I am old-school and I get most enjoyment from riding fixed gear and single speed bikes. I don't have no need for triple chain rings and 10-11 speed cassettes.

I like more gears. I have a 24-speed "sport" mountain bike. It has effectively a 5:1 range. It's not just total range, however, but shifting strategy. The bike has 13 effective ratios. I can use them all in various situations. I need the top ring for the top 2 of them and the bottom ring for the bottom 3 of them (actually top 3 and bot 4 to avoid chain rub), with the level takeoff and cruise range concentrated at the middle of the middle ring. 27-speed bikes have a similar range but use the extra rear cog to delay for one ratio the front shift to the bottom ring. The only other option for this performance is a Rohloff, which costs by itself as much as three such bicycles.

An 11-32 cassette all by itself gives a wider range than nearly any classic 10-speed. For a road bike with a compact double, the number of speeds in the rear allows the rider to put off a front shift for as long as possible. This is not true of a 10-speed bike with 52/42 front, which has a much smaller range and larger shifts and has you twiddling the front shift often.

The quibbles I have with modern systems is that the 20-speed mountain bikes are lacking a high top gear and the 20-22 speed road bikes have an absurdly high top gear and could go lower. Neither is too big a deal but it seems like they're not taking full advantage of the possibilities.

No-one is forcing you to buy into any of this. If you really want to make a point, ride single-speed which has been around for, like, forever.

You don't have to purchase the high-end stuff. You can always find 7 and 8 speed stuff on the low-end stuff, you know, the bikes found in Walmart and other sports stores.

You've obviously have no clue about Pirelli calendars.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp4Y...422579428#t=55

Well, yes. But why did Shimano introduce the 36T sprocket (and isn't there a 40T out now?). It's very easy to forget that MTB and CX development provides some of the needs for road and touring as well.

If someone's focus is entirely road, they may well be missing out on options in other cycling genres.

I don't have a problem with it. Once I move my Synapse to DI2 or Wireless SRAM....my 11 Speed is going on my Commuter....

I ride a 3x9 setup that has 19 distinctly different gear ratios (without cross chaining) that are all evenly spaced between 18 and 101 gear inches. I only have two duplicated gears and those are between the granny and the middle ring where I wanted overlap. I ride the bike for touring and as a daily ride both on hard and soft surfaces. It’s a compromise in everything it does and is personalized to my needs. I have at any given time another 6 or so favorite bikes that I like for certain types of riding, but none cover 100% of my needs like the touring bike.

Advancements will always keep coming as long as there are people ready to accept them and lay down cash for them. To those that find benefits in the new or perceive it will never be overkill. For those that look past the marketing and actually look at their real needs will figure out what they need and if it’s available buy it and if like me find out it’s not then they will find a way to make what they want by inventing it. We are all different in age and strength. We all ride in different conditions. So we all need something that suits us best. For some its 1 gears for others like me its 19.

12-speed cassettes would be overkill for me, no question. Frankly I have no yearning for 11-speed either.

It's the gaps, not so much the range. Evidently there are enough cyclists who have a narrow range of comfortable cadence that smaller jumps are attractive - no conspiracy, not marketing malarkey, just simply demand. Those of us with a wider range don't see the point.

I do question whether the ever-smaller gaps will remain attractive, but I also see the possibility. Imagine a 15 cog cassette (assuming it could be reliable and durable). I think it would feel like a continuously variable transmission - indexing might become irrelevant and you'd just dial it in. Why not, variable is attractive in most ways except for transmission efficiency and using a huge number of gears would fix that.

Dunno that I get the conspiracy theories. Or the upseted-ness over new stuff. If you don't like it, don't buy it. A while back a man told me he would "Never own an iPad", I asked if he had an Android tablet, he said no; and for the same reason. I asked what that reason was, and he said "Because every year they come up with a new one and your old one is obsolete".

