Brian Ratliff

But this is just the way of all technology. Otherwise you get Microsoft (bugs get locked in, designs keep getting less and less ideal, etc.). Arguably, because bike companies aren't using as many proprietary bearing systems anymore, things have gotten better; at least most of your bearings can be had out of an industry standard bearing catalog.

There is no way out of this bind because it is inherent in anything that is subject to change. Unless you are willing to pay for the support, you can't expect people to provide it to you. Lament it all you want, attribute it to "evil corporations looking to lock people in and steal all their money" all you want, but this is a constant.

And given your list of bikes... you aren't in the position to comment about new tech. You don't even have a bike from the current century, much less a modern one. Embrace change (but don't forget the past). You'll be happier for it. Nobody is forcing you to buy things... but if you are going to make it a habit of supporting 20 year old bikes, you'll have to acknowledge that you have some work ahead of you finding spares.

Here's a question: anyone under 35 ever heard of "Vitus 992"?

Also, compared to the early 2000s (a decade ago), prices for basic bike components have gone down and quality has risen. (except for shifters... what's with that?)

Campag4life

Agree....would be a real asset to not only cycling, but the world.

Campag4life

Yup...same with computers. Memory and faster processing speed is much cheaper. Look at the evolution of computer screens and TV's from CRT to flat screens. Can get a 32" TV for less than 200 bucks now. Can't stop the march of tech or shouldn't.
To me, there is no comparison between new bikes and old bikes in terms of weight, stiffness, performance and durability. Having greater commonality would stifle growth. Some ideas are better than others. This is why Specialized killed off PF30 for example. Bad tech falls by the wayside or gets replaced by better tech. Yes, mistakes are made along the way and the market decides what will stand the test of time.

Brian Ratliff

1+

This hit me the hardest back when the original iPad came out. Yes, good idea, yada yada and all the naysayers were proven wrong not the point. The biggest thing that hit me was that it had the processing power and RAM equivalent to my first Windows computer (from 10 years ago at that time), and the hard drive was four times bigger. And, all this, and it fits in your hand, you navigate the OS by touch, and it cost 4x less.

Does anyone think that this would have ever happened had computer processors been standardized between all manufacturers so all OSs and all hardware from any manufacturer could work with them? No way! It would have made it much simpler to buy a computer, but we would still be stuck in the 90s had this happened. With Windows 95.

CliffordK

I think the problem is not too many standards, but orphan standards, and perhaps overpriced proprietary products. I've been running a Sugino outer chainring on my Campy cranks for eons.

I could care less if I had an octalink or a square taper bottom bracket, as long as I can buy the replacement parts that I need. But, once I am told that I have a non-serviceable bottom bracket that is no longer available, so a bottom bracket repair requires crank and chainring replacement too, then one starts having problems.

As far as "innovations".
Side Pull --> Center Pull --> Side Pull --> Dual Pivot
Cantilevers --> Linear Pull (V-Brakes).
Aero cable routing.
1" threaded --> threadless --> 1 1/8"
Non-round handlebars.
Better bar tape.
Triangular profile rims are stiffer than the old single walled flat cross section rims.
Freewheels --> Cassettes.
Indexed Shifting & Brifters (as well as better designed "shifting" in general).

4 bolt or 5 bolt chainrings? Not too big of a concern. We already had 144bcd, 135bcd, 130bcd, 110bcd, and didn't Campy do a 130bcd with an offset bolt? Again, the big thing is future parts availability. And, perhaps finding the parts cheaply. Finding that rare 41T 144bcd chainring for a good price can be a hassle.

RoadGuy

I've been in the microcomputer industry (designing, building, programming, installing, and servicing) since microcomputers were invented. My oldest computer is over 30 years old, and it is still in daily operation. It has five processor chips, and will support eight users with 3 virtual screens per user on less than 5MB of memory. Windows 7 takes how many GBs to boot up a single user without crashing? Memory has gotten cheaper, so programmers got lazy and sloppy. The newer the computer, the shorter it's service life. My 30+ year old computer has it's 30+ year old original power supply. The average life of a desktop PC compatible power supply is less than two years.

Microsoft illegally copied the standard (CPM-86) and rebranded it MSDOS. That is a little acknowledged fact ignored by Microsoft fanboys. The first graphics user interface OS was not invented by Microsoft. Digital Research (Inventors of CPM had one by before Microsoft launched Windows, I have working copies of several versions dated from 1981-1982 that run on my almost 35 year old Compupro S-100 Computer).

