1*.
Fine if you're fit, rich and live somewhere flattish.
Pointless toss otherwise.
Internal spoke nipples
The Raleigh Activator!
Oi!
Erm.. Yeah OK. I had one and it was proper shit.
neilwheel - Member
The square taper crank only exists in 3 different states
1. Seized in place for ever and silent
2. Creaky
3. Works loose once, throw crank in bin.
I assume you have not spent time with cotter pin cranks and cup and lock-ring BB's.
Shirley, you would realise these are just small trifles due to operator error.
Yep I have messed about with cotter pins etc and they are the work of satan, however I'm happy the square taper has gone. Prime example a couple of years ago, tried a mates bike and noticed the bushings were shot. Told mate, "yeah can't change the lower bushing as the threads pulled out on the crank and I don't want to destroy my expensive cranks"
Bottom bracket was fine though.
Square tapers are fine. A good in allied with a Middleburn crankset is a thing of engineering magnificence.
I also loved my USE SUB fork (until I broke it 🙁 )
Now, Zoom seatposts....looked nice, but were impossible to tighten and bent when you sat on them a bit too hard!
[img] 
[/img]
trail_rat - Member
40 tooth cassette extensions should get in the sea. Daft things for the vain.
Yes, they look bloody stupid and probably weight more than a double with a normal size cassette. Same with those 32t cassettes and long cage mechs on a road bike; urgh.
davidtaylforth - Memberprobably weight more than a double with a normal size cassette.
Nope. But, no wronger than the other comments.
[quote=slimjim78 ]I'm happy the square taper has gone. Prime example a couple of years ago, tried a mates bike and noticed the bushings were shot. Told mate, "yeah can't change the lower bushing as the threads pulled out on the crank and I don't want to destroy my expensive cranks"
Bottom bracket was fine though.
We still seem to be stuck on operator error as the problem with ST. I presume nobody has ever knackered an external bearing crankset through dodgy spannering? No, I can't recall ever seeing a thread complaining about that...
In any case it's an interesting one to put in a thread about things that should have been "buried at birth" - I presume you missed the point of the comment about cotter pins?
Square taper had that one terrible flaw- the BBs lasted so long that often by the time you wanted to change one, it'd seized solidly into the frame. Not a problem you're ever likely to have with a modern pushfit on a 30mm axle.
But it's dead on performance bikes for several good reasons, and hangs around on low performance bikes for other good reasons. It's just a shame it's got harder to find really good BBs, and so many modern ST cranks and BBs are basically junk.
(must admit, my Dune came with one and I quickly destroyed a crank arm just by forgetting to properly torque it up... Funny how quick you forget these things)
40 tooth cassette extensions should get in the sea. Daft things for the vain.
Yes, they look bloody stupid and probably weight more than a double with a normal size cassette.
I'm pretty sure my 40t extender weighs a lot less than a 22t chainring and bolts, front mech, front shifter and associated cables.
This thread certainly demonstrates how cack handed the average MTBer (or STW contributor) actually is.
It's a little unfair critiquing some of those early suspension designs too. I suspect a lot is viewed through 'modern' tinted glasses. At the time, nobody knew how to do bike suspension, and anything was better than nothing.
I recall my first RC35s with a whole 50mm of elastomer sprung travel with no damper, compression or rebound, being awesome. Yes, they're shit now, but at the time they were the danglies.
Fair enough, square tapers being buried at birth or whatever is harsh, I was more answering the question as to what's wrong with them.
I have no problems with whatever the new style is called and have only needed to replace one in the last 3 years. Being able to easily remove and refit a chain set is a huge advantage on a full suss bike that gets used all year round.
ISIS bottom brackets should have been buried at birth, fair enough they died in their infancy but it was still to long..
I'm pretty sure my 40t extender weighs a lot less than a 22t chainring and bolts, front mech, front shifter and associated cables.
You're probably right. But the weight of the embarrassment you're carrying around outweighs everything.
MTBing's not meant to be easy; grow some leg strength. What next, 160mm of front and rear travel for riding round a trail centre? You may aswell just sit at home on the settee.
Huge fan of 1x drivetrains and 40t expanders - better than chainsuck hell!
Square taper cranks - when BBs lasted 15 years and didn't require stripping and repacking every month in winter. If they're so flexy how come JIS track cranks are still made with square taper BBs?
Buried at birth? BB30 on MTBs - bearings pressed directly into BB shell that filled with water in the wet and bearing life measured in hours.
khani - MemberISIS bottom brackets should have been buried at birth, fair enough they died in their infancy but it was still to long..
What were isis and isoflow actually all about? Was it supposed to be a better interface or something? I wasn't riding when they came along so I missed it but the best you could say about them, it seemed, was "Just like square taper, only worse".
I gave a Trek Y3 with "long travel" RS Indy's (63mm) to an aging uncle. He loves it, a mercedes of bikes as he puts it.
Trek push fit bb thirded. Lots of dubious designs from back in the day, but from a big brand 20 years on.... took one brand new set of bearings on the welsh c2c, they were screwed before the ends, contacted trek and told them my legs last longer than your bike, for a while after they replaced f.o.c. see they've quietly replaced now with bb92
davidtaylforth:
You're probably right.
No, I *am* right.
But the weight of the embarrassment you're carrying around outweighs everything.
Again, embarrassment doesn't actually weigh anything, so I think you're wrong on that count as well.
MTBing's not meant to be easy; grow some leg strength.
Right, so not allowed gears any more? I like being able to get up steep stuff without having to get off and push. Am I wrong because of that?
