SRAM is 2-1/2 months early for april fools day....

[jm2e]

I agree with Toast; it’s not that big a deal since it doesn’t force you into new frame, fork, etc and bottom brackets are cheap.

But given that:
A) consumers are fed up right now.
B) it won’t improve anything in any way.
C) it’s 27.99mm, not even 28mm.
............ It should be flamed. It makes them look like they are run by marketing.

The only thing that would help right now is if Sram acknowledged that the 24mm spindle is fine and just went with it. It worked fine with VHS and BlueRay. Just pick one and let the world move one.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[jono]

Jongy Snow = Damien Sanders?

Spindle diameter might be the one dimension on the bike with the absolute least possible justification for standardization. Who cares? At 27.99 mm they obviously made it a very close fit into 28 mm ID bearings. If the OTS 28 mm ID bearing that fits into standard BB shells gives the best trade off between friction, strength, weight, cost and life then that's good engineering. The best way to ensure forward compatibility is to improve the product without requiring changes to existing standards--like BB shells. Maybe they did that, time will tell. If so they just extended the life of your existing BB shell size. Well done.

Now about that facial hair...

[Jonny Snow]

Jongy Snow = Damien Sanders?

Spindle diameter might be the one dimension on the bike with the absolute least possible justification for standardization. Who cares? At 27.99 mm they obviously made it a very close fit into 28 mm ID bearings. If the OTS 28 mm ID bearing that fits into standard BB shells gives the best trade off between friction, strength, weight, cost and life then that's good engineering. The best way to ensure forward compatibility is to improve the product without requiring changes to existing standards--like BB shells. Maybe they did that, time will tell. If so they just extended the life of your existing BB shell size. Well done.

Now about that facial hair...

It's 28.99mm dumbass, which I doubt is a standard bearing size.

[reckless toboggan]

It's 28.99mm dumbass, which I doubt is a standard bearing size.

Exactly.

Personally, I'm waiting for SRAM to come out with the forward compatible 29.98 mm version. That extra 0.01 mm is just a bunch of unnecessary weight that can be cut without losing any stiffness or durability.

[toast2266]

I'd bet .01 mm is right around the manufacturing tolerances for the spindle and bearing. Not to mention the bearing may well be deforming slightly when it's press fit into a frame that, in plenty of cases, isn't perfectly round.

Most other companies would probably just call it 29mm. I'm assuming sram is just trying to make it sound fancier.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[jono]

It's 28.99mm dumbass, which I doubt is a standard bearing size.

If you've got some experience sourcing parts please send a PM, I'm always looking for good help. As I'm sure you know, the underlying question is availability of quality parts at low cost. DUB's going price in a year should tell the tale. In the meantime, it's good to have you back, Damian, carry on.

[dunfree]

And Octalink

And Square Taper

And Isis

And about a million different variations that are either 24mm or 30mm, but aren't cross compatible with other similar diameter spindles, so the fact that they're the same diameter is essentially irrelevant.

Man, you summarized why the bike industry sucks. Thanks Toast! Tell me why I should buy some shit you got comped, oh beater!

[Eluder]

I dont understand the rage. It works with everything that already exists... Its not a new standard, its a different spindle size that all their cranks will use instead of having to use 2 different spindles. RF Cinch BB bearings last about 2 weeks in a bb92 frame. The bearing is just too small... though I am not sure if a MM is really going to help all that much. As far as I can tell from the article Shimano is still making 24mm cranks so Im thinking you will all be fine.

Bottom line is If you don't like it don't fucking buy it. If you can afford new shit but can't keep straight what part goes with which pay someone to do it. Last but not least lets just be thankful its not Ebike specific.

[joetron]

I dont understand the rage. It works with everything that already exists... Its not a new standard, its a different spindle size that all their cranks will use instead of having to use 2 different spindles. RF Cinch BB bearings last about 2 weeks in a bb92 frame. The bearing is just too small... though I am not sure if a MM is really going to help all that much. As far as I can tell from the article Shimano is still making 24mm cranks so Im thinking you will all be fine.

Bottom line is If you don't like it don't fucking buy it. If you can afford new shit but can't keep straight what part goes with which pay someone to do it. Last but not least lets just be thankful its not Ebike specific.

