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

I'd add to the whole 15mm / 20mm / Maxle discussion the fact that they are all theoretically inferior from a torsional stiffness point of view to the Manitou hex-axle equivalents. The Manitou versions are keyed on both legs so they resist twisting in a way that a screwed in round axle can't. The reality is that it makes four fifths of fark all difference (all though on the Dorado it probably makes a big difference), but there's no denying its a far superior design.

What this does go to show is that so much of this stuff is not about what is better, but a lot of it is about just being the "new trendy thing".
 
SummitFever said:
I'd add to the whole 15mm / 20mm / Maxle discussion the fact that they are all theoretically inferior from a torsional stiffness point of view to the Manitou hex-axle equivalents. The Manitou versions are keyed on both legs so they resist twisting in a way that a screwed in round axle can't. The reality is that it makes four fifths of fark all difference (all though on the Dorado it probably makes a big difference), but there's no denying its a far superior design.

What this does go to show is that so much of this stuff is not about what is better, but a lot of it is about just being the "new trendy thing".
Click to expand...
Agree on the Manitou hex axle. Patented though, so I guess we blame them for 15mm as much as Sram and Fox then for 15mm.
 
Interesting. Did Manitou have to pay Rock Shox to use the 20mm axle standard?

It seems bizarre that a company could patent a measurement, 20mm axle, as their own.
 
John U said:
Interesting. Did Manitou have to pay Rock Shox to use the 20mm axle standard?

It seems bizarre that a company could patent a measurement, 20mm axle, as their own.
Click to expand...
No, the patents were to do with QR 20mm. Pretty much all brands were using 20mm straight bolt/clamp up axles.
 
I'm really glad to read of these changes that in reality make no noticeable difference to the ride.

I have Fox Factory 32 Float CTD, FIT, DRCV spring, 150mm forks with Kashima finish on my Remedy and I've read heaps of folk complaining about the flex of 32s and that they should have gone 34s and that the Kashima coating makes the ride smoother/plush, etc. I call bullshit on this. I can't feel the forks flexing - they do dip more than I'd like them to but that's a different story. Secondly, I feel no difference between the Kashima coated forks and my old Sherman Jumpers and RS Dukes.

People being manipulated by marketing and group think - king's new clothes at its best.
 
Damn shimano, changing the size of the cups on external road bike BB, supply a plastic adapter ring, but now I have to buy a bb open ended wrench to tighten it up and no way to torque it......
 
johnny said:
I'm really glad to read of these changes that in reality make no noticeable difference to the ride.

I have Fox Factory 32 Float CTD, FIT, DRCV spring, 150mm forks with Kashima finish on my Remedy and I've read heaps of folk complaining about the flex of 32s and that they should have gone 34s and that the Kashima coating makes the ride smoother/plush, etc. I call bullshit on this. I can't feel the forks flexing - they do dip more than I'd like them to but that's a different story. Secondly, I feel no difference between the Kashima coated forks and my old Sherman Jumpers and RS Dukes.

People being manipulated by marketing and group think - king's new clothes at its best.
Click to expand...

You feel it at the limit. If you not pushing hard in rough terrain, it's unlikely you'll notice it.
You may not notice your forks are twisting or deflecting until you ride a stiffer fork over the same terrain. It's not a night and day difference, but when your riding at your limit you can tell.
 
Well I'm not hitting major drops or rock gardens on it as it's not that kind of bike. I do ride lots of trails, flow, and some of the more mild DH trails with smaller doubles and drops. I also ride these trails with my Manitou Jumpers and I really can't tell the dif.

Maybe I don't take the bike to the limit very often, either way, it works fine for me and right now I'm 110kg, so I got faith in them.
 
Ivan said:
You feel it at the limit. If you not pushing hard in rough terrain, it's unlikely you'll notice it.
You may not notice your forks are twisting or deflecting until you ride a stiffer fork over the same terrain. It's not a night and day difference, but when your riding at your limit you can tell.
Click to expand...

Given a lefty is orders of magnitude stiffer than any rockshox or fox fork - if it were so vital, surely everyone would be praising lefties as the be all and end all?
 
A huge part of this problem must be as a result of the yearly product cycle in cycling. If they don't have a real innovation to offer up in the new years products, paint it a different colour and give it a new name, or invent a problem which didn't actually exist and solve it.

