What happened to the mountain bike industry?

I couldn’t argue that any of the standards are worse, they are just so marginal that their cost is disproportionate. 0.3% (650b) resulting in new frame, fork and wheels. 0.1% (boost); new frame, fork and wheels. 0.05% tapered steerer (in some cases); new frame and fork. 15mm axle; at best adaptors, at worst; new wheel.
All in the last 2 or 3 years. It just goes on and it’s not right, and it rewards the industry players to do it!
Seriously, if in two or three years, I can’t bolt a new frame to my forks and wheels (or vice versa) I’ll chuck it in. They aren’t doing it again.

The problem is that product cycles start 2 years in advance of hitting the shops, so manufacturers are often taking a speculative guess to try and predict market trends, each trying to carve their own niche and steal market from others (it’s a static/declining market). Problem is this just leads to confused customers who hold-out to see where things settle.
I design, source and build my own bikes from frames I order direct from China – my fatbike built in 2014 is still more future-proof than the 2016 bikes in my LBS. I built my ‘plus’ bike in 2013. Thing like Boost are complete nonsense – there were enough hub standards in existence.

I bet if it was sunny & dry on the trails there wouldn’t be so many people moaning about Mountain Bikes & bigging up road bikes, i have a road bike i use in the winter for training, but it’s boring & so are a lot of Road Riders.
I always have fun on my Mtb’s 29er Full Suss, 29 Hard tail, 26′ Orange Five i buy what i like & will Ride anything as long as the missus doesn’t find out.

wrecker – Member

I couldn’t argue that any of the standards are worse, they are just so marginal that their cost is disproportionate.

Exactly. There’s nothing actually wrong with 650b as a wheelsize. Well, it diminishes choice/difference because it’s a little bit closer to 29er, but that’s all. But in use they’re fundamentally the same as 26ers . A lot of people misunderstood the objections as being basically a defence of 26 inch wheels but the actual size wasn’t important, if 650b was the common wheelsize and 26ers had come along we’d have said let’s stick with 650b.

Ironically, a lot of people think it’s a defence of the change, to say “But it’s hardly any different, how can you object?” When that’s exactly why most people objected

But it doesn’t have to be a bad standard to be pointless. You could release, oh, a 17.5mm axle tomorrow. It’d probably be stiffer than QR, and quite possibly lighter. But even if it were better, it’d be impossible for it to be sufficiently better to justify the change on merit.

My custom Ti half-fat has Boost so I can run a double chainring and 3″ tyres without having to go for a wide 100mm BB. Doesn’t seem like nonsense to me.

what-happened-to-the-mountain-bike-industry
I believe the correct answer is whiney middle aged cockb@gs happened.

Or because bike industry cockbags happened……

There’s never been a better time to be riding bikes. If I want to nail the hardest descent I know, my current bike is the one that will help me make it, not the one I was riding ten years ago. If you want to pay the Santa Cruz tax you can, but we all have a choice. We can buy into the marketed “cool” brands if we want or we can seek out the bargains that are out there. Bargains that are using the technology that it takes a huge, wealthy and innovative industry to deliver.

^^^ Most sensible post here in ages. Good words Jim!

Industries need to sell product to survive.

Industries need to sell product to survive.

True. And some products take a bit of development, retooling etc,. while others don’t.

The wheel size shenanigans have probably helped them the most. 29 was a real difference and needed new frames, wheels, wider hubs possibly etc,..
But if 29 didn’t work for you you could have just gone back to 26 so to me the 27.5 was the unnecessary development

boring & so are a lot of Road Riders.

This probably hints at the circles you move in rather than the mass of road riding cyclists.

This probably hints at the circles you move in

Are you implying he’s a track cyclist? 😉

whiney middle aged cockb@gs

I don’t know how old you are but Im guessing you’re not middle aged…..

But heres the thing, you will be one day & then the cool kids will be having a dig at you for being past it..

Rather than just having a pop why not make a little space & have a little respect for the old man whose riding his bike & having fun..?

Change for changes sake aint change – its BS..

26 & 29 make sense but 650b & boost/plus?? Come on, we weren’t born yesterday..

boring & so are a lot of Road Riders.cyclists in general.

FTFY

It’s been a big boom over the last 20 years, which has resulted in a few extra ‘standards’ but some great trail choices and an amazing array of bike/component choice.

27.5 wheels makes very good sense to me.

