[Closed] cynic-al's "oh no, we've run out of ideas, what can we sell now" award thread

[i]the cost of developing the bikes. [/i]

Now that does sound like marketing BS

Strip mud guards and rack off a Dawes galaxy (Or similar). Fit suitable tyres. Enter race.

[i]CX bikes BB's are too high anyway. [/i]

You sure? They seem about the same height as on road bikes to me (although I've never ridden a "real" CX bike.)

[i]How about a 'extendible stem' - a bit like a dropper post, but it gets longer to climb and shorter whilst descending?[/i]

I invented that already.

*hunts through photobucket library*

Here we go. The prototype
[img] [/img]

DezB- I'd buy 4 of those but your cable needs to route through the stem top cap, it needs to be hydraulic as cables are useless for everything, I need the remote to mount between my lh shifter, my reverb remote and not interfere with my garmin mount, my I phone holder and my £70 titanium bell

and whats that face plate all about!

^ Needs to lose the gaiter too. What were you thinking?

.no one is forcing you to buy it

Are you new here?
Can I have an orange 5 26 er please?

Why would you want last years model?

How about a 'extendible stem' - a bit like a dropper post, but it gets longer to climb and shorter whilst descending?

Yeah I'm in for that

DezB - Well, I'm not buying that stem unless its 29er specific.

Why is the remote cable so long? I'm out.

Shouldn't that stem have a boxing glove on the front of it ?

How about a 'extendible stem' - a bit like a dropper post, but it gets longer to climb and shorter whilst descending?

I made an extendible stem for my Design Technology GCSE back in 1994/5. I got a 'D'.

Stupid idea.

Threads that go over [b]100![/b]

Ahem. Electric self-adjusting suspension anyone?

Aracer, yes, I still don't see any ip conflicts between our chainsets.

It pisses me off no end, especially Giant with their new "standard" for tapered steerer sizes. No, no and thrice no.

Not surprisingly, there are no Giant bicycles at PJM Towers.

Ten years ago, hydraulic discs, full suspension and riser bars were a novelty so we all jumped ship en masse. But back in those days, top of the line Fox forks could be had for less than £500, XT cassettes could be had for less than £30 and it was an affordable indulgence.

Today the bike manufacturers have become victims of their own greed, which is why they've all gone 650b overnight. Aside from marketing BS, can anyone tell me where a bike of five years ago is fundamentally flawed compared with a bike today?

A five year old bike is no less capable than a new one. People just like to follow the current trend dictated by the media. Like shimanos new SK group set including shimano 150mm forks....excited? Well there's no point... I made it up, but for a split second some people reading that will be planning to buy a new bike and deem their old one obsolete.

All cutlery-based innovations should be given short shrift.

Gps based shifting will be soon. Next logical step for the e suspension tech. Still use less m7nd.

Aracer, yes, I still don't see any ip conflicts between our chainsets.

Sorry - I was being dim when you mentioned IP before and couldn't work out what you were on about. No there aren't any IP issues between the chainsets - the point I was making is that in both cases you only see 4 arms on the crank, and the only way to do that without infringing Campag IP is to only have 4 points of support for the chainring (when 5 points is probably better from an engineering POV for largish chainrings).

To be fair they clearly have put a bit of thought into the engineering - I was going to complain about the arms not being equally spaced, but actually having them spaced as they are makes sense as there is less unsupported chainring at the points of highest load. Still marketing led though I'm sure (as a properly trained engineer with an understanding of the commercial side - I did a summer placement in marketing - I do acknowledge the value of marketing, but only through gritted teeth!)

A five year old bike is no less capable than a new one.

Well, a 2013 trail bike will have better geometry and probably better damping. It might be made of carbon fibre and it'll have through axles both ends.

BUT... there wasn't much further to take it, hence the superfluous new wheel size and marketing omnishambles.

better geometry

[i]different[/i] geometry 🙂

OK, some people might prefer a 150mm bike "all mountain" bike with a 69degree head angle, but I'm glad things have moved on.

EDIT: But I'd happily accept that XC race bikes probably haven't changed to nearly the same extent in five years.

[b]different[/b] geometry

<marketing mode on>

different [b]=[/b] better

From which we can deduce:
650b [b]=[/b] best

And that the day of the penny farthing mountain bike cannot be far off (see how well the front wheel rolls over huge obstacles, while the rear wheel retains its agile nimble handling).