SO!? Your still WORKS! I still have a first gen iPad. Works fine. Now, with computers, software advances. So eventually, the newest software won't work on the oldest hardware. But that's true of PC's and Mac's as well as it's true of mobile devices like tablets and smartphones. New stuff comes out; if you don't want it, don't buy it.

And what's always crazy about these discussions, is that at what point do you decide technology is 'enough'? Bikes with gears? Bikes with two wheels the same size (i.e., the 'Safety Bicycle') instead of one big wheel in the front? There's probably someone out there who loves their carbon road-bike with indexed brifters and 20 speeds who is scoffing at electronic shifting. Even on this forum I've seen (well, read) guys with several-thousand dollar high-tech road bikes who turn their noses up at anyone with a Bike Computer or who tracks their rides with a smartphone. "Too many gadgets, just get out and ride!" they say.

As far as the gearing; I sure do like my 24 speeds. I'm a beginner on a hybrid who doesn't quite have Contadors climbing legs yet. I don't use 24 speeds. But I do need that range. It's a 3x8, with an 11-32 cassette and a 48/38/28 chainring set. That means that when I hit a hill on the way home after a long ride I've got that really nice, "under-drive" 28/32 gear, or even a couple gears above that but not quite as aggressive as being on the 38 ring. I can also run 48/11 when sprinting on flat ground or building speed downhill. It means that at my preferred cadence, I can go 6mph or 30mph and lots of options in between. Chances are, when I've developed skills and strength and move on to a road bike; I'll do what most do with an 8/9/10 speed cassette and a "double" up front.

And really, it's not 24 speeds; because there are several gears that don't really work. Like 28/11 or 48/32. Cross-chaining and making a racket. So really it's not about having a lot of speeds; so much as it is about having a variety of ratios and ranges to choose from. Which depend greatly on the kind of riding you're doing.

One of the things I'm working on on the indoor trainer is increasing my 'cadence range', so it's less unusual to have a wider cadence range without needing gears as close together. But for now, having them close together is nice.

Cars don't need 6 or 7 speed transmissions either. Those old 3 and 4 speeds will get the job done fine. In fact, it wasn't that long ago that three speed automatics were common. But it's less efficient because you have to rev the engine a lot higher in one or more gears (either lower gears in order to reach gear 2 and 3 or at gear 3 on the highway because it's too low geared). These transmissions with more gears are more efficient and improve acceleration by bringing the gearing close together. Even if the final drive ratio and first gear ratio are practically the same as their predecessors.

I went in for a Rohloff from my Derailleur Bike (got off that bandwagon with 6 ~7 speed freewheels .. & triple, Alpine touring cranks.. )

but I watch the parade of dueling gizmo-izations in the market place with interest

Define "need".

Now THAT'S a good point! I only do road biking; but the very invention of the MTB, and many of the on-going developments which relate to it, is truly an area where some useful stuff is still becoming available- such as disc brakes. And many of those developments- including the invention of the MTB itself, are indeed market-driven- i.e. cases where companies truly filled a need that existed, where consumers were demanding a product- often by making their own.

Trouble is, they [the companies] often take those developments, and foist them on the road market- like disc brakes: I never knew any roadies who were crying out for disc brakes- and while I am all for choices and options, the fact is, we will likely see disc bikes and disc wheels become the standard (it's already occupying a large segment of the new market), creating yet more incompatibility for all previous stuff- and not because people were demanding disc brakes ('cause probably only about 2% of current riders actually want them on road bikes) but because it's another "feature" they can market to noobs.

Now that's funny! I keep my computers a long time (The one I am using right now is 8 years old)- but then again, if I were a Windows or Mac user, I guess it would be obsolete. Luckily, purely mechanical devices present no such possibilities- but thanks to things like electronic shifting, I guess they've solved that "problem". (I don't use an iPad/Android/[not-so]Smartphone because I have no need nor desire for such things.)

