WTF Bike Industry

**ACH** · 08-26-2017, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by skideeppow

I was taking to a friend last night and telling him my 1st world problems, he proceeds to tell me that he has a 29er Bronson and want to upgrade to the new 1x12. He can't, not enough clearance on the farm. So he needs a new bike.
Oh that makes sense. Another wtf moment

So, why not just roll with 1x11?
Why get sucked into "its new so it must be better"?

**plugboots** · 08-26-2017, 10:06 AM

^^^ I just did that. Went with Shimano 1x11, cuz 1x12 didn't get me much, 1x11 was more tried and true, and I couldn't get 1x12 SRAM 180 crank arms. Plus I'm strong like bull.

**XXX-er** · 08-26-2017, 10:59 AM

IME 1x11 works great except it wasnt low enough for my app, it would have been nice to get the up spec model with 1x12 but that was a whole bunch more $$$$

so I dropped 2 teeth on the chain ring, also went oval, for 100$ its now geared low enough, i suppose i lost some top end but I don't miss it where I ride

**GeezerSteve** · 08-26-2017, 12:38 PM

Question for the group: When you buy a bicycle or a frame, are compatibility and availability of parts significant factors in your purchase? I have a strong bias in favor of having bicycles with the readily available parts that can be switched out with commonly available tools, thus I build my frames with 68mm or 73mm threaded BB shells, 27.2mm seat posts, 1-1/8" steerer external cup headsets and common hub widths. My bias comes from my long-distance touring days (decades ago) when compatibility issues were a different (e.g., French/Swiss/Italian BBs v. English right/lefty, weird hub widths, French headsets, weird seat post sizes). Back in our touring days our rule was to have the best chance to find replacement parts in small towns, where often a Western Auto store was the only source for parts for hundreds of miles.

**smmokan** · 08-26-2017, 01:16 PM

Yes. Which is why I kind of laughed when I saw the new $10,000 Hope bike that's almost entirely proprietary.

**plugboots** · 08-26-2017, 03:08 PM

That was why I was late to the 29" party.

**ACH** · 08-26-2017, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by smmokan

Yes. Which is why I kind of laughed when I saw the new $10,000 Hope bike that's almost entirely proprietary.

Sure is pretty tho

Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

**Damian Sanders** · 08-26-2017, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by DIYSteve

Question for the group: When you buy a bicycle or a frame, are compatibility and availability of parts significant factors in your purchase? I have a strong bias in favor of having bicycles with the readily available parts that can be switched out with commonly available tools, thus I build my frames with 68mm or 73mm threaded BB shells, 27.2mm seat posts, 1-1/8" steerer external cup headsets and common hub widths. My bias comes from my long-distance touring days (decades ago) when compatibility issues were a different (e.g., French/Swiss/Italian BBs v. English right/lefty, weird hub widths, French headsets, weird seat post sizes). Back in our touring days our rule was to have the best chance to find replacement parts in small towns, where often a Western Auto store was the only source for parts for hundreds of miles.

Pretty big for me, I prefer 26", standard tapered head tubes, threaded BB's, 30.9mm posts, post mount brakes, 180/160mm IS rotors, Shimano drive train / cassette body, 104mm chainrings, 31.8mm bars and 8.5x2.5 rear shocks. That's a long list.

I've somewhat given up on the hub standards, two of my wheelsets can swap between 20mm and 15mm front, and the 135x10mm through axle rear can be fitted to 142mm with a bit of work, but my newest wheelset is dedicated 15mm and 142mm for my main bike, I don't feel like dropping $60 for the conversion kits, not that it would be convenient to swap the rear back and forth anyway.

One good thing about some of the standards is they are backwards comparable. For example, you can run a straight 1-1/8 fork in a tapered head tube with the right crown race. You can fit virtually any modern through axle crank to a BB30/PF30 bottom bracket with a simple bushing/spacer kit. It really sucks when they devise new standards that are intentionally not compatible, like boost, metric shocks, and 29" wheels.

The funny thing is, if bikes were more compatible, people would probably keep older bikes longer as a spare, and buy parts for them. They would still buy new bikes, because that's what they do. As it stands, there is a good number of "obsolete" de-valued bikes being sold before their time, undermining the new bike market. People aren't stupid, most people buying a $5k bike are pretty savvy and don't want drop $5k on a bike that will be artificially undervalued in 3 years because of changing standards, which also hurts sales.

That's why I've said before that the industry is killing itself with all these new incremental standards.. They should have gotten together around 2010 and started with a blank slate, to devise a specific set of modern standards that would be good for the next 20 years, explained it to the public, and then changed all at once.

**kidwoo** · 08-26-2017, 07:11 PM

Originally Posted by DIYSteve

Question for the group: When you buy a bicycle or a frame, are compatibility and availability of parts significant factors in your purchase?

Yup. It's one of the reasons I bought my current trail bike over one I kinda wanted more.

I break things. It's really nice to be able to poach from another one of my 3 bikes I keep running. It's saved me road trips, saved me race runs in the past, and generally made life awesome. Then sram, trek, specialized and giant had to go and hire a new cheap, fresh faced engineer every 3 years with all kinds of fancy new ideas..........and here we are. Dumbfuck ideas and planned obsolescence abound.

**stuckathuntermtn** · 08-26-2017, 09:08 PM

I'd say that at this point, 27.2mm seatposts and straight 1 1/8" steerers are getting to be pretty rare. Or is this for road bikes?
And why are seatpost sizes so weird, is it an inch and a fraction in standard sizing?