<marketing mode off>

I'm surprised they're making such a big deal. My FSA K-Force cranks are 620g including rings and BB.

As for the folding of the rings, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that is bullshit (excluding crash damage and manufacturing defects).

First bit I agree with.

Last bit I'm not so sure, I've an SL-K compact (rarely use the 36, but the 50 to 13-27 seems the perfet range for me), the chainrings are as flexy as a paper plate, they rub the mech under load, and have developed a permenant bend ov about 3mm. And I'm no Caverndish!

On the other hand those rings are pretty light (IIRC the cranks are ~DA weight, the extra lightness is in the rings), so 'normal' shimano rings would be fine.

And cost wise the HT2 rings are silly, but I don't think I've ever worn out an outer ring on the road bike (commuter excluded) so it's a non issue?

Any 650 specific saddles yet? really need one of those 😉

And that the day of the penny farthing mountain bike cannot be far off (see how well the front wheel rolls over huge obstacles, while the rear wheel retains its agile nimble handling).

See, this is the bit I don't get. The front wheel needs to steer, so the gyroscopic effect matters. The front wheel also has more suspension generally, so has less need to roll freely.

So doesn't 26" front, 29" rear make a lot more sense than the other way around?

The 26" front wheel gives you faster, more responsive steering, the larger back wheel removes the need for rear suspension.

The 26" front wheel gives you faster, more responsive steering, the larger back wheel removes the need for rear suspension.

Maybe, but then you get longer chainstays, which also slow the steering down.

It's been done before

[img] [/img]

Well, a 2013 trail bike ... It might be made of carbon fibre

So might a 2007 trail bike.

bencooper - Member

So doesn't 26" front, 29" rear make a lot more sense than the other way around?

The 26" front wheel gives you faster, more responsive steering,

I know you're joking, but... Seriously, who wants faster steering? I've never in 20-odd years ridden a single mountain bike that needed faster steering, they all turn exactly as fast as my hands go.

Big front wheel, small rear wheel makes sense in the same way that suspension on the front but not the back makes sense. But the most important thing is, it looks silly either way.

29er saddle takes the cake, do we also need 29er shorts to go with it?
anything 650 related is a close second, please, go away
hydraulic or electric derailleurs

honourable mentions:

140mm disc rotors, and mega lightweight all air no metal disc rotors
cannondale leftys
millions of headtube standards
bars over 750mm, enough already

I've never used it - and it's already been out a few years - but I really never saw the point of Shimano's Ice Tech brake rotors/pads.

And user reports seem to suggest the rotors can be a bit of a PITA.

bars over 750mm, enough already

Hmmm, I went from 750mm to 780mm on my DH bike this summer and I won;t be going back.

🙂

do we also need 29er shorts to go with it?

💡

I know you're joking, but... Seriously, who wants faster steering? I've never in 20-odd years ridden a single mountain bike that needed faster steering, they all turn exactly as fast as my hands go.

I'm being serious for once. Of course the bars turn as fast as you steer, but with a larger wheel it takes more effort to turn the bars. Isn't it better to have a bike you can flick between obstacles, rather than having to muscle it through?

bencooper - Member

Isn't it better to have a bike you can flick between obstacles, rather than having to muscle it through?

i'm a pathetic 11stone weakling, steering a 29er takes more force than steering a 26er in the same way that lifting a sandwich takes more force than lifting a bag of crisps.

i'm a pathetic 11stone weakling, steering a 29er takes more force than steering a 26er in the same way that lifting a sandwich takes more force than lifting a bag of crisps.

In the same way that a 29er rolls better than a 26er?

Both rolling resistance and steering speed are proportional to wheel radius - you trade one off for another.

Real innovation:

Something that makes more people want to ride.

Something that transcends the 'lighter, cheaper, more durable. Pick two' rule of Keith.

A tubeless system that works without you having to carry a tube and pump.

Something that helps prevent theft or increases the chances of recovery.

The rest is just bollocks.

Pointless standards and meaningless change just put people off.

The bike industry is now at the point the camera industry was pre digital:
The producs were pretty much perfect. Error was due to the user rather than the machine.

