"improved" products that make **** all difference

Stuff that’s become standard when that before it was perfectly fine.

My list:

15mm
tapered steerers
bolt through rear axle

What have I missed?

At least some crap seems to have died out – eg 35mm bars

I’d love to agree with you. But a good carbon dirty road bike should have all those features.

However, my Dads Fatty has non of those and works great.

non-QR front dropouts seem a good idea generally IMO and especially with discs, regardless of which way the slots point. I suppose you could extend that to rears but it’s a bit less of an issue to me at least.

15mm vs 20, though – pointless tinkering

tapered steerers don’t seem to me to make much difference but, meh

Disc brakes .
Threadless headsets .
Tubeless .

Cranks, chains and the like, there was sod all wrong with the dandy horse.

I like bolt through rear axles, belt and braces maybe but definitely peace of mind for me.

Agree with 15mm & 20mm axles, the industry needs to all fall into line and have one or the other!

Sort of agree with the tapered steerer thing but for different reasons, a straight steerer into a 44mm headtube gives so many more options re. external or internal cups, stack height, anglesets etc etc….a tapered steerer takes up too much room in the headtube and limits your options in my opinion.

brant – Member

I’d love to agree with you. But a good carbon dirty road bike should have all those features. I design bikes for a living so I can’t diss this stuff

FTFY, are you having a laugh?

What benefits are there to bolt through on a road bike that outweigh the compatability issues? (OK I can just about see tapered steerers having some benefit)

No need AT ALL for bolt through with disc brakes – there is a simple way around it that barely anyone adopted.

As for disc brakes and aheadsets, you forgot suspension clipless pedals and pneumatic tyres 😛

External bbs

External bbs

… on mountain bikes. The external BB’s on my road bikes last for an absolute age. This has to be down to the fact that my winter bike has full length guards and the BB is protected from the wet stuff. My summer bike does dry rides only. My mountain bike is a completely different kettle of fish. If I have clocked 800 miles on it in the last four years then I would be surprised however it is on it’s 3rd BB. All Shimano.

After changing fsa bbs about every 3/4 months on my cx I aquired an old, very neat, Hope titanium sqr taper bb and a s/h pair of Middleburn cranks – now costs £10 to replace the bearings rather than £60 plus and they have been changed once in 12 months and then only because I was bored and not that they really needed changing.

As for disc brakes and aheadsets, you forgot suspension clipless pedals and pneumatic tyres

No need AT ALL for bolt through with disc brakes – there is a simple way around it that barely anyone adopted

Suit yourself al – Not sure what you mean. I know there’s ways of avoiding the resultant force from pushing the wheel out directly but I ASSUME that the underlying fault that seemed to involve QRs magically undoing due to braking forces will still happen if the slots point forwards and that’s something I’ll happily avoid. (I know it’s probably dependent on the brand, to an extent at least, but it’s also something that needs checking every now & then and I’m lazy and forgetful so I’m out)
Whether there are any real benefits from a stiffness pov, I’ve no real idea (I have a shiver sc on an old bike that’s supposedly prone to swivelling the wheel through 360 degrees as if it was in the exorcist but I liked it apart from the weight)

If I have clocked 800 miles on it in the last four years then I would be surprised however it is on it’s 3rd BB.

Therein could lie your problem, water getting down the seat post tube, even a few drops every now and then will lead to dampness sitting in the bb shell to fester away at your bearings as the mtb sits unloved for weeks at a time.

Use it or lose it scenario i bet.

What improved products piss me off?…..

All washing powders, home cleaners, hair products etc…etc…in fact the entire **** chemical industry of enhanced house and personal hygiene product lines.

herein could lie your problem, water getting down the seat post tube,

It’s a 2004 spesh enduro. If water does get down the seat tube its going to be dripping on the shock.

Internal cable routing.
Press fit BB,s
Bb30
Integrated headsets
Straight pull spokes (all proprietary spokes).
Most advancements are actually bi-products of making things easier and therefore cheaper to mass produce.

tapered steerers

Naaa, we’re riding around on forks that are stiffer than the original pikes (with the almost solid steerer) but weigh less than their contemporary manitou minutes (that flexed enough to wear the steerer against the inside of the headtube).

Pressfit BBs – a marketing solution to a cost of manufacturing problem

Tubeless.

Never suffered from pinch flats/punctures, in terms of performance not noticed any difference, in my case they’re a solution to a problem that never existed.

No need AT ALL for bolt through with disc brakes – there is a simple way around it that barely anyone adopted

Forward angled dropouts? Which I think first appeared on the On-One Carbon forks I designed about a zillion years ago.
Maybe, don’t think so much of experts like you, think of people who struggle with things more. Bolt through is so much more secure for everyone.

This years colours. Last years colours were perfectly adequate.

Tubeless.

Never suffered from pinch flats/punctures, in terms of performance not noticed any difference, in my case they’re a solution to a problem that never existed.

dirtydog wins the thread 😀

The rear end of my last non maxel FS flexed noticeably, the two maxel rear FS that have followed have been much better. How is that not an improvement?

Because having a maxle wasn’t the only difference so you’re confusing coincidence with causation.