Off the top of my head Fox do this regularly. I love the bump threshold adjustment on lock out. I got my first RLC fork in 2005. Then along comes Terralogic which does pretty much the same thing. First we have the RP3, then we have the RP23, then we have the CTD which sounds the same as RP3. Watch out for history repeating itself this year. Maybe there'll be a new darker version of Kashima coating, it'll be called Kashima Dark. I have their shocks on quite a few of my bikes and like them. Pro Pedal works for me.

Fox are not alone in this. In fact I'd almost go as far as saying that the majority of cycling companies do it to varying extents. It is the exception to the rule to have a company shun the yearly release cycle to wait until they have some real innovation before releasing a new model.
 
Ivan said:
You feel it at the limit. If you not pushing hard in rough terrain, it's unlikely you'll notice it.
You may not notice your forks are twisting or deflecting until you ride a stiffer fork over the same terrain. It's not a night and day difference, but when your riding at your limit you can tell.
Click to expand...

I agree.

I'm generally a pretty skeptical person when it comes to hype (I'm still on 26" and love it) but I don't understand weekend warriors here saying that none of these advancements make any difference when they obviously don't push their equipment anywhere near as hard as the elite riders might. I like the fact that my bike uses the same parts as most elite Enduro/XC racers. Not because I want to be like them but because I can relate to them when watching said race. Now if these advancements are noticed by them and not me, I'm fine with that. I would rather have varying standards to meet the needs of those who push their equipment on my bike (even though I may not feel it) rather than have a set of 'joe blogs' standards for us weekenders to make swapping parts easier and then having racers on bikes that we can't relate to. Kinda like F1 i suppose, I can't relate to those drivers because I will never drive a car like theirs. It sounds far fetched but that's what I love about the sport, its easily accessible and I can relate to those I watch on TV. So, while you may ride the Yarra Trails and not notice the difference between QR9 and QR15 or straight 1 1/8 and tapered, maybe some can.

The mentality that 'I can't feel it so it must be shit' is pretty narrow minded and I attribute it to people who have the mentality of 'I haven't seen it with my own eyes so it can't be real'.

The taper is a proven in engineering, you can gain stiffness and strength where it's needed with little weight gain where it's not. Again, it's not exclusive to bikes. You may not feel it, but does that mean that this proven manufacturing process (bikes or otherwise) is a load of crap?
 
John U said:
A huge part of this problem must be as a result of the yearly product cycle in cycling.
Click to expand...
Not really, components generally have a production life of three to five years (except things like consumables such as chains, cassettes & brake pads, which remain in production for many years after a groupset is no longer "current"). Frames are generally two or three-year production runs, but occasionally they'll push out to four years, with only the paintjob changing to distinguish each year's models. Shimano MTB groupsets are typically a four-year run (although there can sometimes be mid-model updates, clutched rear derailleurs being a notable recent one). SRAM are similar. Suspension similarly has a several-year production run. In fact, Fox are probably in the minority in that they do tend to tweak stuff annually. They tried large-scale changes a couple of years ago, and look what that did to their reputation.....
 
Shadow Puppet said:
The mentality that 'I can't feel it so it must be shit' is pretty narrow minded and I attribute it to people who have the mentality of 'I haven't seen it with my own eyes so it can't be real'.
Click to expand...

I think that's an invalid comparison. People like me are saying that we've tried it, compared it with other like items and cannot feel it. That is about 50 worlds of difference to not seeing it with my eyes so not believing it because we have "looked with our own eyes" but we have "seen" nothing.

What you are suggesting people like me do is say "I have seen something specific with my eyes but I will believe something different because that's what I'm expected to do".

The taper is a proven in engineering, you can gain stiffness and strength where it's needed with little weight gain where it's not. Again, it's not exclusive to bikes. You may not feel it, but does that mean that this proven manufacturing process (bikes or otherwise) is a load of crap?
Click to expand...

Many people aren't saying it's a load of crap and they are not doubting that it does improve strength. They are saying that the difference is so small that it's likely unnoticeable by the rider.

I take your point that the average rider like myself/ourselves may not note the incremental progression in performance. However looking back over the pages of this thread I'm quite skeptical that even the majority of these changes and varying standards are not related to economic/branding decisions.
 
Shadow Puppet said:
The taper is a proven in engineering, you can gain stiffness and strength where it's needed with little weight gain where it's not. Again, it's not exclusive to bikes. You may not feel it, but does that mean that this proven manufacturing process (bikes or otherwise) is a load of crap?
Click to expand...

