldn’t be arsed with the next four TBH, so this may all be repetition)…
It strikes me that maybe you should be asking the potential customers rather than “The Trade” those in other shops that know how to deal with/ avoid a slump will probably be keeping their best tricks as closely guarded as they can…

For my own part as a consumer of bikes and related paraphernalia, I think this time of year brings on a different set of priorities, the getting together of kit for the up-coming winter, warm/dry clothing possibly assembling a reliable SS bike, mudguards for the commuter, mulling over tyre choices, etc, etc and then of course do the kids need a new bike for Christmas? New bikes for me just ain’t on the radar…

Genuine q How is 1 x 11 lighter than 1 x 9 given it has more chain rings on the cassette and a larger one at the back ?
Clearly you can make 9 rings weigh less than 11 as you just remove two from the 11

More gaps inint, there’s more air between the sprockets on an 11 speed cassette… 😉

It makes little sense to use the singular if you mean two [ or more] completely different bikes. It makes even less sense for us both to discuss once he has answered

Cheers tom marginal if any, gains.

I can see the appeal of 1 x 11 locally [ though I can SS it all anyway]but not for proper mountains.

OP. I think the boom for MTB’s has eased. The fad followers are moving on to follow another fad, some got turned on by Wiggo and Froome in Lycra, some got put off by the very wet winter, some got old and cynical, some felt the Olympic buzz for track and road racing and some just went back to playing golf.
MTB has been one of the fastest growing sports/hobbies over the last 15 years and now it has plateaued, no big issue the scene is vibrant, has great depth and due to the boom we have some amazing new places and bikes to ride. Happy days.
Custom builds have never been so bloody enjoyable 😀

I can see the appeal of 1 x 11 locally [ though I can SS it all anyway]but not for proper mountains.

As pointed out not everything developed in mountain biking is for you.