Completely agree with roscharch many of the improvements were aimed at reducing cost of manufacture – threadless steerer’s, internal headsets, cartridge BBs, press fit BBs all make a bike quicker and cheaper to build.

Because having a maxle wasn’t the only difference so you’re confusing coincidence with causation.

The first maxel bike was a bolt through version of the qr bike. Thanks for trying to tell me what I know though.

threadless reduced weight and made adjustment/servicing easier

dirtydog wins the thread

Knew it would be controversial, not much in the way of backlash yet.

Must admit that I struggle to see the point of tubeless or at least justify the cost to change from my current set up.

650b

After many years using Halo Hex, i’ve just invested in a Hope bolt in rear hub, QRs are just so antiquated on a MTB.

My list is an amalgamation of many above

Tapered steerers
15mm front bolt through
Rear bolt through
Internal routing
Any BB that doesn’t screw into the frame
Any headset that isn’t external to the frame
Bigger crank axles than ht2
Bigger bars than 25.4
650b
Probably 29ers

All of it is nonsense and a waste of time and money. The majority of riders can’t tell the difference and without fail they have all made life more difficult for the consumer.

threadless reduced weight and made adjustment/servicing easier

how is removing a stem and moving a limited number of spacers around easier than undoing one allen bolt and raising a quill stem as far as you need it?
Any advantages (eg servicing) are secondary to the real reason they were introduced.

The first maxel bike was a bolt through version of the qr bike

And the second? My Alpine is the only maxle rear Ive had in 20 years of almost exclusive FS ownership and the only bike that was more flexible was a Trek Y bike from IIRC 1996.

That’s not the Maxle on your Alpine but the long swing arm held in place by just a single pivot exhibiting the well known flex characteristics of Orange’s design.

Personally not a problem, the motorcycle industry went through the whole ‘stiffer the better’ phase a while ago and found the bikes to be harsh, jittery and difficult to ride…they now engineer a certain amount of flex into the chassis as they realise the suspension can’t deal with everything, particularly not loads coming at the forks when they’re not in the optimum vertical position.

I don’t know what came first but 15mm is a downgrade from 20mm.

Bolt-through rear axles, depends on the bike, nothing stopping a company making a stiff QR reared bike but in theory it’s a weight reduction, for equivalent stiffness. In practice, most bikes seem to be designed so they’re fine with QR rears, then have bolt-through as an option for people who’re too #enduro for QR.

If your QR rear end is too flexy it’s because the bike was made that way, not the QR. And stiffer isn’t necesarily better. And honetly I think for most riders, a sticker that says “STIFFER” will make just as much difference to the ride

And honetly I think for most riders, a sticker that says “STIFFY” will make just as much difference to the ride

😯

Northwind – Member
I don’t know what came first but 15mm is a downgrade from 20mm.

Bolt-through rear axles, depends on the bike, nothing stopping a company making a stiff QR reared bike but in theory it’s a weight reduction, for equivalent stiffness. In practice, most bikes seem to be designed so they’re fine with QR rears, then have bolt-through as an option for people who’re too #enduro for QR.

If your QR rear end is too flexy it’s because the bike was made that way, not the QR. And stiffer isn’t necesarily better. And honetly I think for most riders, a sticker that says “STIFFER” will make just as much difference to the ride

I dunno – if a through axle is a good ideal for forks, then it’s a good idea for the rear of the bike too – they’re more or less the same structure. The way 142 locates the wheel in the dropout is nice too – won’t change your life, but a nice fringe benefit.

I’m wondering how much of the new generation of light 160 forks – Pike being a pound lighter than a lyrik, for example – is down to tapered steerers.

And the second?

29″ version of the others.

Were moving all our bikes to tubeless as default rather than tubed (currently the lowest end are tubed) because it’s so much less hassle than fitting tubes irrespective of any other benefits.

I disagree with the points about bolt-thru axles not being an improvement. Someone mentioned earlier that any perceived benefits are down to other frame changes, rather than the bolt-thru system.
While I see where you’re coming from, if you take a bike that has the option to go between a qr and a 142×12 axle, the difference is definitely noticeable.
Take for example my old asr-5. I rode it for ages with a QR thinking it was absolutely fine, and it was. However, I made the switch to 142×12 (same frame, same wheel, just changed the dropouts & axle) and it completely transformed the bike, making it even awesome-er.

Aside from the stiffness benefit, it’s just so much bloody easier than faffing about with fiddly qr skewers.

Lots of the ‘new’ and ‘improved’ clothing.

honourablegeorge – Member

The way 142 locates the wheel in the dropout is nice too – won’t change your life, but a nice fringe benefit.

142 is an honest to god upgrade on 135×12. But only really regains what 135×12 lost over QR. So it’s a bit horses for courses. It’s one of those awkward things where if they’d got it right first time it’d be great but instead we’ve gone clumsily into a flawed standard which had drawbacks obvious the first time you used it, but waited years to change it, then just as soon as it got some traction made it obsolete with the part it should have been in the first place. Because the bike industry (manufacturers and shoppers) don’t actually like standards at all, both prefer novelty and shiny new things.