Pointless new standards - name and shame the "innovators".

MARKL said:
Fox / Shimano for 15mm (100) axle
SRAM? for 15mm (110)
Specialized - E150 fork - uses a 25mm axle (didn't that take off)
Maverick - DUC32 and SC32 forks use a 24mm axle
Specialized for 142+ (or whatever they call it - they apportion the 7mm slightly differently compared to normal 142
Click to expand...

Giant od2 (God I'll bang on about this for as long as I like until manufacturers finally learn!)
Trek 148+
Shimano for hollowtech
Sram for GXP, ISIS?
Shimano for centrelock (after they agreed to use 6 bolt)
Easton for oversize bars
Who is responsible for headsets - It still hasn't sorted itself out yet!
Spesh and someone else (Cannondale?) for BB30, Shimano/Trek for returning the favor and going BB86/92.
Trek for G2
Spesh for brain
WHO DID TAPERED!?

I wonder how much of it is because of patent? I mean lefty would take over the world if Cannondale just let it go (Secretly wanting a rear righty swingarm to kill off 29+, 27.5+ fat bike etc.).
 
driftking said:
I haven't read through the thread but we need to keep in mind that riders also want light weight parts. One of the goals for bikes is low weight so they want to reach their goal strength and performance with minimal weight as possible. Maybe the weight is negligible but people buy carbon derailleur covers after all Maybe they don't serve a functional advantage but maybe the advantage lies in the weight for many.
Secondly people search fro minor advantages if something improves a part by 2% its a better part and they will want it.

I don't disagree with the thread but there are also reasons for new standards some who find them reasonable.
Click to expand...

Spot on.

We don't all ride the same type of bikes so why would we all want the same thing. An XC rider prob doesnt want a 20mm QR. Its only shaving a few grams but that is why QR15 was invented. A tapered steerer only saves a few grams as well over a straight 1.5 but a few grams here and a few grams there all adds up. I'm no weight weenie but I think it would strange having a straight 1.5 inch steerer and 20mm forks on a short travel XC bike just because the AM guys want it and we need to stick to one set of standards. Advances happen in increments, they might be small but they all add up (weight and performance).
 
Nick_M2r said:
Things i like:


Frame construction techniques such as hydro-forming, carbon etc. - Though I'm sorry carbon is priced WAY WAY higher than it needs to be, paying north of $3800 for a frame is stupid.
Click to expand...

mitchy_ said:
That's the retailer more than carbon... You can buy an entire carbon Trance for sub 3.6k.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, it comes down to production volume as well. While carbon isn't that expensive as a material, the tooling costs are pretty massive, and that investment has to be stumped up by the manufacturer regardless of volume. So Giant who pump frames out by the million can recoup the investment on tooling at a significantly lower price per unit than a small manufacturer who might only produce a few thousand frames.
 
Shadow Puppet said:
Spot on.

We don't all ride the same type of bikes so why would we all want the same thing. An XC rider prob doesnt want a 20mm QR. Its only shaving a few grams but that is why QR15 was invented. A tapered steerer only saves a few grams as well over a straight 1.5 but a few grams here and a few grams there all adds up. I'm no weight weenie but I think it would strange having a straight 1.5 inch steerer and 20mm forks on a short travel XC bike just because the AM guys want it and we need to stick to one set of standards. Advances happen in increments, they might be small but they all add up (weight and performance).
Click to expand...

There is a TA standard smaller than 15mm (9mm TA) why not use that? It's another few grams.

As for 1.5 straight steerers - why not use 1 1/8 if weight is a concern. If riding blind, can people really tell the difference in 'stiffness'? Tapered is one of those annoying things. It costs a lot more to make than both 1 1/8 and 1.5, that additional cost could have probably bought you the weight saving somewhere else. And the real reason why tapered worked out more successful than 1.5 was because of cross compatibility with stems - nothing to do with weight.

Not buying the weight argument. Even marketers are careful not to sell for weight reduction. They know you can just carbonize the thing for cheaper than pushing a new standard. Besides, consumers can and do weight things so they get caught out more often than not. Instead they sell stiffness because no one can really measure stiffness and the differences generally cannot be felt a human.
 
Calvin27 said:
There is a TA standard smaller than 15mm (9mm TA) why not use that? It's another few grams.

As for 1.5 straight steerers - why not use 1 1/8 if weight is a concern. If riding blind, can people really tell the difference in 'stiffness'? Tapered is one of those annoying things. It costs a lot more to make than both 1 1/8 and 1.5, that additional cost could have probably bought you the weight saving somewhere else. And the real reason why tapered worked out more successful than 1.5 was because of cross compatibility with stems - nothing to do with weight.