There has never been a better time to build a custom bike. Thanks ever changing Bike industry 8)

mrlebowski – Member

26 & 29 make sense but 650b & boost/plus?? Come on, we weren’t born yesterday..

Boost does have some legitimate applications tbh. Though o’course all the manufacturers that say it’s for wheel stiffness weren’t rushing to implement larger hub flanges or even quality wheels to achieve the same. Also, a lot of boost bikes “for extra stiffness” will still come with flexy badly built wheels. And I’m sure a lot of boost 29ers will end up with their b+ capability restricted by frame size anyway.

(aside; isn’t it ironic that what b+ would benefit from most is slightly bigger wheels? Something exactly halfway between 26 and 29 would have been close to ideal…)

27.5 wheels makes very good sense to me.

Me too. Me and several mates have timed & compared sections, and all recorded speed gains on 650B/27.5″. That means it makes sense, so is a worthwhile improvement as it makes you faster. A “change for changes’ sake” would have no tangible benefit – the wheel size does. Not everyone places a high importance on speed, but that doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be available to those that do. And at the end of the day, a manufacturer can only commit to tooling so many variations and still turn a profit, so dropping 26″ makes sense. Why risk your business security on a product you know is inferior?

It’s important to remember this is an **industry** not a hobby club. People’s livelihoods depend on it, so they have to ensure sales to make sure wages get paid. Nothing wrong with that.

andyrm – Member

Me and several mates have timed & compared sections, and all recorded speed gains on 650B/27.5″.

Did they ride absolutely equivalent 26ers and 29ers?

every ride is a race.
getting back to the trail centre carpark 3 seconds quicker is of utmost importance.
last time I saw XC race it seemed even the girls of diminutive stature found 29ers faster.

Short of building two bikes with exactly the same geometry (wheel base, travel, front and rear mechanical trail, etc) I don’t see how you can compare 26″ and 650b.

650b coincided with geometry becoming longer and slacker. Because 26″ was thrown out overnight we’ll never get a chance to see how 26″ would have performed with the new geometry.

My guess is not that much different because they’re the same **** size.

Though o’course all the manufacturers that say it’s for wheel stiffness weren’t rushing to implement larger hub flanges or even quality wheels to achieve the same

A few companies did make larger flanged hubs but you need some pretty large flanges to match what you can do with wider hub spacing, particularly on the front. Faff vs benefits aside, the wider hubs have a few benefits in one move – stiffness, clearance in a few areas, space for 13 speed .. etc.

I’d guess the problem comes from how you view the bike industry, ie from an ever expanding capitalist veiw point.

Me? i personally couldn’t give 2 hoots about the industries profit margins, it looks all fine and dandy from where I’m standing, there’s never been a better time were we’ve had more choice when buying parts or bikes. Something there for everyone at all levels. 🙂

And lets face it, once you go by a certain price point on all forms of cycling, the performance/bang for buck ratio gets extremely incremental.

jameso – Member

A few companies did make larger flanged hubs but you need some pretty large flanges to match what you can do with wider hub spacing, particularly on the front.

Yah, tbh it’s the “Fitting bendy Boost wheels” that was my main thing there,what I’m mainly getting at is there’s lots of ways to make wheels stiffer. So I’m pretty skeptical about companies that didn’t bother making stiff wheels in the past, who now claim it as a benefit. And perhaps unfairly but I’m assuming that most boost OE wheels will still not be very stiff, and the ones that are, would have been fine without boost.

That’s not very well explained is it. Bottom line, bendy wheels are mostly a build issue not a hub width issue.

Ironically, a lot of people think it’s a defence of the change, to say “But it’s hardly any different, how can you object?” When that’s exactly why most people objected

Does anyone remember the move from 27″ in 700c in roadieland? Was there a lot of hoo-ha?

I was a mechanic a several years after, but wasn’t around for the big switch.

I seem to remember a rather comprehensive test done between 26, 27.5 and 29 bikes from the same manufacturers using good riders over a pretty lengthy mixed terrain course. It showed the 29 fastest uphill, the 26 fastest downhill, and the 27.5 fastest at nothing. The 27.5 was also slowest over the whole circuit.
Marketing for the sake of it.
I’ve not owned a 29 but can see the point of them. As for not being able to test newer slacker geometry on 26 bikes, my Stanton Slackline, 26, and brand new, is proof that that statement is rubbish.

