[Closed] has there ever been so much quick change of mtb standards?

It keeps the bike market very buoyant... As It's the sum of the marginal gains that make us the riding God's that we imagine we could be.

Cantis to Vs was almost overnight.

SPDs took off massively quickly.

Ditto Aheadsets, or threadless as they're now known.

142's that rare thing- a new standard that genuinely is just better than the old. And relatively easy to convert old wheels for too (if you have a maxle wheel and the manufacturer doesn't provide a 142 conversion, it's because they hate you- hate them back)

Narrow/wide isn't so much a standard as a facilitator, you'd have no widespread 1x movement without it.

Cantis to v's wasn't so much a change in standard (the brake bosses were the same) as a genuine massive performance upgrade for £20. That one I really liked, and nobody I rode with ever said they wish the old cantis were back or were late adopters.

I think it's called [i]progress[/i]. Some of it is, some of it isn't, it's just hype.

I have 4 different BB systems on my bikes (square taper, octalink, ISIS, external cups), and none are up to date!

I have decided to take the bits that work for me and reject the rest as an arms race, my weapons of choice are: full rigid, SS, grippy tyres, wideish rims, wideish bars, disc brakes.

Good point, tinybits. I suppose it was such a step change in performance though.

I remember telling customers on test rides to be careful. They'd laugh, then come back ashen faced! They really were massively better.

* but if anyone sells me a SS Trek 69er 15.5" I'll embrace the one big wheel*

There just seems to have been so many changes so quickly its mad. My headset and bb now look like coke cans, tho admittedly cooler looking than my old square taper and 1" headset 😉

Like you, I had a few years off proper mtb'ing ('08 - '13) and couldn't believe the differences.

(1) Some have crept in like wider bars and shorter stems. Gearing too; I remember duos (dual ring) cranks and 9 speed at the rear. 1x10 / 1x11 seems like a natural progression.

(2) Some solve legitimate problems such as clutch mechs for people running 1x gearing and dropper posts for not stopping at the tops of descents. Loosening cranks on square taper arms and the subsequent replacing the rounded cranks was the majority of my riding budget way back when.

(3) Some are incremental improvements on what we have. Comparing my elstomer sprung Judy XCs to modern forks makes you wonder why we bothered. Same goes for brakes, shifting, geometry. Well, most aspects of 'modern' kit.

(4) Some, like 650B wheels and tapered headsets seem, to my mind, like marketing hype.

However, if #4 gives companies the funds and interest in developing #1 - #3, I don't care. I worry a little that higher end tires might be hard to come by in 26" in a few years. Other than that, just get on with it!

😉

Yeah I forgot about the tiny stem and huge bars 😉

Tubeless?

What is the actual benefit of a tapered headset over a straight 1.5" ?

I just bought an Intense Tracer 2 frame with 1.5 headtube and decided to revive my 1,1/8 Fox float 36 forks with some new 1.5" uppers (Mojo were selling off old stock for £50!)

I got a 1.5 Thomson stem and Chris King headset for absolute peanuts as its a defunct standard and it all looks the dogs danglies. Beefy as heck 😈

But the steerer tube is thin walled all the way up rather than becoming thicker at the top so I imagine its still pretty light....and the headtube must be much less costly to create over a tapered one?

(3) Some are incremental improvements on what we have. Comparing my elstomer sprung Judy XCs to modern forks makes you wonder why we bothered.

Are your modern forks broken?!!

Its all gone mad and ive only been away a few years a never remember it moving this fast before

Blink in the 90's and you'd miss

SPD
headsets (threadless, and later 1.1/8
riser bars
suspension corrected geometry
full suspension
(followed by, linkages in various fashions, shocks that actualy worked, more travel, even more travel, more travel that actualy worked, less travel)
aluminium
Tyres bigger than 1.9"

TBH bikes these days seem pretty stagnant, a few new standards (even BB30 is getting on a bit, hardly new), but nothing revolutionary, 29ers are getting on for 10 years old, reverbs are 3 years old, gravity droppers significantly older than that, 142 and 142+ are just refinements of 135x12.

I just view 650b as like new tyres, you wouldnt rush out and buy a new bike because it came with 2.4 Maxxis HR2's, and you only had 2.35 HR's. It's like knocking 1deg off the angles ona trail bike, or lowering the BB, incrementaly better, but not life changeing.