Not buying the weight argument. Even marketers are careful not to sell for weight reduction. They know you can just carbonize the thing for cheaper than pushing a new standard. Besides, consumers can and do weight things so they get caught out more often than not. Instead they sell stiffness because no one can really measure stiffness and the differences generally cannot be felt a human.
Click to expand...

My argument wasn't only about weight but performance also. A little improvement here and a little there adds up. Yep, many people cant tell the slight differences but then, some people can't feel the difference between having their pro pedal lever on or off.........!

Really, I don't see this as being as huge an issue as people claim. Almost all parts from every manufacturer are made in each 'standard'.

How many parts from a Subaru will fit a Ford?
 
Last edited:
Shadow Puppet said:
My argument wasn't only about weight but performance also. A little improvement here and a little there adds up. Yep, many people cant tell the slight differences but then, some people can't feel the difference between having their pro pedal lever on or off.........!
Click to expand...

So if it's performance then go for the 20mm? Seriously it's such an insignificant difference in weight and performance TA's are - why make a new standard? Tapered steerers are no different. Besides stiffness has little to do with size once you reach a certain point and has a lot more to do with tolerances. This is the same as a 27.5 argument except the stakes are much lower. Why not a 17.5mm TA?

Shadow Puppet said:
Really, I don't see this as being as huge an issue as people claim. Almost all parts from every manufacturer are made in each 'standard'.

How many parts from a Subaru will fit a Ford?
Click to expand...

Automotive manufacturers are required by law to stock/provide parts and supply them for a period of time. Bikes have no such thing. Also it's probably not feasible to do it with bikes given they (maybe except some of the bigger guys) chop and change distributors and retailers. Keep in mind cars also sell for more than 40 times a bike - starting at about $20k. Manufacturers can afford to customize, even then they try to streamline as much as possible. Parts from a ford focus won't fit a Subaru, but they will fit a mazda 3. The enthusiast market is also different from that of bikes. Spend half the value of you vehicle and you get much faster. Do it on a bike and you're not going to see miracles.

Also given the wear rate of bike parts vs cars, it would be suicide to do it. Cars are pretty much maintenance free (trust me I've seen some cars that really should have died of neglect). Bikes not so much, cable adjustments, cassettes, heck even wheels break and frames crack. Besides , if fat Joe has to haul his ass up a hill and his friends say it will be easier if he change 'xyz', he'll do it. If he can't word will quickly spread how incompatible brand 'abc' is. Cars on the other hand are mostly whitegoods on wheels. Cars are not bikes and the manufacturers know it.

Right now the manufacturers are playing a game to see how far they can take it. With less consumable parts like cranksets, headset bearings and suspension pivots they can get away with it. But move to common things like stems and hubs and they struggle a bit. Even giant struggled to keep supply of their od2 stems despite bold claims. Try to change something like a bike hub and it gets hard. I dare say 142 would not have been adopted if it was not reverse compatible with 135 (not sure if 148+ is or not...). The reverse for tapered steerers (can use old forks).

There is a place for standards and a place for customization - it is usually dictated by a price point. Bike aren't there no matter how hard they try.
 
Giant cited this ongoing hilarity with standards as the reason they retained quick releases on the 2015 disc braked Defy range. They reckon they didn't want to lock customers into one standard and limit wheel set choice.

I suspect they were being cheap, but given they make all their own hubs and have plenty of though axle disc ones to use I would have preferred it had through axles.
 
Haakon said:
Giant cited this ongoing hilarity with standards as the reason they retained quick releases on the 2015 disc braked Defy range. They reckon they didn't want to lock customers into one standard and limit wheel set choice.

I suspect they were being cheap, but given they make all their own hubs and have plenty of though axle disc ones to use I would have preferred it had through axles.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing it was for weight, as they use 15mm hubs in their TCX's.
 
mitchy_ said:
I'm guessing it was for weight, as they use 15mm hubs in their TCX's.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but through axle forks are lighter... Maybe Giant are not bullshittig and it is about leaving open more wheel choice on roadies. I'd still have preferred through axles. Oh well, still rides very nicely with old school quick release :)
 
Haakon said:
Yeah, but through axle forks are lighter... Maybe Giant are not bullshittig and it is about leaving open more wheel choice on roadies. I'd still have preferred through axles. Oh well, still rides very nicely with old school quick release :)
Click to expand...

Arguable. There is probably more alloy in my through axle dropout than my QR fork had.