On a totally different note if the t**t that cut my wife up at Llandegla on Sunday is reading this you are a total d***head.
Thanks

As for not being able to test newer slacker geometry on 26 bikes, my Stanton Slackline, 26, and brand new, is proof that that statement is rubbish.

Sorry, of course, you’re right. Having a single example of a 26″ hardtail frame built this year can be extrapolated to all models from all brands across the entire industry.

Feel free to post the results of your double blind testing anytime.

No worries, my 5 year old 26 Ibis Mojo HD is just the same………
Just commenting that you can still get the new “latest” geometry on new 26″ bikes, just a shame more companies aren’t still offering them…

I seem to remember a rather comprehensive test done between 26, 27.5 and 29 bikes from the same manufacturers using good riders over a pretty lengthy mixed terrain course. It showed the 29 fastest uphill, the 26 fastest downhill, and the 27.5 fastest at nothing. The 27.5 was also slowest over the whole circuit.
Marketing for the sake of it.

Was that the article that also claimed 73% of statistics are misleading? 😛

Here it is, or part 2 anyway. It’s MBTR stuff, but interesting at least.

You know that tandems have been using “boost” technology for years? 148 mmm? Pah! Try 160 mm for a dishless wheel. I’m skeptical of what looks like a half-measure to me.

Same issues about adopting new standards. Wider is better, for some applications, but I’m running a dished Hope 135mm as a single speed and it has been flawless, as was the previous dishless SS-specific wheel, btw.

Mrlebowski….43 this time round.The last 12 years of which spent running lbs workshops….and dealt with a lot of whiney middleaged cockb@gs.

I reckon you’re in the wrong line of work Rorschach..

Hmmm…. Just caught up on this thread and re read my last (I think) post on it in telly to mikewsmith:

Poopscoop – Member
mikewsmith – Member

Poopscoop – Member
After reading all this and posting, or not, has a single person changed their opinion?
Most of what I’ve read is moaning, extrapolation or a basic misunderstanding of simple things like inflation or exchange rates.
The BS on you can’t get this or that when wait a minute you can or the melodrama of I can’t get this I must bin my bike the evil bike industry is evil stuff.
So no I hold firm that things are going well in the world of mountain bikes, the range and choice is fantastic
Ho-hum. Kind of have to reply as you quoted my post.
Moaning? From me, perhaps, if it contrasts from your viewpoint it seems? A heavy amount of cynicism from me however? Most definitely guilty there. I’ve seen enough of this amazing world to know when change for changes sake is being applied rather than change for the better.
That said, I hope I never become so world weary as to attempt to belittle any contrasting viewpoint to my own. There in lies true cynicism.
Hmmm.. perhaps I’m not as cynical as I thought afterall?
Wont comment on my or others “basic misunderstanding of simple things” such as exchange rates or inflation. I don’t profess to be an internet expert in such matters or even bother attempting to be via a bit of googling and such. In my previous posts I didn’t bring them up to support my empathy with the OP’s opinions anyway. Not sure he did either but without a long reread I’m really not sure?
Ah, not being sure… A wonderful thing! The self admission that not every opinion other than my own is inherently “BS”. Yep, I’m definitely feeling less cynical by the minute.
You mention “melodrama”, “binning bikes” and an “evil industry”.
Cant say I feel any melodrama at all and its a shame you sense that from a forum post about the cycle industry. Im passionate about bikes, arent we all, not melodramatic about them however? Can’t say I see the industry as evil either. Misguided on occasion, sure, not evil though.
Anyway, not meaning go into sarcasm overload but to be honest mike when you time after time belittle others opinions simply because you don’t agree with them, well…as you said in a previous case about wheel sizes I think, “it becomes dull”.
Back to the real world.
Zero animosity meant in this post. We all/both love bikes and if I ever met you out on a trail one day id shake hands and be glad to meet a fellow STWer whilst out.
Then compare wheel sizes.

To be honest I think I came across as a bit of a judgmental/ arrogant twonk in that reply. Slightly redeemed at the end.

That said, I don’t like coming across that way in real life or online.

So apologies mikewsmith if it did indeed come across like that.

Happy riding bud. 🙂

I reckon you’re in the wrong line of work Rorschach..

+1.
I think we should be told which workshop so that we can avoid it.
I’m sure he’d be happier changing inner tubes for commuters for £20 a pop.

