Brian Ratliff

Do they improve bike performance? ...to me
Are they consumer-friendly? (sure, that's fuzzy, but for example have fun selling your ISP bike used) ...to me
Are they compatible? ...to me

To others... these might be good metrics, but there is no good way of evaluating. Your "criteria" is highly dependent on when you entered the bicycle market.

tekhna

Sure, any consumer experience is subjective.

More reasonably though, there are objective ways to measure many of these things. Do aero wheels make you faster? Yes, in certain circumstances. Do different carbon layup techniques make bikes stiffer? Yes.

Do those things matter? Sure, and that's up to the consumer to answer.

But integrated seatposts literally serve no purpose other than aesthetics. For bike companies though, they're great. Permanently modify a customer's bike so they need to buy a new bike if they want or to adjust their bike? Awesome!

Brian Ratliff

no true Scotsman. Just an assertion that "...serve no purpose...".

They are lighter.
They are more aerodynamic.
They are stiffer.

Shall I go on?

If you are claiming "objectivity" you can't come back with a glib "it's subjective". You've established three criteria... then said those criteria are subjective but important to you (the subject, apparently)... then asserted your assertion yet again. That's not an argument!

Campag4life

A couple of things. Bike purchases are elective. Nobody twisting our arm to buy any bike. If you like an old style bike, you can build one with the help of a frame builder. Even off the rack steel frames available with BSA from companies like Salsa mentioned. If you want a crappy square taper crank, or steel frame, or older style single pivot brakes, or heavier wheels, or fewer gears, or poor quality tires, or less ergonomic handlebars or crappier saddles of 15 years ago...or...even a longer list, you can make a new bike with an old design.

I love the new bikes and have been riding for decades. I am not in love with PF30 or derivatives. Specialized just abandoned PF30 for BB30 which can be easily tweaked thanks to Praxis to create a threaded BB. A new Shimano DA or Campy UT is light years better than any old style crank out there.
BB30 requires more mechanical skill than most seem to have as simple as they are. A great time to be a cyclist.

Lazyass

I quit trying to keep up with new stuff. What I hate the most are compact frames and all this crazy geometry with weird sizing. It seems every brands medium is a different size. Give me a level top tube, I don't need three feet of seat post showing with a seat post one foot in diameter, and size it by centimeters.

Campag4life

All the weird sizing as you put it has a purpose. Anybody who got a B in school geometry should be able to figure it out. But the same applies to BB30 many can't solve either so no surprise. All the new alternative geometries is one of the best things ever to happen to the road bike industry. Endurance geometry bikes and carbon are two the most significant changes in the past twenty years.
For those that don't know, its harder to create a taller head tube bike which gets the handlebars up higher with a level top tube because of compromise to stand over.

tekhna

Sigh. There are objective measures and then subjective evaluations of objective data. That's what analysis is. And no, that's definitively not an argument but thankfully we don't live in a world of pure argumentation.

Campag4life

Most aren't qualified to evaluate what you call objective data. The correct term btw is empirical data which is often misinterpreted. In other words, many aren't objective about empirical data.

Brian Ratliff

Of course, but you can't make an objective statement and then support it with all subjective claims. Change is a constant. Embrace change (just don't forget the past). You'll be a happier person for it.

"Analysis" is not the "subjective evaluation of objective (empirical) data", BTW. Analysis is the objective evaluation of empirical data (using statistics, etc.). Subjective evaluation of objective data is called "BS".

Brian Ratliff

When I got a warranty replacement frame for my Madone, I was a bit scared of the new BB90 bottom bracket that it came with. After a couple delays getting the bearing parts installed at the shop, I finally put the bike together and... it's been great. One of the best things that happens when you eliminate the constraint of a threaded bottom bracket is the bottom bracket shell doesn't have to be symmetrical anymore. Since force on the bottom bracket is not symmetrical... well... this makes sense.

The best thing about going away from the old three part cranks? Using standard industrial bearings. Finally. That and in hubs as well. Now you can buy replacement bearings for $4 at McMaster Car rather than spending big money buying proprietary bearings/bottom bracket assemblies. And, the top of the line Shimano threaded bottom bracket is $30. Because Shimano can make the bearing housing for 50cents in quantity and the bearings they can buy from China for pennies.

hueyhoolihan

i like threadless headsets, cartridge bearings everywhere, the two piece crank, the 31.8 handlebar clamping area and carbon frames and rims for recreational and racing use, and clip-in pedals. they can keep the rest.

none of the above are game breakers though. i ride without most of them more than half the time, and about a third of those listed above are there only because they avoid some maintenance.

and for touring, if the frozen burrito existed before 1980, i don't think i regularly use anything invented after that time except clip-in pedals .

cellery

But I like doing extended internet research on what size part fits my frame. Why do you want to take away my hobby?