What is the actual benefit of a tapered headset over a straight 1.5" ?

benefit to the manufacturers of carbon fork steerers and carbon head tubes because it's easier to pull a cone out of a mould than a straight tube

benefit to the manufacturers of carbon fork steerers and carbon head tubes because it's easier to pull a cone out of a mould than a straight tube

haha, wasn't expecting that
Sounds about right though - change a standard to make things much more difficult for the vast majority of frames manufactured in order to help the low volume carbon ones

TINAS' points pale in comparison to headset & BB standards

These are impossible for a shop to keep stock of and may involve a google exercise any time a bike comes in to work out WTF it needs.

Along with hub axles, many make negligible difference to the riding experience.

As for shimano chainrings!

[quote=firestarter ]When u packed in it was all 2x9 and 20mm front ends 29ers all the rage.

Pah - mine is a 3x9, QR, 26" wheels, 1 1/8" headset, long stem, flat bars, bar ends XC racer. Only 7 years old but it's all totally obsolete and I presumably can't even get replacement forks very easily.

That was bought at the point suspension had been sorted, most sus bikes worked well and discs had become standardised - quite a lot of revolution in the previous 7 years from when I first got a sus bike with discs when such things were a rarity.

ndthornton - Member

What is the actual benefit of a tapered headset over a straight 1.5" ?

Less ugly! And keeps compatability with old stems too. There's a weight benefit too- the fork isn't much lighter but the frame, headset, stem, etc all can be. Oh and you can do more clever things with a tapered steerer in a fullfat headtube like anglesets etc, conical peg in a round hole.

But mostly, less ugly.

I reckon the changes stand out more for gravity based stuff

Longer + better suspension, stronger wheels, stiffer axles, wider bars, bigger tyres, better brakes, slacker angles, dropper posts......all these things do make quite a considerable difference for both speed and enjoyment when you put everything together.

But for an xc racy bike, I reckon you could still be reasonably competitive on a top spec 15 year old machine.

My big bike gets upgraded quite often but My light weight hardtail hasn't seen any new bits for a good few years now.

But mostly, less ugly.

Pah - mine is a 3x9, QR, 26" wheels, 1 1/8" headset, long stem, flat bars, bar ends XC racer. Only 7 years old but it's all totally obsolete and I presumably can't even get replacement forks very easily.

Same here except mine is 10 years old and still has V brakes!

Oddly, this old bike seems to have huge wheel space so as I'm putting disks on it, I'm also using 650b wheels.

Im surprised no one has mentioned Fat bikes and 29+ yet

Yeah, good point that, there seems to be more conflicting standards for fatbikes than for the entire rest of the bike industry combined.

When and why did Shimano ditch Allen head chain ring bolts for Torx? That took me by surprise when I got some new slx cranks the other day.

Standards have always been changing quickly, they will never slow down either.

When and why did Shimano ditch Allen head chain ring bolts for Torx? That took me by surprise when I got some new slx cranks the other day.

Torx bolts are better.

Less chance of the ham fisted rounding them
More surface area to spread load
More torque

Because people round off allen bolts - you can put more torque through a Torx when the bolt has seized (which seems to happen with chainring bolts).

Torx

(4) Some, like 650B wheels and tapered headsets seem, to my mind, like marketing hype.

I can see benefits of both. 😳

What is the actual benefit of a tapered headset over a straight 1.5" ?

Marginally lighter than 1.5 and works will 90% of stems on the market. Lower race still has larger balls (s****) which deal with load better, and that's the end that takes a physical hammering (s**** again).

FTR, I think 20mm is still going strong - certainly in 150+mm travel, 36mm stanchion forks.

Given the choice I'd still go 20mm over 15mm too.

TINAS' points pale in comparison to headset & BB standards

These are impossible for a shop to keep stock of and may involve a google exercise any time a bike comes in to work out WTF it needs

True, but are there really that many differernt 'new' headset standards? I've had mainstream bikes since the 90's that had non-standard headset's, integrated, internal, 1.5, etc. Even the newest sizes must be getting on for 15 years old now?

BB's. Does sir want shimano or camapag taper, what shell size would sir like, what spindle length, italian or british threads (or in the 90's, USA sized). And then there was ISIS, and octalink, and octalink-DA, and those wide truvative ISIS BB's with eternal bearings. I bet more bikes now have BSA threaded BB's and 24mm HT2 cups than ever had any single variation on square taper.

Pimpmaster Jazz - Member

FTR, I think 20mm is still going strong - certainly in 150+mm travel, 36mm stanchion forks.

Given the choice I'd still go 20mm over 15mm too.

Aye, 15mm is the VHS of axles- the inferior option that everyone ends up with because of who backed it. But even Fox admit that it's not up to properly hard use... So why does it exist at all? Bawbags.