Good point. Imagine 10 or 15 years from now, having trouble with "1st Gen" Di2 group and being told I have to replace because Shimano no longer supports the software. But then again, component groups have been moving from universal compatibility to strictly proprietary for some time, so the next logical step in this direction.

OK, technically, nobody really "needs" more than 3 speeds, for general bike riding. (one speed for climbing, one for cruising on flats, and one for downhill or sprinting) And we have had that for about 100 years. That said, we all find some level of technology that we are comfortable with. Maybe need is a poor choice of words, and instead, I would say, things I would miss if they went away.

I am speaking only for myself, as someone who has ridden everything from old school "10 speeds" with downtube or stem friction shifting, toe clips, old school mechanical speedometers, to a large number of indexed shifting bikes (3 x 7, 3 x 8, 3 x 9. 1 x 8, and most recently 1 x9), the modern things I would miss if they went away are 7, or 8 speed cogs, triple chainrings, indexed shifting, modern bike computers, and clipless pedals. And, there is no way I would ever want to go back to toeclips, heavy steel wheels, downtube shifters, or 5 speed freewheels. I don't own 10 or 11 speed, but I do own 9 speed. If I had to, I could live with 7 or 8 speed, but not 5 or 6.

To be fair, those investing in Di2 now, are probably more cutting-edge types who will have moved on 10 or 15 years from now. By then, it might be a lot cheaper and simpler. 15 years ago, cellphones were just starting to become something the regular joe might own and Joe probably already had a computer. But a digital camera was a luxury that took poorer pictures but had nice convenience so with those willing to spend a little more or a little more 'techie', they owned them. SMS messaging wasn't very popular at all and video chatting was a brand new kid on the scene of the computer space and really only for a niche market. Now, all of those capabilities, and much more, are in the pockets of middle school students. What will Bicycling look like 15 years from now? Cheap power meters, electronic shifting as de-facto a standard as Brifters on road bikes today, who knows!

When computerized fuel injection hit the scene people really freaked out (And old timers still say the same thing, really); but those sorts of 'computers' aren't the same as your quickly obsolete smartphone. They are low-end, bulletproof machines that do a specific purpose.

10 or 15 years from now I bet electronic shifting will be cheap and widely available. And, frankly, I'm willing to bet that there are plenty of 15 year old groupsets with one or more parts that are irreplaceable (at least new). Even mechanical stuff goes obsolete.

But; there again, is the drawing of lines with technology. "Anything older than X is too old, and anything older than Y is too new". Which is why these conversations tend to get silly as we find that everyone has a different line that they draw.

Although, what very well may happen with Di2 and similar systems; is that there might be really cool features (like sequential shifting; where you simply shift 'up' or 'down' and the computer decides what to do in relation to the chainrings and the cassette, as opposed to the current system of manually shifting the chain rings and cassette to select the right gear, which could mean shifting up on the cassette whilst simultaneously down on the chainrings to give you the next 'gear') which might not be available on older systems; and might require updating hardware. Similar to the way smartphone manufacturers limit software features to newer hardware. Famously, when Apple introduced 'Siri', the voice-activated assistant, it came on the iPhone 4S and was not available as a software update on the 4. However, some enterprising folks managed to hack the iPhone 4 and install Siri; which ran just fine. Simply a matter of Apple, in this case, choosing not to include new software features in older hardware; even though they might've worked.

Inasmuch as any standards exist between indexing systems, it's because smaller or lower-end manufacturers copied the market leader rather than trying to fight them.

There's often good reason for drift. For example, the cable pull of SIS shifters and derailleurs up through 10-speed road and 9-speed MTB was a relic of the 7-speed downtube shifters. When Shimano had the opportunity to do a ground-up redesign with their trigger-only Dyna-Sys / Shadow system, they chose more cable pull for lighter tension which is easier to shift and easier on the shifter internals. SRAM made a similar choice but it's not (directly) compatible.