Lazyass

But if you want people to listen to you and consider your opinion, which I don't, posting punk comments isn't the way to do it. I understand you only do it on the internet, but still.

Campag4life

Yeah. When I read whimsical posts from guys like Angry Asian, I can only think of how little commonality there is in the car or computer industry. Most of it is proprietary. Commonality actually inhibits creativity and innovation as companies compete against one another for technical superiority.
Of course tier 2 supplier have to play ball with the OEM's to survive but even this isn't in lockstep. Look at how slow Shimano and Campy were to support BB30. Shimano still doesn't make a dedicated BB30 DA crank which would be easy for them to tool with the DA design. Its a bit of chess game and if the consumer doesn't want to get stung, he has to do his homework to choose what he wants.

Campag4life

I have an audience. They are just smarter than you. I am the voice of the industry. I agree with its direction which is evolving for a reason. Its obvious you have no idea what you are talking about. All the variation in frame geometry has been one of the biggest innovations of the bike industry. More precisely to your point which you couldn't articulate, old school seat tube length frame sizing convention is no longer valid. This is because of all of the diversity of frame geometry out there which is only a benefit to the consumer and not a hindrance. Sloping top tubes are virtually essential to the endurance geometries for the reason I stated above in particular and an argument can be made they further reduce frame weight even without a tall head tube for standover. So you have to know something about geometry to take a meaningful position on it.

Biggest problem with the discussion on this subject? You are the poster boy. It takes insight to decide if any change in tech is worthwhile.

RJM

All that ego is going to burn you up, boy.

chilidawgnv

All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

Campag4life

Kinda bombastic eh?

Lazyass

What you are is someone who just gave me some new signature material

RJM

It burns through the screen, man.


My take on all the tech "improvements" is that it works great for those who are searching for the improvements that they offer and the more choices, the better. I am just glad I can decide what I want to use and what I don't want to use. Square taper bottom brackets mated to aluminium cranks still works for me...cheap too, but I went modern Ultegra for my latest build. I'm thinking of going electronic shifting for my next bike because it would be interesting to try, but am still happy riding a downtube friction shifting bike. In the end, much of the latest improvements will be shelved for something better (I always think about Softride bikes or Trek's Y frames being thrown about as the latest and greatest) anyway.

Campag4life

Hilarious. Awesome.
Glad you have a sense of humor. Its just bikes afterall. And of course, never to forget the public mantra. Bikes are toys and belong on the sidewalk.

colnago62

What you are describing is Kierin racing. The riders are held in seclusion before the race and must assemble the bike on their own.

2manybikes

I guess the OP has never worked on cars, houses, or computers.


I know this was already posted, but, I think it's worth repeating. Perception of the same thing, can vary widely.

RoadGuy

The thing that I don't like about all innovations is the developers/marketers willingness to throw new developments onto the market, and then abandon the Buyer a couple of years later. No support, and no replacement parts means the Buyer is forced to replace the bike he/she just paid a fortune for a couple of years ago.

Proprietary headsets, bottom brackets that are changed every couple of years, special seatposts, and cartridge bearing wheel hubs are all going to be maintenance problems two to three years after a bike is made. I read about some people who complain that the old standard square taper bottom brackets were not a standard at all with the two different tapers, three different threadings, and multiple spindle widths. Yet here we are year after square taper was abandon by the major bike manufacturers, AND square taper bikes are still with us, and we can still easily buy replacement square taper bottom brackets with the expectation that they will fit.

Can you say the same thing about some of the bike frames that were manufactured with proprietary integrated headsets (Vitus 992 headsets being one example)?

What I see are new designs that make the manufacture of bikes faster, and easier for the manufacturers and raising prices, while raising the ultimate cost to the consumer, and shortening the service life of the product, without any regard for the consumer.

Component and bike manufacturers produce components and bikes with proprietary parts to lock the consumer into their products. They have no interest in supporting technologies that they force on consumers, since they make a profit on every change, just like the Paris and New York Fashion Designers, changing styles every year to force women into replacing their wardrobes every year, OR like Microsoft, and the Computer Manufacturers getting together and deciding how to change the "acceptable computer software and hardware" configuration to keep the "churn" going to keep selling more software and hardware each year.

Want to send a message to the Component and Bike Manufacturers that you aren't interested in buying into the annual fashion change? Refuse to buy the they and greatest. Economical Pressure is the only pressure that For Profit Companies will acknowledge.

Lazyass

BF should give you your own section. Just ask Campag4life, the Voice of the Industry