**kidwoo** · 08-26-2017, 10:01 PM

^^^^^^^

Name: zfhs9.jpg
Views: 268
Size: 59.2 KB

**grinch** · 08-26-2017, 10:04 PM

Seatpost diameters will probably be the next thing to change with the longer drop on posts

**GeezerSteve** · 08-26-2017, 11:16 PM

Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn

I'd say that at this point, 27.2mm seatposts and straight 1 1/8" steerers are getting to be pretty rare. Or is this for road bikes?
And why are seatpost sizes so weird, is it an inch and a fraction in standard sizing?

Yeah, road bikes. 27.2mm became the common SP size for high end road bikes in the 1970s and AFAIK it's still the most common road bike SP size (although not as universal as it once was). Not weird. 28.6mm O.D. single butted alloy steel seat tube with 0.7mm wall has an I.D. of 27.2mm. (I turn 27.2mm I.D. shims and silver braze them inside 31.8mm seat tubes.)

**bsavery** · 08-26-2017, 11:29 PM

Originally Posted by skideeppow

I was taking to a friend last night and telling him my 1st world problems, he proceeds to tell me that he has a 29er Bronson and want to upgrade to the new 1x12. He can't, not enough clearance on the farm. So he needs a new bike.
Oh that makes sense. Another wtf moment

Bronson is a 650b bike.

**skideeppow** · 08-26-2017, 11:45 PM

Originally Posted by bsavery

Bronson is a 650b bike.

I meant Tallboy.

**stuckathuntermtn** · 08-27-2017, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by DIYSteve

Yeah, road bikes. 27.2mm became the common SP size for high end road bikes in the 1970s and AFAIK it's still the most common road bike SP size (although not as universal as it once was). Not weird. 28.6mm O.D. single butted alloy steel seat tube with 0.7mm wall has an I.D. of 27.2mm. (I turn 27.2mm I.D. shims and silver braze them inside 31.8mm seat tubes.)

Right, but 28.6mm is 1 1/8". See what I mean?

**GeezerSteve** · 08-27-2017, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn

Right, but 28.6mm is 1 1/8". See what I mean?

Well, yes and no. There are two things going on. 1-1/8" ST and DT became the standard for high quality steel alloy tubing because Reynolds (UK before it went metric) led the technology back in the the 1930s, so, yeah, the ST O.D. was an Imperial standard thing. But 27.2mm became the most common SP size not because it's a conversion from an inch fraction, but because the I.D. of a Reynolds ST in a standard tube set just happened to measure 27.2mm.

**stuckathuntermtn** · 08-27-2017, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by DIYSteve

Well, yes and no. There are two things going on. 1-1/8" ST and DT became the standard for high quality steel alloy tubing because Reynolds (UK before it went metric) led the technology back in the the 1930s, so, yeah, the ST O.D. was an inch standard thing. But, 27.2mm became the most common SP size not because it's a conversion from an inch-standard, but because the I.D. of a Reynolds ST in a standard tube set just happened to measure 27.2mm.

Gotchya.

**skideeppow** · 08-27-2017, 06:25 PM

^^. I didn't understand any of that. And I've been riding bikes for 25 years (not saying that to say I'm fast, just that I have some knowledge).

**GeezerSteve** · 08-27-2017, 07:30 PM

what part did you not get?

**grinch** · 08-27-2017, 07:57 PM

Fun facts. Did not know this.

**GeezerSteve** · 08-27-2017, 08:01 PM

Add that some French tubing set ST O.D.s were 28.0mm with a nominal I.D. of 26.4mm, thus the de facto standard of 26.4mm seat posts for high end French road bikes, e.g., Peugeot PX-10E. (Don't laugh. Guys won Tour de France yellow on 'em.)

**grinch** · 08-27-2017, 08:14 PM

Can't think or remember any mt bikes with 26.4. It was 26.8, 27, 27.2 for a while then 30.0 and a couple companies trying bigger sizes just to screw with our minds. Just ok that we now mainly just have 30.9 and 31.6. Should be just the later and call it good. Zero benefit I'm altering it by .2. With 6 and 7' dropper posts appearing I guess they could go 32 and call it. Can't see any more drop than 8' needed

**GeezerSteve** · 08-27-2017, 08:25 PM

Some Italian road bikes came with 26.8mm seat posts to fit early Columbus tubing sets. 27.0mm fit a handful of British and a few U.S. frames. There was lots of feeling around when 1-1/4 (30.8mm) O.D. seat tubes became available. I built a few frames for 29.4mm but then got a lathe and started turning braze-in shims for 27.2mm.

I just checked a few on-line suppliers, all of whom carry more variety of 27.2mm posts than any other size.

**Damian Sanders** · 08-27-2017, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by grinch

Can't think or remember any mt bikes with 26.4. It was 26.8, 27, 27.2 for a while then 30.0 and a couple companies trying bigger sizes just to screw with our minds. Just ok that we now mainly just have 30.9 and 31.6. Should be just the later and call it good. Zero benefit I'm altering it by .2. With 6 and 7' dropper posts appearing I guess they could go 32 and call it. Can't see any more drop than 8' needed

I really liked the long 27.2 titanium post on my old titanium hardtail, really took the edge off the ride. Most 31.6 alloy posts ride like a brick.