[Closed] Ever been a bit of bike tech released that has been, generally, liked by all?

Apart from silly ones like 'the wheel' or 'tyres' then no

I remember people moaning about:

Indexed gears
7/8/9/10/11 speed
Front and rear suspension
Alloy and carbon frames
Cantilever, u, v, disc brakes
Long/short stems
Narrow/wide/flat/riser bars
Short/long chainstays/tt
Steep/slack angles

You name it

Front loading stems. Tied in with, but more useful than Aheadsets#. This single advance has led to easily swappable stems, with better bike fit for all. When was the last time you removed the tape/grips and brake levers to swap a stem?

Compact road geometry. Will never catch on. Along with changeable stems led to a reduced number of frame sizes and reduced inventry. Thank you Mike Burrows.

#My (vintage) track bike is too small and has a conventional headset. But I switched from a 100 mm quill stem and Cinelli track bars to a quill converter 120mm Ahead stem and compact bars and the fit is now perfect. A 120 mm quill would not be anywhere near as rigid and the drop on track bars is too deep for me. That adjustability is now taken for granted.

aluminium
the whole aheadset arrangement
QRs for wheels & seatposts
hydraulic disc brakes, when they got to the point where they were reliable
suspension that works
indexed gears (although I'd argue; the neatest implementation of indexed gears doesn't involve a derailleur, derailleurs are simple and work)

I'd love to suggest
20mm maxles
150mm hubs
1.5 headtubes
but takeup wasn't universal, sadly

mrmonkfinger - Member

aluminium

V-Brakes

My mates used to moan that pads 'didn't last a full ride'

QRs for wheels & seatposts

Why do you need them?

Cotterless cranks.

Why do you need them?

SPD pedals

After all of last years injuries caused by sudden loss of drivetrain resistance, I'm loving the narrow/wide chainring and clutch mech combo.

Has anyone said anything other than good things about this?

Flex-stem? I had one when they came out and it was ace.

Heap of crap! managed to feel seasick going over some medieval ridge and furrow.

Narrow/wide chainrings (in fact I haven't heard a bad word said against XX1/X01 apart from cost)

It's SRAM...

It's SRAM...

Thick/thin ring is a good call- so far I'm convinced they do nothing less well than a standard single ring, and some things much better, and at no major price penalty. Can't see anything wrong with that.

Clutch mechs too- ok, they are heavier and more expensive, and not everyone needs them, but it's otherwise all good news.

stevied - Member

Flex-stem? I had one when they came out and it was ace.

God no. Didn't really do much when new, then when the elastomer perished- which happened more or less immediately- it stopped being faux-suspension and became a hinge between your bars and your bike. Also more than averagely painful to smash your balls into.

Another vote for the original Z1's and the other Bombers in the range but not for the Pikes. I hated mine.

V's were ace and seemed to be accepted without much fuss.

Narrow wide rings seem to have been adopted without much fuss too.

I like my lock on grips; being able to whip them off with two bolts is much easier than shoving a screwdriver under the grip and nicking your mums hairspray to get them off / make them stick again.

Saddles

Schrader valved innner tubes

the original lumicycle halogens?

Clutched mechs? Synchros cassettes, and again NW chain ring a other than cost. Definitely freewheel, and rubber wheels instead of wood or metal like the original bikes.

I find it amusing that there are some things in this thread that are on [url= http://dirt.mpora.com/featured/the-15-worst-mountain-bike-products-ever.html ]Dirt's Worst 15 Products[/url] list.