Taper I have no real issue with, it seems reasonably logical. We had 1 1/8 on everything, 1.5 was developed for long travel single crowns. Then we got taper' an intermediate standard offering much of the stiffness/strength benefits of 1.5 along with the smaller stem of 1 1/8. Seems a logical development path.

What is not logical or defendable is Giant's woeful OD2 setup, there is simply no excuse it offers no benefits that could not have been achieved within one of the existing standards :frusty:
 
johnny said:
I think that's an invalid comparison. People like me are saying that we've tried it, compared it with other like items and cannot feel it. That is about 50 worlds of difference to not seeing it with my eyes so not believing it because we have "looked with our own eyes" but we have "seen" nothing.

Not really, its more like you looking for something on one level of a house but not looking on the upstairs level because you can't get up the stairs and swearing that what you are looking for does not exist in the house at all.

What you are suggesting people like me do is say "I have seen something specific with my eyes but I will believe something different because that's what I'm expected to do".



Many people aren't saying it's a load of crap and they are not doubting that it does improve strength. They are saying that the difference is so small that it's likely unnoticeable by the rider.

I take your point that the average rider like myself/ourselves may not note the incremental progression in performance. However looking back over the pages of this thread I'm quite skeptical that even the majority of these changes and varying standards are not related to economic/branding decisions.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
MARKL said:
Taper I have no real issue with, it seems reasonably logical. We had 1 1/8 on everything, 1.5 was developed for long travel single crowns. Then we got taper' an intermediate standard offering much of the stiffness/strength benefits of 1.5 along with the smaller stem of 1 1/8. Seems a logical development path.

What is not logical or defendable is Giant's woeful OD2 setup, there is simply no excuse it offers no benefits that could not have been achieved within one of the existing standards :frusty:
Click to expand...

I have OD2 on my bike and can't say if it makes any difference as I have not tried the exact same bike without OD2 to compare. The whole OD2 thing was not understood by most people though. The frame head tube did not change with OD2 so you could convert any frame from or to OD2. Yep, it made trying out a regular stem you had in the garage impossible but then the dropper post I bought for one bike wont necessarily fit the next but we live with and accept different diameter seat tubes.
 
johnny said:
I'm really glad to read of these changes that in reality make no noticeable difference to the ride.

I have Fox Factory 32 Float CTD, FIT, DRCV spring, 150mm forks with Kashima finish on my Remedy and I've read heaps of folk complaining about the flex of 32s and that they should have gone 34s and that the Kashima coating makes the ride smoother/plush, etc. I call bullshit on this. I can't feel the forks flexing - they do dip more than I'd like them to but that's a different story. Secondly, I feel no difference between the Kashima coated forks and my old Sherman Jumpers and RS Dukes.

People being manipulated by marketing and group think - king's new clothes at its best.
Click to expand...

Johnny, bad example.
Bolt a Slant or Pike on your pushie and you will see a world of difference. 150mm 32's are complete rubbish.
Agree on the kashima, but it looks very nice and it will get you some extra cash when you finally see the light and flog your 32's on ebay.
 
No way, best example ever, shut up!

These forks are pretty shit aside from any issues of flex and when I can justify the expense I will be replacing them....., with 34s.

Maybe then I will be able to tell the difference as the forks that I'm comparing them too have much less travel.
 
Shadow Puppet said:
I have OD2 on my bike and can't say if it makes any difference as I have not tried the exact same bike without OD2 to compare. The whole OD2 thing was not understood by most people though. The frame head tube did not change with OD2 so you could convert any frame from or to OD2. Yep, it made trying out a regular stem you had in the garage impossible but then the dropper post I bought for one bike wont necessarily fit the next but we live with and accept different diameter seat tubes.
Click to expand...

Yeah the stem was the killer. Most people would not have noticed until too late (fork changing time) but being in store and not being able to get a stem really killed it. That and the fact that is is yet another 'in between' standard that promises trade offs between weight and stiffness.

I have no issues with going bigger, stiffer or lighter. But creating in between standards is just lazy on bike manufacturers part. There are reasons why totally incompatible systems like lefty do well. That's because the benefits are real and it's a genuine innovation. For everything else the approach seems to be 'take the midpoint' - the little weight/stiffness trade off is just not worth it when you take into account compatibility. This is what I define as pointless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top