New does not necessarily mean better.

Microsoft does not spend a lot of money fixing bugs, most Microsoft OSs have bugs that Microsoft knew about, and never bothered to fix. They just plan on rolling out anther OS, and forcing migration.

I have no problem finding replacement parts when necessary for my bikes, in fact that seldom need replacement parts, because they are well built, in contrast with newer bike technology (like brifters).

I never said that I don't look at new bikes, I don't own any because they don't offer anything that interests me more than what I already have (I did trade my last steel bike for my Trek 2300 composite bike last year).

If your carbon bike falls over on it side when somebody bumps it or the wind blows it over, what are you going to do when there's a crack? If one of my aluminum bikes falls over, all I have to do is pick it up.

Sure, a new multi-thousand dollar 15 pound carbon bike may weight less than my 89 Schwinn 754 (weighs just under 20 pounds). But will your carbon bike be around 25 years from now, and will replacement parts be available? Probably not. By then, the frame will have been long ago cracked, the headset, bottom bracket, and cartridge wheel bearings worn-out and unavailable.

WhyFi

lol. Yup, that's exactly the way it works.

Lazyass

You must not be a liberal

Brian Ratliff

This is a key difference in the motivations between the bike part manufacturers and individual consumers. The bike part manufacturers respond to a consumer majority consensus. The consumer consensus is that bikes have a specific lifespan over which people are buying consumables, and the manufacturers respond to that exclusively. An individual doesn't have the purchasing power to affect this, which is actually why there was, once, cheap 41 tooth 144bcm rings. TA makes them now, but they are a boutique manufacturer who charges boutique prices to consumers outside the mainstream. (and plenty of people make 42 tooth 144bcm rings for the fixie scene)

The manufacturers have an interest in pushing new technology. The consumers have a split interest between maintaining their existing fleet and inexpensive access to new tech. On the large scale where manufacturing decisions are made, between these two forces is a consensus. It's as much the fault of your fellow cyclists as it is the manufacturers. Probably more, in fact. The manufacturers are not going to push what doesn't sell, and consumers don't have the power over the output of production lines.

I used to get mad about this (the future availability issue). Now, I just ride what I have and leave decisions about spares to the future. Bikes are tools, not investments. My only investment is to the activity. I'm not going to rail against the fact nobody makes competition quality slotted cleats anymore to support my track pedals. I'll just slide over to something else that people do make and give away or sell the older stuff to hipsters.

Brian Ratliff

The above shows you are out of touch. Windows 7 and MacOS is loads better than Windows 95 which was lightyears ahead of Windows 3.1/Dos. You are an order of magnitude off about the power supplies.

You've never used new bike technology for extended periods. Old stuff had their issues too. New stuff lasts a lot longer than you've given credit. You are out of touch.

I've crashed my carbon bikes multiple times with the worst thing happening being a replaced derailleur hanger.

You are out of touch. As with all things, it depends on how it's used and cared for. Most 89 Schwinns are on the rust heap right now. Most hard ridden bikes succumb to cracked frames, cracked and frozen headsets, bottom brackets, and worn bearings. At least if my cartridge bearings run out, I can buy replacements from McMaster Carr for a few bucks. Tried to replace a 90's era hub bearing cone lately? Remember what happened when the cup spalled? Yup; pressed in with an interference fit means you replace the hub or you lived with it, repacking and replacing the bearings yearly until you got tired of it.

RoadGuy

You are wrong if you think that consumers cannot influence manufacturers.

What happened to the Edsel?

What happened to Windows 2000 and Windows Vista?

Consumers killed them by not purchasing them.

What happened to Windows XP? Microsoft killed it in an attempt to force consumers into buying Windows Vista. Windows XP worked, and users were rejecting Windows Vista, so Microsoft threatened Independent Software Developers who were continuing to support Windows XP by telling them that they would not receive a license to build Future Products that would support future versions of Windows if they did not end support for Windows XP versions of their software.

