Forum menu
I think what you need to do is just do less maintenance on your bike (or buy a bike that requires less maintenance) then it doesn't become a problem where your cables go.
My brakeless fixed gear being the logical extreme. Won't catch me worrying about cables, gears or brakes. I am however very reliant on my chain...
No, he isnt, he is opinionated (which is of course fine, lord knows I am opinionated if anything!).
Absolutely that, and of course if he wasn't so opinionated he may well never have bothered to make frames that he thinks (and so many agree) are what the world needs. He's on a bit of a rant but let the baby have his bottle. He's earnt it.
For a bit of fun, lets directly quote him from the clip...
Perforating a frame with holes, isnt very sensible, in my point, in my view
This is actually where I have a problem (all relative to the real problems in my life of course).
Internal cable routing hardly perforates a frames with holes, and has been pointed out, touring frames and more recently bike packing frames have always been similarly 'perforated' with holes as mount points for various racks, guards, bottle cages, bags, etc.
He's an engineer with a deserved reputation but is making an implication that cable routing holes make a frame unsafe. I don't believe there's any evidence to support such a view. Could be marked up as bad marketing in my opinion.
No, he isnt, he is opinionated (which is of course fine, lord knows I am opinionated if anything!).
Absolutely that, and of course if he wasn't so opinionated he may well never have bothered to make frames that he thinks (and so many agree) are what the world needs. He's on a bit of a rant but let the baby have his bottle. He's earnt it.
For a bit of fun, lets directly quote him from the clip...
Perforating a frame with holes, isnt very sensible, in my point, in my view
This is actually where I have a problem (all relative to the real problems in my life of course).
Internal cable routing hardly perforates a frame with holes, and has been pointed out, touring frames and more recently bike packing frames have always been similarly 'perforated' with holes as mount points for various racks, guards, bottle cages, bags, etc.
He's an engineer with a deserved reputation but is making an implication that cable routing holes make a frame unsafe. I don't believe there's any evidence to support such a view. Could be marked up as bad marketing in my opinion.
FWIW I really don't care either way. Internal routing looks neater, is a bit more of a faff, but I really wouldn't chose a frame based on how the cables were routed. The Deviate hidden top tube route is quite neat but those allen bolt thingumies can also be a bit of a faff to fit.
love internal routing. bike looks cleaner and nicer and betterer. it's a bit of faff but arent all good things?
internal or externa doesn't put me off either way tho. headset routing does/
Just push and it pops out the correct hole....
this matches my experience. I don't think either of my internally routed bikes has made any maintenance task any harder or longer. There are certainly more annoying things on bikes - SRAM cranks, removing pedals, taking saddles off to re-pressurise droppers etc, none of which require cable-faff.
There are certainly more annoying things on bikes -........removing pedals....
Double what....?
I also like Cy, but have to say it’s a non issue on a well built internally routed frame. On my Stumpjumper you just push the cable in and it comes out of the right place.
To be fair, I’m not sure he even believes it, it’s just a video designed to generate discussion and an image of no-fuss Cotic bikes. How can he when they put some many holes in their frames as mentioned several times above? Like their advertising obsession about how much better steel is than all other materials - but then using alloy for the swingarms on all their full sussers. I’d consider a Cotic full suss if they switched to full steel but otherwise they don’t stand out enough for me - if part of the bike is alloy, the rest of may as well be alloy (with all its strengths and weaknesses)
yeah ive got bikes with a bit of internal routing, but not full
its a bit fiddly but not that bad, ive got no problem with it either way
and i actually disagree with snotrag, i think the integrated bar stem and cables looks way worse!,
i really like the Deviate idea up there and i like the downtube guides integrated into my bottle bosses on my kona, a very tidy way of doing things and doesnt need extra holes in the frame
i think i prefer neat external engineering solutions like that
what i do think is stilly is that internal routing adds extra complexity cost and weight, for a debatable aesthetic gain
I've forgotten - are disk brakes still on the wrong side of the forks?