Stop feeding the troll...
Right, so not allowed gears any more? I like being able to get up steep stuff without having to get off and push. Am I wrong because of that?
Do whatever makes you happy, that's the best bet. THere's no denying big cassettes look stupid, if nothing else.
What's this chainsuck ?
What were isis and isoflow actually all about?
Well the flaw in square taper was that if they came slightly loose you'd toast your cranks before you did the BB in. That meant that if it did happen, it was a big bill. ST was good though, I have an early 90s Yeti in the garage still on its original Middleburn/Royce combo. ISIS was basically the first stab at something like hollowtech2. It was a bigger axle with splines to create a better interface with the cranks, which would in theory make it lighter, stiffer and stronger. Problem was some genius forgot that in order to get the bearings [i]inside[/i] the shell of the BB as they were then, you'd need to use bearings so small they could measure their lifespan in a BB in hours. It was a total nonsense. That said, it did spawn octalink (or maybe octaink spawned ISIS?), which spawned Hollowtech and eventually HT2, which is a pretty good system IMHO. Got to start somewhere!
[quote=trail_rat ]What's this chainsuck ?
Something experienced by people that can't set up a front mech?
Something experienced by people that can't set up a front mech
Saucer of milk with that?
instead of posting each and every photo again:
"post the ugliest DH-bikes of the world":
http://www.mtb-news.de/forum/t/zeigt-her-die-haesslichsten-dh-bikes-der-welt.590571/
Something experienced by people that can't set up a front mech
der, chainsuck isn't caused by the front mech setup.. it's caused by the big(ger) ring not releasing the chain due to a sticky tooth.
Orange Sub Five. Bloody awful
Buried at birth? BB30 on MTBs - bearings pressed directly into BB shell that filled with water in the wet and bearing life measured in hours.
This. I had an alloy Flash which I really liked, but a BB should last more than three rides.
Anything with a 'unified rear triangle'. Along with the SID I'd chuck the Judy XL in with this list too.
I would reluctantly dispute the GT LTS - but only once you'd binned the aforementioned Judy XL. Feeling a bit embarrassed about the stem length but gonna post this anyway 😛 :
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
a bit embarrassed about the stem length but gonna post this anyway
You should be more embarrassed by the tyres, though they're a worthy addition to this thread in themselves (I agree about the LTS being quite good though, especially with a nice Bomber on the front).
Agree that the LTS should be given a pass, the low cost versions were a bit uneasy on the eye but by and large a good looking bike. I believe Jeff Jones worked on the development of the LTS.
As for stem length, I happened upon an old thread of a bike I was putting together and commented on not liking the stubby stem (it was a 70mm). How times have changed!
ISIS bottom brackets for me also, the worst piece of kit ever. I once got around 73 miles out of a FSA one which was only ever ridden in the dry!!!
Giant NRS it put me off riding mtbs for years. I know other people got on with them but I just hated mine.
Another vote for ISIS BB's - utter poo. Shimano Octalink was pretty good though.
I quite liked the LTS back in the day. I like ibeam posts and saddles too!
The Orange X1 was a dire bike as was the Mr O...what were they thinking?
RS Indy's were awful. The Judy's were only marginally better.
You should be more embarrassed by the tyres, though they're a worthy addition to this thread in themselves
Wildgrippers were a good tyre, as were lots of the other things in this thread relative to what else was available at the time. When Indys and Judys first came out Marzocchi hadn't yet launched the Bomber if I recall correctly.
This, on the other hand, was a lousy solution to a problem that didn't exist:
[img] http://media.chainreactioncycles.com/is/image/ChainReactionCycles/prod2741_Black_NE_01?wid=500&hei=505 [/img]
Just to annoy davidtaylforth, feast your eyes on my 9-44t cassette
[img] 
[/img]
PF30 bottom brackets.
When Indys and Judys first came out Marzocchi hadn't yet launched the Bomber if I recall correctly.
The Indy was released in 1997, so the Bomber was around by this time. The Judy pre-dated the Bomber by a couple of years - they were still rubbish though with plastic cop caps.
today's tiny item of annoyance:
[URL= http://i432.photobucket.com/albums/qq47/robertedj/qr%20spring_zpsdrvyclcf.jp g" target="_blank">
http://i432.photobucket.com/albums/qq47/robertedj/qr%20spring_zpsdrvyclcf.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
so do they actually serve a purpose? and how long do I look on the garage floor before going to look in the "odd" bits box?
Edit for people from this century its part of a quick release
if you have ever done service at a road race youll appreciate the frustration at weight saving roadies who remove em.
asshats.
But other than keeping your skewar central for easy wheel insertation they do nothing.
For quick wheel changes they make life SOOOO much quicker.
For quick wheel changes they make life SOOOO much quicker.
well it was a security skewer on my rat bike not much speed there - removed completely so could replace the balls and grease - a 5 minute job - compare that with the stress of hammering out sealed bearings
removed completely so could replace the balls and grease - a 5 minute job - compare that with the stress of hammering out sealed bearings
was this supposed to be an ironic statement ?
Someone put a picture of my old XTR shifter brake combos that I still have on my bike which I love...the best shifters and brakes I have had on a bike even if they were separate. But making them into one unti is a great idea. After all its only the same idea as the Shimano road bike levers and brakes..Grip shift now I would agree that is a sack of shit and should have stayed on a Raleigh Grifter with three gears not 8-9 speed of adjustment!
Aren't they the flappy paddle shifters? brake and shift with the same lever?