Campag4life

I build computers. What you write in bold is rubbish but its just as well that computers wear out as fast as they do. Its for the simple fact that processing speed is growing exponentially with time. A 100 dollar dual core computer today that comes with Windows 7 installed is light years ahead of a $1200 Computer of 10 years ago...processing speed, RAM memory and speed and hard drive storage. Your mantra of your POS 30 year old computer lasting forever...nobody cares if you like your 8 track and it keeps on ticking. Same with bikes. Your fall over carbon bike analogy is also total BS. I have endo'ed two carbon bikes, got back on and road away. The yield strength of carbon fiber is much higher than that of steel or Al..the latter dents like a beer can. I can crush a top or down tube in my hand and probably not many on the planet that can do the same thing with carbon fiber.

Retrogrouchs who don't embrace the future of tech are just living in the past and don't understand the technology. Your ridiculous assertion about computer programs getting sloppy is further BS. Bytes are almost free. There is no reason to be as precise. Software is better than it ever has been.

Campag4life

You just don't understand the march of tech. Microsoft is far from perfect. Either is Apple, or BMW or Specialized. Every company makes mistakes along the way. I know because I worked in product development and the average guy has no concept of the tradeoffs involved.
Vista was a blunder. XP was good. MS made a leap to Vista and it failed. Windows 7 is better than both. MS screwed the pooch again with Windows 8 and tried to atone with Windows 8.1. Windows 7 is still cleaner. Windows 10 may or may not be better. Its a jagged slope on the way to the top but that is where we are headed. It is no different than with any technology including bicycle bottom brackets. Mistakes are made along the way but the mean of technology marches forward.

RoadGuy

I've built, sold, and serviced PC compatibles since the 1980s. Thousands of them. You don't have much experience servicing PCs. The switching power supplies they contain do not have a long service life. The quality of the materials used in them and the design tolerances don't make for long lived products.

All products wear out with use. Because of the design and construction, some products last longer than others. Older bike parts will last longer (in general) than newer designs. Mostly because the older parts were made heavier, from stronger materials. Newer parts may cost less to manufacture (not necessarily benefiting the consumer), and they are lighter. The fact is, as a product matures, manufacturers develop ways to manufacture them faster, lighter, and less cost. The product may appear for sale at lower cost, or the manufacturer may choose to simply pocket additional profit. The problem with the lighter products, is shorter service life.

Look at the development of washing machines. The basic top loading designs go back to the 1940s. Front loading washers are a realtively new development for home appliances. Commercial front loading washers have been around for many decades, the home models less than two decades. Yet, manufacturers specc'd home front loading washers with under-sized bearings. Front loading washers sell at premium prices, yet their useful service is a record short period. From what I've seen it's less then ten years, whereas top loading washers may last in service 25-30 years. My original top loading washer lasted 30 years, and costed about $300. The front loading washer I have costed $1500, and I expect it to last about 5 years if what I have read is to be trusted. It's been cranky for two years already. I've been told that replacing the bearings will cost about $800-900 to replace when the time comes, parts (that are related but not covered) and labor not included (the bearings have a longer warranty than the rest of the washer, are covered). When this washer dies, I'm going back to the older top loading design (I am not going to pay to have the bearings replaced).

I have not had to replace any bearings on my 89 Schwinn. Periodically servicing the bearings (headset, bottom bracket, and wheel bearings) with a good quality synthetic grease is not big deal. Maintaining your bike is part of the ownership process. If you have a throwaway bike, and unlimited disposable income, and don't have the ability, will, or option of maintaining your bike, then maybe a throwaway carbon bike is your best option. Thankfully it is not mine.

RoadGuy

"Aim Small, Miss Small...:. So you say there there is no need to be precise, but that isn't being sloppy?

You can't crush the tubes of any of my aluminum bikes with your bare hands. Just because you can crash straight ahead on your carbon bike doesn't mean that it won't be damaged falling over sideways. I dare you to take your carbon bike, roll up up a concrete parking block, and let it fall over striking on the main frame triangle and see what happens. You are going to crack a tube. My aluminum bike may dent, as a steel bike would. But both the aluminum and steel bikes can be ridden away safely. Not so, your carbon bike.

I met Bill Gates in the early 1980s, he impressed me as a Slick Crook back then. And you don't get the point. Just because bytes are cheaper now, doesn't mean that they are free, and wasting them does not have consequences. I get more out of memory errors now with GBs in my computer, than I ever did back then. Why? Because programs are not being written properly to release unneeded memory when the program is finished with it. That's bad programming.