I would have expected the next big thing to be ebikes, tbh.
A worhwhile innovation that could benefit countless numbers of people.
A tipping point in the fundamental relationship between car drivers and other road users isn't that far away, this could really help to push us toward that.

Instead, we have the obviously cynical, lazy pile of toss that is 650b.

We need people who are actually prepared to take risks and innovate, rather than prey upon our inherent gullibility.

bencooper - Member

I'm being serious for once.

I don't believe you.

You're a framebuilder, you know the relationship between rake, trail, head angle and wheelsize.
I've never heard anyone say they can't get a frame built that steers quickly enough for them.

bencooper - Member

Both rolling resistance and steering speed are proportional to wheel radius - you trade one off for another.

'trade off' suggests that faster/lighter steering is a good thing.

is it?

it [i]might[/i] be if steering a 29er was hard work, but it isn't.

i've found that i need to lean a 29er a little more to make 'the same' turn, i reckon this makes it more fun.

better rolling, and more fun cornering? that's not a trade-off, that's win-win.

A tubeless system that works without you having to carry a tube and pump.

crazy idea - have you tried a tubeless repair kit and a couple of co2 cannisters?

A co2 cannister is still a pump.
Just less environmentally friendly but easier to carry.

And a repair kit is far more inconvenient than a tube. 🙂

At what point do you start counter steerering though? 😉

Aside from marketing BS, can anyone tell me where a bike of five years ago is fundamentally flawed compared with a bike today?

This

and I definitely agree that geometry is different not better.

Or were manufacturers holding back the new superior geometry all this time for a reason?

You're a framebuilder, you know the relationship between rake, trail, head angle and wheelsize.
I've never heard anyone say they can't get a frame built that steers quickly enough for them.

But how many people said "I don't think my fork steerer is stiff enough" or "I wish I had 11 cogs at the back instead of 10"?

Fine. 😀
Make one and see how many you sell.
These were quite popular:
[img] [/img]

But, as you know, you don't need a smaller wheel to get quicker steering. 🙂

My Mrs still uses non oversize bars.

We both run 9 speed 1 & 1/8th inch headtubes, and front QR's.

Amazingly, we still manage to enjoy ourselves. Weird huh?

A tubeless system that works without you having to carry a tube and pump.

Still not used my spare tube in 5 or 6 years of tubeless use.. But yeah, agreed, fair post sentiments about real progress. Not much to be had really.

I would have expected the next big thing to be ebikes, tbh.

It is in Europe, just look at the changes at Eurobike. We just don't have the infrastructure that would create a real market, seems to be the roads that put people here off rather than the effort. I think advocacy and infrastructure need more focus in the uk, less on the product and more on where or how we use it. Then we really could sell more bikes. Too much focus on performance in the bike industry and that comes from having it directed by people that do ride, mainly making toys for themselves and the racers they look up to rather what their mum or non-bike mad son would be comfortable riding.

prey upon our inherent gullibility.

Any more so than Tescos or Coca Cola or X Factor does? Gullibility or magpie tendencies that link into the performance focus of the industry.. a rider's tendency whichever side of the counter you're on. They feed each other. If none of us cared about 'better' performance, being the shredder of the group ride, having new sht etc, consumerism and egos, maybe we'd all be on rigid bikes with between 1>9 gears and big tyres still. Preaching to the converted to you though maybe.

I would have expected the next big thing to be ebikes, tbh.

I think it probably is. I think the bike industry is probably looking to new markets (blue ocean strategy, bleugh) as i think rustys not far wrong

The producs were pretty much perfect.

E bikes are becoming a bit of a night mare on my commute though. To go 20 mph+ on a push bike you have to reasonably fit - and one might assume you have spent some time on a bike getting fit and have picked up some bike handling skills/ general awareness. Not so with e bikes, it's almost weekly i almost crash into some old duffer on one doing 20+ on a shared use path, with no idea how to control it, no sense of looking ahead, and anticipating, no slowing for the blind corners. bonkers.

I would have expected the next big thing to be ebikes, tbh.

E-bikes have been the next big thing for as long as I've been doing them - 15+ years. Lots of companies have dived head-first into the market, and been badly burned.

Logic dictates that eventually they might be the next big thing - so maybe this time 😉