[Closed] Shimano 2011 embargo

Oh ? Well that's OK then, snouts in the trough everyone! I shall have to accept that critical mantle for myself...

The lone noble warrior valiantly fighting for truth and justice in the face of vile corruption eh?

I have to almost admire your staggering pompousness. 😆

[i]One or two, but they're embargoed until the mag is out ;o) [/i]

Well that's no fun, I was looking forward to reading Mark's response on facebook after you posted some.

I have to almost admire your staggering pompousness

it was supposed to be funny 🙂

I've never seen/heard ST (or any any mountain bike magazine for that matter)make a claim that they "Hold up to scrutiny" anything

so those group tests just go to the highest bidder ? Surely that [b]is[/b] a libellous allegation ?

Simon, you are starting to make yourself look a bit ridiculous now.
And I'm not going to rise to the libelous nonsense.

Day after day,
Alone on a hill,
The man with the foolish grin is keeping perfectly still
But nobody wants to know him,
They can see that he's just a fool,
And he never gives an answer,

But the fool on the hill,
Sees the sun going down,
And the eyes in his head,
See the world spinning 'round.

Well on the way,
Head in a cloud,
The man of a thousand voices talking perfectly loud
But nobody ever hear him,
or the sound he appears to make,
and he never seems to notice,

But the fool on the hill,
Sees the sun going down,
And the eyes in his head,
See the world spinning 'round.

And nobody seems to like him,
they can tell what he wants to do,
and he never shows his feelings,

But the fool on the hill,
Sees the sun going down,
And the eyes in his head,
See the world spinning 'round.

Ooh, ooh,
Round and round and round.

And he never listens to them,
He knows that they're the fools
They don't like him,

The fool on the hill
Sees the sun going down,
And the eyes in his head,
See the world spinning 'round.

Ooh,
Round and round and round

Simon, you are starting to make yourself look a bit ridiculous now.

so what's new ? This isn't a popularity contest...

I don't think it kind to suggest that the mag doesn't hold anything up to scrutiny

The fool on the hill

at least I'd be on a hill :o)

so those group tests just go to the highest bidder ?

Most likely, yes!

I haven't read this thread.

the fool on the hill

a fitting epitaph for when someone puts Simon out of his misery

volunteers? 😀

a fitting epitaph for when someone puts Simon out of his misery

when the time comes it'll be a kindness 🙂

volunteers?

we've had internet bullies, now the internet kill ?

No,let's all sit back,not reply,and watch the Uber-troll vanish up his own backside,arguing furiously with himself all the way.
Ian

and watch the Uber-troll vanish up his own backside

isn't it a cheap shot to accuse someone with a legitimate concern of trolling ? Such action is an attempt to circumvent discussion by claiming there is no case to answer.

They can ban you, based on a self-determined ruleset. Therefore the freedom of speech is granted within confined boundaries, as determined by the owners.

this interests me because ST provide and administer the forum in compliance with their legal responsibilities and the interests of good taste (at least notionally) - but the value inherent in the forum comes from the bulk of its contributors - who far outnumber the ST team, and provide most of the content. Thus I would suggest that the forum 'belongs' to all of us, not least because we hold the copyright to our posts

[i]I don't think it kind to suggest that the mag doesn't hold anything up to scrutiny[/i]

Most of the time it doesn't, and it doesn't try to. I'm becoming increasingly unclear what magazine you're reading. In common with all other magazines of roughly the same ilk (of which there are hundreds) it reports what it is told by PR and marketing people, takes shiney pictures of gadgets, garmets and devices, prints some blurb about them, tests things in a rather vague and unscientific, but reasonably useful and amusing sort of way and attempts to compare them, in a way which usually involves stating that they're all actually for different things and it isn't fair to compare them, or which comes to the conclusion that they're all quite good and you should make up your own mind. You will never read any of the following articles:

- "2010 Shimano proven to be better than 2010 SRAM"
- "Bike pricing cartel exposed"
- "There is no such thing as "slope-style" - it's marketing bullshit"
- "QR's and disc brakes are a deadly combination - our lab tests reveal"
- "Bike manufacturers fail to pass on falling aluminium price to consumers"
- "People should spend less on bikes and just have fun"
- "Revealed - the child slavery at the heart of Taiwan's bike industry"

etc etc (no sugestion that there is a grain of truth in any of these should be implied). You just won't. You'll read endlessly about how everything keeps getting better and better so you should buy it, that maybe, just maybe, this one isn't as good as it should be, that they had a pre-production sample and the product has been improved for 2010 etc. That they had a nice ride, that such-and-such a place is well worth a visit, that some chap at CyB has created a really good new trail.