I never had issues with my QR axled disc brake road or CX frame either, and I'm not light... The 15mm axle on my TCX is nice though, if not a placebo effect.

Also manufacturers like Zipp, Reynolds, etc have QR disc brake wheels available... I've had to have custom wheel sets built for my TCX.
 
Last edited:
MARKL said:
Spesh from memory, believe it or not it was a road bike thing
Click to expand...

OMG so angry - my spesh secteur has a bloody 1 1/8 and 1 3/8 tapered tube. I knew it at the time but was to good a bargain. It shits me they made this standard and then backflip and create other mumbo jumbo. Ahh well at least they have retained it for a few years and run it through out their disc brakes roadie range.

mitchy_ said:
Arguable. There is probably more alloy in my through axle dropout than my QR fork had.

I never had issues with my QR axled disc brake road or CX frame either, and I'm not light...
Click to expand...

Another rant on my spesh. Every time I load it on the car with the wheel off the rotor decides to do something else. It takes a real skill to get it right. No such issues with TA MTB!
 
Calvin27 said:
OMG so angry - my spesh secteur has a bloody 1 1/8 and 1 3/8 tapered tube. I knew it at the time but was to good a bargain. It shits me they made this standard and then backflip and create other mumbo jumbo. Ahh well at least they have retained it for a few years and run it through out their disc brakes roadie range.



Another rant on my spesh. Every time I load it on the car with the wheel off the rotor decides to do something else. It takes a real skill to get it right. No such issues with TA MTB!
Click to expand...

Are you going to change the fork on the secteur though? I couldn't give 2 shits what size fork is on my road or CX bike, they won't ever be changed likely by anyone.

As for the QR, just make sure you put it on the same way each time. Ie. I always tightened mine with the bike sitting on its wheels, never had the rotor rub after numerous removals.
 
Shadow Puppet said:
Yep, many people cant tell the slight differences but then, some people can't feel the difference between having their pro pedal lever on or off.........!
Click to expand...
Bahaha. You still dwelling on that? You'll be pleased to know that the old one than came on my intense is lethal. Almost works like a lockout when dialled right up. Others I've had, blew the skin flute. There, you can sleep now.
As for 15v20mm, I'm currently swapping back and forward between the 2 on my banshee. Difference... Less than fuck all. Less than less than fuck all.
 
Headset due to the amount of crap I ride through. And my issue was with the cam. It has these sunken bits on the fork (kind of like suspension fork qrs) which means I have to unscrew the qr. I've had to train myself to 'feel' how much cam pressure is right. Too tight and the fork flexes too much, too little and the opposite.

Thinking I've been doing qrs the wrong way all this time now haha.
 
moorey said:
Bahaha. You still dwelling on that? You'll be pleased to know that the old one than came on my intense is lethal. Almost works like a lockout when dialled right up. Others I've had, blew the skin flute. There, you can sleep now.
As for 15v20mm, I'm currently swapping back and forward between the 2 on my banshee. Difference... Less than fuck all. Less than less than fuck all.
Click to expand...

Haha, was that you? To be honest, I've heard quite a few people say the same..... some people just don't notice it.
 
mitchy_ said:
Arguable. There is probably more alloy in my through axle dropout than my QR fork had.

I never had issues with my QR axled disc brake road or CX frame either, and I'm not light... The 15mm axle on my TCX is nice though, if not a placebo effect.

Also manufacturers like Zipp, Reynolds, etc have QR disc brake wheels available... I've had to have custom wheel sets built for my TCX.
Click to expand...

Most people would know more about road and cross bikes than me, I'm just going on what I read. I don't really anticipate the QR being a problem, I don't ride that hard - although it will be semi CX capable when I put some 28mm tubeless tyres on it :) I'm not planning on upgrading the P-SR1 wheels, even though they're a bit porky at 1870 grams - but I guess it would have been nice to have the stiffer system given Giant have it already and redid the frame from scratch for 2015 anyway.
 
Shadow Puppet said:
Haha, was that you? To be honest, I've heard quite a few people say the same..... some people just don't notice it.
Click to expand...
Many agree. Some pp, maybe it's more the suspension design, do jack shit. 3/4 of the ones I've used were useless. 7/8 of my mates running them are of a similar mind.
 
Then there's those shitbags who introduced tapered, and 15mm axle dirt jumper fork (Marz, Fox, Rockshox)

That leaves people who ride chromo frames with either 1 frame choice, the proto deity (might be out now), but who would want to scratch their precious $1000000 fork riding park or street?
or 1 fork choice, Manitou Circus, or maybe a lowered 36
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top