Excellent ramble Chad – it’s the kind of thing I frequently produce (see below LOL)!

I recently bought a road bike – it think it’s great, but I like my mountain bikes and riding off-road more! We are surrounded with TV advertising/brain-washing (if it didn’t work, they wouldn’t spend £billions on it!) and TV is stuffed full of road cycling whilst MTB is marginalised and hard to find on mainstream TV. The Olympics was a ****-up as far as MTB was concerned, because TV coverage was minimal and the xc course was more like a bodged-up cyclocross field than the natural & beautiful forests that inspire us all to ride mtb.

29ers/27.5

I think the maufacturers had a genuine dilemma over 29ers. I think they said to themselves:

“We can’t so easily make longer travel 29ers, and in any case they are not ideal for the sub 5′ 9″ guys and most women (half our potential market)….We don’t want to be producing 2 separate categories of frames, wheels, forks, tyres, so (for the mass market) we’ll plump for the middle ground and big it up to everyone!”

I think you’re right about the ‘quicksand’ (note – David Bowie Reference) of standards. Everyone is terrified that they’ll spend a fortune and then the bike they bought will be obsolete with near-zero second hand value 18 months later. (To be fair – roadies are going disc at the moment so the same thing is happening – I recently bought alloy with rim brakes and I’m happy). I think the brooess post makes a good point about ordinary wages and spiralling debt – I, for one, am constantly thinking about how to keep the cost of my biking under control cos Rocketdog is spot-on about MTB trashing your equipment much faster than road biking.

Personally I’ve got two Salsa 29ers and a Defy roadbike. My mtbs are 2010 and 2012 vintage and to be honest (with the exception of a bit of wider wheel rim/tyre experimentation – see Cotic Solaris 2 development history on their website) I see no good reason to change either of my bikes anytime soon. I could easily imagine riding the same 2 bikes in 5 year’s time: for a past serial bike-swapper like me, that’s Radical!)

This is NOT a message of despair for bike manufacturers. They just need to change their focus from marketing disposable flashy products (mis-allocation of resources) to a genuine long-term customer service ethos. As a customer I don’t need incompatibility, I don’t need £300 cassettes, £150 mechs, and £70 chains (they are toast in months anyway) – I don’t need an expensive (and rubbish) new BB standard that will save then a couple of quid per frame manufactured!They sould think about things from their customers point of view for a change! This may seem like a message of despair for the bike manufactures, but it’s not. They can sell me drive-chain bits, tyres, and brake spares in abundance – but they shouldn’t expect me to put everying in the dustbin and buy a whole new setup every 2 years. If they come up with a really fantastic new frame that’s a genuine & significant improvement on what I’ve got – then I’m listening.

What I’m talking about!
I don’t think there’s a proper 1 x 10-speed cassette and mech from Shimano yet. There’s now a massive industry in bodge-ups. How the hell did that happen, when bikers have been begging & crying out for it for the last 2 years????

“We can’t so easily make longer travel 29ers, and in any case they are not ideal for the sub 5′ 9″ guys and most women (half our potential market)….We don’t want to be producing 2 separate categories of frames, wheels, forks, tyres, so (for the mass market) we’ll plump for the middle ground and big it up to everyone!”

Another of the biggest myths in mtb… half of those I know on 29r’s are sub 5’9. I’m that height and mine feels nice and compact. The wheel size is a tiny part of the bike, they have got a lot better at 29r as thing have gone on.

Yeah – but that’s the story they told us.

It’s been done to death already but (a) you’re hardly the market if you’re not buying new bikes, (b) you will still be able to buy bits to keep your bikes running (c) progress is progress. There’s no reason everyone else should be constrained to the “standards” adopted at the exact point in time you bought your bikes, e.g. do your bikes have 1″ steerers, rigid forks, sub 2″ tyres and V-brakes?

TimCotic – Member

I don’t think there’s a proper 1 x 10-speed cassette and mech from Shimano yet. There’s now a massive industry in bodge-ups. How the hell did that happen, when bikers have been begging & crying out for it for the last 2 years????

Exactly the same reason there was never an XT 11-36 9 speed cassette- they don’t want to sell you a new 10 speed cassette, they want to sell you a whole 11 speed drivetrain. ‘Twas ever thus, new stuff often doesn’t have enough genuine advantages to recommend it but you can manufacture differences. Not just the bike industry that does this of course, it’s a fairly standard push tactic