Just what the world needs...another fu^ken standard

[bear the bear]

From Cyclingnews.com

FSA also showed off their latest range of 2x9 mountain bike cranks which use a proprietary ‘386’ spider configuration (three bolts, 86mm bolt circle diameter) instead of the previous version’s 94m pattern. According to FSA, this allows for smaller and more versatile inner ring sizes than before and the new cranks will be fitted with 27/40T or 27/42T sizes.

more 2x9 = good!
another standard = bad!

 

[shane_2Kona]

I think you just need to relax a bit.

 

[Adamski]

I don't see what the problem is with new standards when the older stuff is still around to satisfy people like you. The most popular and accepted of the newly introduced standards tend to hang around and then dominate the market. I expect this of the new 15mm front axles getting rid of QR.

FSA is also bringing in the 30mm spindle/BB size if you want a little more standard pain

 

[Reubs]

Yeah, 1.5" headsets were supposed to be the next "standard". They've hardly set the mountain bike world on fire now have they. If you look at the number of bikes with 1.5 verses 1 1/8 its hardly become a standard.

likewise:
* 29er wheels (lame!)
* integrated headsets (too many sizes)
* 2:1 ratio shocks (good idea but only foes seems to care...)
* UST tubeless (I like tubes! but would probably go for stan's instead)

I think time will add this new crank to my list.

 

[powley]

* UST tubeless (I like tubes! but would probably go for stan's instead)

since when is UST a standard?

 

[Ivan]

since when is UST a standard?

UST: Universal Standard for Tubeless

A UST rim profile shows specific humps to fix securely UST compatible tyre or any other tube type tyre.

10 Char..........

 

[Christo]

* 29er wheels (lame!)

I beg to differ on that point. IMO 29ers are the future of MTB.

 

[shane_2Kona]

Powley you just got burned.

 

[mushroom]

Think of it this way- every 'standard' is just someone else's compromise forced upon you.

I think it is great that there are lots of options available regarding wheel size, axle size, etc. Ideally you'd have every part custom sized to suit your purpose, obviously this would be inconvenient, expensive and infeasible.

The only bad standards are proprietary standards designed to force you to buy other products by that manufacturer. As Adamski said, popular innovations become the standards- often for a good reason. Having the choice is good!

 

[powley]

Powley you just got burned.

to me it doesnt seem to much of a hassle compaired to other standards.

I mean there the same size, the can be used on a non-UST rim (tubeless or not). hell you can even use non-UST tyres on UST rims (with or without tubes) and on non-UST rims and make them tubeless!!!

 

[bear the bear]

I should probably added some clarity to my little dummy spit at reading that article yesterday.....
I am a firm believer in 2x9 for a large number of mtb applications xc, marathon, and some longer endurance races. I also understand why FSA are using 86bcd ( an obsolete standard, last seen in the early 80's on campy super record!) to overcome a minimum inner ring size of 29t for 94bcd.
What I don't get is the use of a 3 arm chainring wtf? The only other manufacturer that uses anything like this is middleburn, and it is acknowledged that this setup "can be" flex for larger/ stronger riders. I can see problems with the design, and won't be adopted by other manufacturers.

 

[shane_2Kona]

to me it doesnt seem to much of a hassle compaired to other standards.

I mean there the same size, the can be used on a non-UST rim (tubeless or not). hell you can even use non-UST tyres on UST rims (with or without tubes) and on non-UST rims and make them tubeless!!!

Yeh i agree, but it was just funny.

 

[howie_two4]

* integrated headsets (too many sizes)

Say what ?

 

[bear the bear]

* integrated headsets (too many sizes)

I kinda understand that....

• press fit
• drop in
• 36/45 bearings
• 45/45 bearings
• 48 v 50 headtube dia

 

[kill_switch]

I beg to differ on that point. IMO 29ers are the future of MTB.

I beg to differ. Bring on the 27.5/650B

 

[ozzybmx]

i run 2 x 9 .... its a personal preference . I only used the 3 ring when on the road .... or ecsaping from charging cows/dogs

Industry change is not taken lightly , they dont make a change unless there is a market for it.

So dont knock it , just accept and it might fail .... it might be the next big thing.

Do what you want to do, and all will be good .

(its not often i get philosophical so enjoy the calm)

EDIT: i usually come on here and get ANGRY !

 

[b_S]

Yeah, 1.5" headsets were supposed to be the next "standard". They've hardly set the mountain bike world on fire now have they. If you look at the number of bikes with 1.5 verses 1 1/8 its hardly become a standard

1.5 wasn't meant to replace 1 1/8, it was meant to be an alternative to use where appropriate. And it is used commonly throughout the industry.
Funnily enough, you'll see a lot more 1.5 lower cups next year, and taper headtubes are appearing on road bikes too. Setting the world on fire? Not really, but the standard does have its place.

29" wheels have their place, as do 2:1 ratios... which is hardly a "standard" as it's frame/brand specific That said, leverage ratios are lowering over time.
UST is a standard for tubeless tyre and rim compatibility, stans is a halfway measure to fit to non-tubeless rims.

Maybe your cynicism is slightly misplaced here...