This about sums it up.

Also, can I interest you in a Rotor 4130 bottom bracket for your 30mm spindle in a bb92 frame? They’ve been holding up.
Regards,
Industry shill

[Jonny Snow]

This is a problem because bullshit standards lead to more bullshit standards. Customers need to call out the industry every single time, and then not buy their shit. The industry needs to decide on one set of standards that is generally future proof, and then stick with it.

[scrublover]

This is a problem because bullshit standards lead to more bullshit standards. Customers need to call out the industry every single time, and then not buy their shit. The industry needs to decide on one set of standards that is generally future proof, and then stick with it.

...and I'm sure the industry going get right on that.


...any second now.

...right around the corner.

[Eluder]

This is not a standard it is a product that fits all modern mountain bikes.

[jono]

This is a problem because bullshit standards lead to more bullshit standards. Customers need to call out the industry every single time, and then not buy their shit. The industry needs to decide on one set of standards that is generally future proof, and then stick with it.

This is a solid plan and I'm glad you mentioned it. What we need is a new set of standards. Ones that won't change. The best thing about having you here is that we know you'll call them out when those standards are released because, you're right, they need to be called out every single time.

While you're waiting for the next one, might I suggest honing your meme game in the Polyasshattery subforum? We'll need you at the top of your game when the next incident occurs. Thanks for your vigilance!

[toast2266]

This is not a standard it is a product that fits all modern mountain bikes.

No, you don't understand. Every component needs to be identical.

I, for one, am furious about hub flanges. All these companies with their different standards for hub flange size. It's ridiculous.

[doebedoe]

No, you don't understand. Every component needs to be identical.

I, for one, am furious about hub flanges. All these companies with their different standards for hub flange size. It's ridiculous.

You think hub flanges are bad?! Try ERDs.

[toast2266]

You think hub flanges are bad?! Try ERDs.

Don't even get me started! It's like there's a different standard for every rim!

[funkendrenchman]

A 6 minute product video about one of the least interesting bike components.....Whatever this DUB thing is will make no difference to how I ride or how much fun I have. As others have said, I'll buy whatever fits and not worry about it.

[Skistack]

So we went from 24mm to 30mm spindles to cut a few grams no one would ever notice and make spindles 4.7% stiffer; now we're going down to 27.9999mm to cram bigger bearings into the BB?

Do these engineers and marketing wankers lie awake at night thinking about how they have contributed nothing positive to society?

[smmokan]

You do realize the “marketing wankers” have done their jobs, right? Look at all the people talking about their new product.

[reckless toboggan]

Do these engineers and marketing wankers lie awake at night thinking about how they have contributed nothing positive to society?

I'm pretty sure they lie awake at night thinking about their facial hair configuration instead.

[Jonny Snow]

This is a solid plan and I'm glad you mentioned it. What we need is a new set of standards. Ones that won't change. The best thing about having you here is that we know you'll call them out when those standards are released because, you're right, they need to be called out every single time.

There's a huge difference between what SRAM pulls out of it's ass and markets to people, vs. real industry standards.

Imagine if the electronics/computer companies just came up with their own proprietary data formats, connections, hardware, etc, across the board. The internet literally wouldn't exist and we'd probably still be at 1970's level with computer technology.

[Roxtar]

You do realize the “marketing wankers” have done their jobs, right? Look at all the people talking about their new product.

Ding, ding, ding, And the winner for "post of the thread" is....

[toast2266]

Imagine if the electronics/computer companies just came up with their own proprietary data formats, connections, hardware, etc, across the board. The internet literally wouldn't exist and we'd probably still be at 1970's level with computer technology.

I can only assume you're trolling you get someone to say "Apple."

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Jonny Snow]

Apple is the computer equivalent of SRAM - both used by morons who aren't tech savvy.

[doebedoe]

Apple is the computer equivalent of SRAM - both used by morons who aren't tech savvy.

Except that most of the tech world uses apple. Like, every serious software engineer and computer scientist I know. Because they all want a UNIX-based OS, good hardware, without the faffing around of setting up Linux.

But sure, the people building the tech world right now, aren't tech savy.