I've forgotten - are disk brakes still on the wrong side of the forks?
That was only on the early generation Roadrat wasn't it?
It was a workaround for the potential issue of QR wheels with disc brakes. Normal dropout alignment does pose a small risk that if you don't do the QR up tight enough, the wheel can be ejected. Reversing it all had the opposite effect, applying the brake pulled the wheel further up into the dropout.
It's all irrelevant now that thru-axles are a thing.
If you can't figure out how to swap cables easily on an internally routed frame, then you're doing your LBS a favor and keeping them in business, its pretty dam simple, even more so with an internal routing kit.
Well that's fine with your experience of internal routing. However my experience when I worked as a bike mechanic was often very different. Frames where you had a 1.5mm hole to get the cable into the top tube and another 1.5mm hole to get it out again were my favourites. Frames which had been sawed through from the inside because the cable had slipped out of the internal guide were also not uncommon.
To change a gear cable on my ebike involves removing the motor. I know what I'm doing with this but it's hardly "pretty dam simple".
Done well, internal routing is no drama, but it's so often done very badly.
If you can't figure out how to swap cables easily on an internally routed frame, then you're doing your LBS a favor and keeping them in business, its pretty dam simple, even more so with an internal routing kit.
Well that's fine with your experience of internal routing. However my experience when I worked as a bike mechanic was often very different. Frames where you had a 1.5mm hole to get the cable into the top tube and another 1.5mm hole to get it out again were my favourites. Frames which had been sawed through from the inside because the cable had slipped out of the internal guide were also not uncommon.
To change a gear cable on my ebike involves removing the motor. I know what I'm doing with this but it's hardly "pretty dam simple".
Done well, internal routing is no drama, but it's so often done very badly.
Isn't that a historical thing though now, so the internal routing on bikes from the last year or two is 10000 times nicer than some from 3-5 years before that.
Having a go at people because they lack the skills and knowledge to fix something that's been made unnecessary complicated for reasons of profit, is somewhat unfair. What if we all had simpler and easier to maintain items? Would probably lead to a lot less waste.
My internally routed Spur was easier to cable than my externally routed Pace. If the bike has been designed well there's no reason for it to be more complicated.
Perhaps that's the actual argument to have, badly executed cable routing vs good, internal or external?
Someone mentioned earlier about it maybe leading to manufactures not even giving a cable option, wireless only. Haven't specialised done that already?
He's an engineer with a deserved reputation but is making an implication that cable routing holes make a frame unsafe. I don't believe there's any evidence to support such a view.
My LBS has experience of poorly designed titanium Kinesis frames where the port at the top of the down tube cracked due to poor design and engineering. One of the reasons that I went with an Orro frame a couple of years back.
It's a bit like when someone decided that full outers were a thing we must have on hardtails. Why?
Probably because they rode regularly in the Peak District where grit solution finds its way into every cable end.
I can't say I'm particularly animated about internal cable routing. It's easier to build up a bike without it for sure, but the cheapo amazon routing kits work well and make the whole thing reasonably tolerable ime. It's not a hill I'd particularly choose to die on. Cables and hoses routed through headsets on the other hand, just seem nuts to me.
Also not a fan of electronic shifting, anything that needs a battery and motor seems ripe for failure.
My philosophy is that a bicycle should be simple enough for a 9-year old to fix with basic tools.
That sort of thing might have flown in Victorian times - small children up chimneys and that sort of thing - but is illegal these days. If, as it seems, you are employing small children as bike mechanics, you are almost certainly breaking the law.
Sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick here 🙄
My internally routed Spur was easier to cable than my externally routed Pace.
Externally routed brake hose though. 👍🏼
True but the gear cable and dropper were easier!
Isn't that a historical thing though now, so the internal routing on bikes from the last year or two is 10000 times nicer than some from 3-5 years before that.