That's just how it works. Everyone except you knows that, and no-one except you greatly cares. I know I'm not reading hard-hitting investigative journalism, I'm fully aware I'm reading a trade mag mostly filled with PR and fluff. It's reasonably entertaining, and provides a certain amount of information. But "scrutiny" is simply not the game.

It is (as Mark has pointed out repeatedly) part of the bike industry. It does not have the relationship to the bike industry that we expect Private Eye to have to government. It doesn't have a libel defence fund (I shouldn't think), it doesn't have the business model to support investigations or the production of articles containing serious analysis of independently-collected data. It just isn't like that at all.

It is however a [i]good magazine[/i] run by perfectly decent people. You're seeking to hold it to a standard that it doesn't purport to reach. If you feel it is important that someone should "take up the mantle" of critiquing the bike industry from the outside then you're probably right, it might well be healthy. If you did it well, we'd all buy less stuff, possibly have more fun, spend less money, worry less about a whole lot of things. The "industry" as we understand it might well contract however, and your efforts would not net you a living. You'd not be producing a glossy magazine and a popular website, you'd have a small blog, which would cost you money. You could do it, of course. But don't expect someone who's decided to do something else, from which they can make money and have fun, to be doing what you could do but aren't.

Don't bother selectively quoting bits of this in italics with tediously provocative non-sequiturs about how this is like slavery/cannibalism/pederasty incidentally. I'm almost certainly not going to rise to it. 😀

Everyone except you knows that, and no-one except you greatly cares.

wot, just me ? I don't think I'm that special.

If you feel it is important that someone should "take up the mantle" of critiquing the bike industry from the outside then you're probably right, it might well be healthy. If you did it well, we'd all buy less stuff, possibly have more fun, spend less money, worry less about a whole lot of things.

that sounds wonderful. Someone should definitely do it.

Don't bother selectively quoting bits of this in italics

I hope you're not trying to censor me ? It's not a personal thing, and it doesn't have to be you replying. The whole point of inserting quotes is to show which bit is being responded to, and without you'd have to guess.

TimBle - Member

FWIW, if the 2011 XTR looks anything like the pics, I'd buy it.
But I certainly won't be dropping cash on any 2010 XTR in a hurry now I know there's juicy new toys coming out.

Indeed. I've been mulling over the whole 2x10 thing since seeing the XX reviews and realising that I can't honestly remember the last time I actually used the big ring. And yeah I think it looks nice (better than the current stuff for sure)

I was also mulling over getting some XTR stuff again too and was talking to Dipper/Gravity Sports about it (turns out that the prices are reduced at the moment - wonder why that could be, eh?). So no I'll not be buying anything new in a hurry.

Say, don't suppose that might be why Shimano wanted an embargo in the first place would it?

when people contradict me I think I'm onto something, when they agree, I wonder if I've made a mistake!

I've been mulling over the whole 2x10 thing since seeing the XX reviews and realising that I can't honestly remember the last time I actually used the big ring

OK, but, as far as I can make out, the issue of 10 speeds and that of running just 2 rings are unconnected. The extra sprocket just gives fractionally closer ratios but the same gearing spread, and unless you are racing the exact cadence isn't critical

Or even that with 10 speeds you might only [i]need[/i] 2 rings? But that would be connected though...

[i]I hope you're not trying to censor me ?[/i]

You can't help yourself, can you? You quote me, selectively and misleadingly with a lazy allegation that I'm trying to censor you rather than helping you to avoid wasting your time. Truly, you are the master of the endless argument. 😀

[i]OK, but, as far as I can make out, the issue of 10 speeds and that of running just 2 rings are unconnected.[/i]

Don't start that probing journalistic website just yet ;o)

Dave - Premier Member

OK, but, as far as I can make out, the issue of 10 speeds and that of running just 2 rings are unconnected.

Don't start that probing journalistic website just yet ;o)

LOL.

I have no interest whatever in new groupsets - I'm running a square taper chainset & BB that cost me £33 complete when new

Or even that with 10 speeds you might only need 2 rings?