I have 5 road/cross/touring bikes, all equipped with Shimano 9-speed drive trains. They've got all the gearing I need. I have no desire to add a 10-11-12 speed or group to the mix because then parts would be non-compatible among my bikes. Hopefully Shimano will keep making 9-speed parts as long as I keep riding.

I don't think the evolution of more gears/speeds is a conspiracy, but it definitely fits in the with the "planned obsolescence" business model so common in the bike industry.

Now this may be where advancing technology really will translate into something that the average non cycling enthusiast goes for. Shimano tried and failed with their Coasting bikes, but the technology needed to really make it work might not have been there with just 3 speeds. With 11 or 12 speed and multiple chainrings programmed to shift up or down electronically with the computer selecting the combinations, we are approaching the possibility of a continously variable transmission. Imagine where the same bike can be tuned or programmed for auto , sport, hills, comfort, or even powered assist.

My questions are:

1) Is this thread on a 30 or a 60 day re-post schedule?

b) Does it alternate with the Disc Brakes Are a Fabulous Technology That Everyone Must Have thread?

III) Did "planned obsolescence conspiracy" re-introduce Fixed Gear riding on the road just to start over again at 1 cog and 1 caliper brake?

-Bnadera

Actually I think a CVT might be pretty cool. Probably some sort of a hub based system. Maybe electronically controlled like Hondas CVT's in some of their cars where it can emulate gears (by having fixed pre-programmed points it slides to); or, if you prefer, put it in full CVT mode and just pedal. It keeps your cadence. The more power you put out, the faster you go. But your pedaling never slows or speeds up. Heck, we might even see an electronic CVT where the 'shifter' is simply where cadence is selected. With a CVT, any force that would normally result in pedaling faster, would result in a fractional increase in gear ratio (and vice versa), so you're always putting out your power most efficiently. Would be cool, I think.

Everything was perfect when I got here. Now everyone stop changing!

It would be a lot of technology that would simplify the user experience, sort of like a tablet or smartphone.

Very true. Only I believe it'll be a lot sooner than 10 or 15 years. I'll bet we'll hear of Di2 servo motors starting to fail very soon; as Di2 has become somewhat popular, and there will be more units on the road becoming a few years old. At that point, just take your groupset and throw it in the garbage. Just buy a new derailer? "Oooopps! Sorry! They change every year or two- and the new ones aren't compatible with your old shifters; and we no longer support the software in your old set-up! No problem though, sir, just go to your nearest Shimano Di2 authorized dealer, and he will be happy to set you up with a new groupset; Just tell him Sanjay sent you- and hand him $3500, and you will be good to go. Thank you! Come again!".

And even with the mechanical stuff- as you say, with all the proprietary stuff or the ever-changing standards. I'm in the process of converting my '97 Klein from a standard to a compact crank. I wanted to tick with the theme of Ultegra/Dura Ace, in keeping with the rest of the bike- but I can't. No Ultegra/DA compacts are compatible with any BB that fits my BB shell! (And my bike doesn't even have the proprietary earlier Klein BB !!)- So I was very limited in my choices among a few after-market cranksets.

Say goodbye to the days when you could have a bike sit in a garage for 20 years, and pull it out and still have it be perfectly serviceable. As the price of bikes keeps going up, instead of becoming more durable, they are becoming disposable. Oooopps! No longer make that sealed-bearing cartridge for your bike? Oh well, just think: At least you didn't have to occasionally grease and repack the bearings! Now you get to throw it out and buy a new one! But hey...you'll get an additional cog on your new bike!...and disc brakes, in case you ever decide to ride Mt. Everest! What a world we live in!

Fallbrook offers or at least advertises an automatic option for their NuVinci CVT.
https://www.fallbrooktech.com/cycling/harmony

There were derailleur bikes that used centrifugal force to shift the rear. Maybe they still exist.
Ah, here we go https://www.landriderbikes.com/
Mechanism https://www.disraeligears.co.uk/Site/...erailleur.html