Campag4life

Bill Gates has an IQ of 150. He scored close to perfect on his SAT's. He is one of the smartest guys in the world. A genius. In spite of his weaknesses we all have, he has given more money to charity than just about anybody with his foundation.
He has done good much good with his wealth and contributed more to society than almost anybody in modern history not only in terms of technology but by philanthropy. Your bad programming mantra is a joke.

Campag4life

You don't understand the priority of a modern carbon road bike. My guess is you are a slow rider. I have owned many Schwinn's growing up. They are boat anchors. Yes they are strong and may outlast a carbon bike even. The public voted and you lost. Schwinn with its brick $h1t house bikes went out of business. A Rivendell is a modern day Schwinn you can buy brand new if a brick s house is your priority.

Both are boat anchors compared to say a new Tarmac with Campy Record. There is NO comparison. A guy who wants the fastest bike doesn't care if its a tank. A guy who buys a Ferrari doesn't care if it is as strong as an F150. Strength and robustness increase weight and have a cost in terms of speed. That is why you see no armor cladding on a F1 car to make it more crash proof. Speed is the priority with modern carbon bikes. You obviously don't understand that.

Nachoman

Maybe?

Lazyass

The Voice of the Industry speaks again

CliffordK

One thing that happens...
I think there are a lot of 30, 40, or 50 year old bikes around, many are still roadworthy.

The old Schwinns. I see them on Craigslist all the time. Why? Because they made millions of them, most of which have ended up in the dump years ago, but a few have survived.

There are a few "good" road bikes too. How many 30 or 40 year old Colnago frames still exist today? Maybe half of them? I haven't quite figured out how an old road bike dies.

So, a company like Shimano may like pushing customers into the "new stuff". No sense in letting them ride a 40 year old bike when they can go out and buy a new one... outfitted with all the latest components too.

Now, they don't want you to think that their components are all junk. Shimano, of course, does make a lot of junk parts, but not necessarily sold to the end consumers.

The PC world is an interesting comparison. A couple of year old PC might be just fine, but with all the "latest and greatest" upgrades, it just kills them. I have to wonder if the FREE Windows updates are a conspiracy to get people to add stuff that slows down their computer to the point where they just need to buy a new one.... and a new Windows OS, and a new Office package.

How many people here used to own a "Big Wheel"? No doubt they could have been designed to last for generations. One could literally be riding one's grandparent's Big Wheel. EXCEPT then the company wouldn't sell so many. Instead, they are designed so that the front wheel wears out with a single kid. A family of 2 would need to buy 2 of them since one would wear out. Not bad to keep building and selling them.

I suppose if Shimano or Campagnolo can convince me that I can no longer maintain my old bike, then I'll be tempted to go out and buy a new one, with all new components.

Campag4life

Actually, this time, I was speaking in behalf of the world only because of the importance of the subject.

With each conversation, a new pearl of wisdom is born. Another quotable has emerged...
Fast guys don't endorse slow bikes.

Campag4life

On a tangent. I live in a pretty eclectic cycling town. Every conceivable permutation of bicycle exists...from low rider recumbents to big wheels. I passed a guy on a big wheel yesterday. I asked him if it was an original and he said no...a remake. Still quite a sight to behold.

StanSeven

You're becoming a BF legend. After you're banned you will be another Ryan or umd

CliffordK

That would have been interesting.

Or , do you mean a Penny Farthing?


You can even buy new ones based on a pneumatic 36" tire.
Wheelman Penny-farthing Bicycle

Brian Ratliff

Sorry, wait. Are you suggesting nobody should ever make new stuff? I don't want to ride a 40 year old bike. And 40 years old from when? Present day? 2000? 1990? Where's the line where progress should have stopped (except for the greedy efforts of those titans of industry)?

Maybe you are saying that once someone makes something, they should never ever ever stop making it? It's a moral duty to keep a factory line open forever once it is started? Under this reasoning, when is it ever okay to obsolesce a component? Apparently, Mr. Road Guy doesn't have an issue finding consumables which will fit his 20 year old bike. Why is he complaining? Apparently, they keep the lines open for over 20 years already!

My suspicion is that the line (where stuff was "good" and should stop progressing) is drawn from when the author of the argument (whoever it is) was 20-30 years old. It's the "back in my day" argument wrapped up in pretty clothes.