[b]need[/b] is a hard call, but assuming you decide you want multiple gears, surely what matters is the [b]range[/b] of ratios available, not how close they are together? Adding more sprockets within the same 11-32 span (or whatever) doesn't allow you to keep pedalling in more situations, it only lets you get closer to your ideal cadence - of there is such a thing - within that range, whereas adding (or using) a third ring gives you a wider gear range, and losing that ring takes range away

Truly, you are the master of the endless argument.

as far as I can make out, the issue of 10 speeds and that of running just 2 rings are unconnected. The extra sprocket just gives fractionally closer ratios but the same gearing spread

okay I'll rephrase that: With 10 speeds [i]I[/i] might only need 2 rings. I can see the advantage of that.

(edit: aracer: I really couldn't be arsed getting in to all that but then I've actually read the reviews. I even checked t'weenies to see the spreads too...)

It does make you look rather silly attempting to argue about something you're not actually sufficiently interested in to find out about!

I did ask about it, but no one replied and you're right, I didn't care enough to find out as I have no intention of buying new parts for a negligable improvement. And I don't know what the "XX" is. What is the the range available - or is it a secret too ? Am I right in thinking the chain will have to be even narrower ? How does this affect wear rate ?

According to the above,you have no legitimate interest.

My interest was in censorship, not hardware

Just out of curiosity,do you,or have you ever,read the mag?

I have a subscription and read the opinion pieces, but not the reviews.

I'm not sure what you lot are arguing about but I think the new 'XX' 'revolution' is mainly marketing guff. Alot of of cock if you ask me.

Oooo instead of running 1x9 you can run 1x10. Wow! Or...you can do away with the third/big ring if you run 2x10 and prentend its making up for the missing 7 gears...wow!

Thanks SRAM, what else will you dressup for 2011? Downtube mountain bike shifters for 'the racer in you'.

How did we cope with the 8speed system? Wow, it must have been really really hard.

And I don't know what the "XX" is.

and cant be arsed to google to find out either. BTW XX = 2x10. Did you see what they did there, cunning, eh?

and cant be arsed to google to find out either. BTW XX = 2x10. Did you see what they did there, cunning, eh?

thanks for the tip 🙂

[b]11-36T[/b] oooh, 2 whole teeth more eh ?

Is this STILL going on? It'll be another lukewarm curry for the grumpy one at this rate!

I remember when I got my new Remedy, and was excitedly showing 2 roadies at work the cool features, like 20mm maxle, full floating shock, floodgate, abp etc....
But no, they weren't interested, they were much more excited about the new 11 speed setups for their road bikes, and how it would *yawn* "really improve the granularity" and give major improvements to *yawn* cadence control etc......

You change terrain a lot quicker on a MTB, so unless you're racing surely 3 rings is more user friendly than going sequentially through lots of gears?

My point was that I hardly use the big ring any more, with 2x10 it might eliminate the need for it all together (for me I mean).

And 1 extra gear to sequence through?, I think even I can handle that...

okay I'll rephrase that: With 10 speeds I might only need 2 rings. I can see the advantage of that.

no, still irrelevant, as you could have an 11-36 span on a nine speed cassette, with no need for a) narrower chain b) new shifter, though you might still need a longer cage mech

What I'll admit I did miss was that it's not just a matter of losing the outer ring, as the 2nd ring can be an intermediate size to allow more spread using less overlap between the rings, although looking at the [url= http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/sram-unveil-new-xx-mountain-bike-groupset-21756/ ]SRAM[/url] it seems they've made both inner rings bigger, losing low range.

It'll be another lukewarm curry for the grumpy one at this rate!

no, now we're on the dubious benefits of the new hardware rather than editorial policy

regardless, I won't be able to afford it if I see it now, tomorrow or in a year! Back to trawling for cheap parts ...

no, still irrelevant, as you could have an 11-36 span on a nine speed cassette

now we're on the dubious benefits of the new hardware

trawling for cheap parts ...

Well you could, but that would certainly result in an awkward enough gap that I'd notice even if you're too insensitive.

if you split the 36:11 (3.27) range into 8 equal ratios you get a step of 1.16, so (with slight rounding) 11, 13, 15, 17, 20, 23, 27, 31, 36, though you might choose to make the 31 a 32 to even out the number of teeth added.

Which you're arguing about despite having no interest in?

no interest in [b]buying[/b] 🙂