Nope, not on my new Orange. Tiny holes at the top of the downtube, tiny holes at the bottom and then the same again into and out of the chainstays. No internal piping. If it hadn't had the plastic pull through guides installed, I'd have been resorting to vacuuming bits of string through the frame. There's also absolutely zero chance of getting any foam in there to stop the cables rattling the inside of the frame.
It does ride lovely though.
That’s because orange have poorly executed their solution
an implication that cable routing holes make a frame unsafe. I don't believe there's any evidence to support such a view.
I haven't watched the whole clip but I doubt that's the point made. It's true that adding cable ports (or M5 threaded bosses, but to a lesser extent ime) in many places on the frame needs additional wall thickness to pass the safety tests w/o cracking. Cable ports tend to be placed in areas where stress from fork leverage or pedalling load is high hence why there are examples of bikes cracking around those fittings, whether they passed testing or not (since there's safety regs to meet, test passes is highly likely on anything you buy from a reputable brand).
I was a bike mechanic 15 year ago when I first encountered an Orange with internal routing. One tiny hole at each end of a tube and nothing to stop the cable from rattling around inside. Crappy little grommets which were a nightmare to fit and wouldn't stay in place.
Routing tools didn't exist at the time we came up with all sorts of methods to speed up the process. It was a giant waste of time.
I'm surprised and disappointed to hear they haven't improved things in all this time.
I'm surprised and disappointed to hear they haven't improved things in all this time.
The Stage Evo I bought last year wasn't 'that' bad. The internal routing is of the most basic hole each end type and the dropper routing had me stopping to wonder if that really was correct (took some deft finger in the bottom bracket work) but the holes are pretty big so I was able to slide some anti rattle foam over each cable/hose and the rubber grommets went into place with the help of some silicon lube and a massage.
This reminds me of the 70s debate: brazed on bosses or srcew on clips that avoided heating the tubes. Silver soldering was one answer till steels that stayed strong after brazing arrived. My beloved Vitus 5/10 DB eventually cracked at a tiny braze on tab near the end of a butt.
My philosophy is that a bicycle should be simple enough for a 9-year old to fix with basic tools.
That sort of thing might have flown in Victorian times - small children up chimneys and that sort of thing - but is illegal these days. If, as it seems, you are employing small children as bike mechanics, you are almost certainly breaking the law.
Sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick here 🙄
🤣
I wasn't calling for a return to the times of child labour. Although...
Bikes should be easy to repair and maintain with basic tools. All bikes. And components should be easily swappable over bikes. When I first got into MTBs, way back in the late 80s, most components fit most bikes, regardless of use type. You could fit the same parts to a racer, an MTB, a shopper or even a kid's bike. Who doesn't like a racer with chopper handlebars (one kid locally fitted drop bars to hisChopper; I think this became the prototype for those time trial bikes with the smaller front wheel). But us kids could tinker and mess about with our own bikes with basic tools we'd borrowed or nicked. Quite telling that most young people these days aren't so great with mechanical devices. Someone mentioned bike shops benefitting form people not being able to service their own bikes; for sure, but an increasing problem for many bike shops is the proprietary nature of bike systems; special tools needed for various cranks, BBs, etc. One local shop I chat to told me of a time when a customer had brought in a high end Campagnolo equipped racer, to have a new cassette and chain fitted. They didn't have the Campagnolo specific chain tool, so he went elsewhere. So they bought one, expecting other customers to need the same, only for it to be used a grand total of once. A £120 tool.
It all went wrong when marketing decided there weren't enough 'standards', and set about inventing new ones. Eventually we'll get to a point where bikes are like cars and you have to take them to specific brand workshops. Kerching.
As a Shimano stockist about 30 years back they wouldn't warranty the chain or any stuff that got mangled if it broke if you hadn't bought the HG chain tool - only about 25 quid IIRC.
It's far better now that QuickLinks are pretty much everywhere.