# Stupid Bike & Equipment Trends-- Past & Present



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Hoping to start a thread here on bike/equipment trends that should've died/should die, past and present. I got one to start.  

I'm just getting back into road cycling after an 11+ year lay-off. As a result, it's a bit like stepping out of a time capsule, but I'm glad some things have mostly died off... like the dreaded ULTRA NARROW CLINCHER phenomenon of the late '80s/early '90s.

Basically, back then, some 'genius'/moron marketing guys decided that if 700x23 is good, then 700x20 must be even better. Lookit how LIGHT the tires are! Lookit the PRESSURES you can pump 'em up to! What's not to LOVE!?! :devil: 

And bikies, being ever the suckers for the latest trend, totally bought into it... for awhile, anyway. Which then started an 'arms race' to get even narrower... 700x19, 700x18... as STOCK tires on midpriced bikes. In all sizes. Eek! ut: 

Eventually, the road riders of the era, pinch-flatted beyond recognition and sore-thumbed from having to hitch-hike home yet again from their previously low-hassle training rides, woke up and smelt the coffee. 

700x18/19 tires and their ilk were consigned to the dustbin of history, at least as stock equipment for all but tiny riders and time trialers.

Why do I mention this? So we "don't get fooled again", as the old Who song goes.

If anyone else has any 'stupid bike/equipment trends' they'd like to add, post 'em here. I'm sure we could all learn a lot from the mistakes of the past (and present). :idea:


.


----------



## leviathans_child (May 23, 2008)

i cant believe campy are going 11 speed...its getting ridiculous...

eventually will all be riding about on 47 speed bikes with 1 meter seat stay width

surely theres a point when it's just not optimal...

on top of all that 10's just a nice round number


----------



## Blue Sugar (Jun 14, 2005)

*Stupid socks*

I think the new socks with all the stupid graphics and lettering (beer logos, humping rabbits, etc.) on them are for the most part stupid. I do like my Lion of Flanders socks, though.


----------



## Blue Sugar (Jun 14, 2005)

*Stupid socks*

I think the new socks with all the stupid graphics and lettering (beer logos, humping rabbits, etc.) on them are for the most part stupid. I do like my Lion of Flanders socks, though.

Doesn't anyone make plain black or white socks anymore?


----------



## smokey422 (Feb 22, 2004)

+1 on the 11 speeds. I'm still using an 8-speed drivetrain and have never wanted more gears. It would be nice if there were a wider selection of drop-barred bikes that would take wider tires and would allow the bars to be mounted higher without one of those ugly 3" risers. Rack and fender mounts would also be nice.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

Carbon fiber bars & stems. They're actually heavier than alloy. Seats that are more like butt floss than anything to sit on. Titanium bolts/nuts/screws. Compact style frames - IMO they're fugly. +1 on the socks. Road tires with tread. Computers that measure speed, ave. speed, time ridden, time of day, cadence, lap times, split times, altitude, % of grade, power output, heart rate, wind speed, temperature, direction, humidity, time of sunset/sunrise, calories, toenail hardness, earlobe length, how long it's been since you last shaved and showered, whether or not your hands are clean, tire pressure, how full your bladder is, and your average rectal temperature.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

Mr. Versatile said:


> Computers that measure how full your bladder is, and your average rectal temperature.



That requires the "butt floss seat sensor" option


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Mr. Versatile said:


> Carbon fiber bars & stems. They're actually heavier than alloy. Seats that are more like butt floss than anything to sit on. Titanium bolts/nuts/screws. Compact style frames - IMO they're fugly. +1 on the socks. Road tires with tread. Computers that measure speed, ave. speed, time ridden, time of day, cadence, lap times, split times, altitude, % of grade, power output, heart rate, wind speed, temperature, direction, humidity, time of sunset/sunrise, calories, toenail hardness, earlobe length, how long it's been since you last shaved and showered, whether or not your hands are clean, tire pressure, how full your bladder is, and your average rectal temperature.


That is the most singularly awesome display of retro-grouchness/curmudgeon-ness I have ever seen. And rightfully so! 

I am in awe, sir. :thumbsup: 


.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

Lol!


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 20, 2007)

Disc brakes on mountainbikes to the point where there dang few frames available with canti bosses. I wonder how long until the only new mtb frames with V-brake capablility will say Huffy on the tubes.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

leviathans_child said:


> i cant believe campy are going 11 speed...its getting ridiculous...
> 
> eventually will all be riding about on 47 speed bikes with 1 meter seat stay width
> 
> ...


Word. Anything to one-up the other guy I guess (in this case, Shimano), even if it's not particularly needed. rrr: 

I guess it'll stop when we all have 11-28 straight blocks? Aughhh. Imagine shifting through _that_ mess. :yikes: 

What renders it even stupider is that compact cranks allow riders to get a low gear without going to big cogs, thus reducing the number of cogs you need. Instead of running a 12-27 cassette with 53/39 'rings, you can run an 11-23 'sette with 50/34, and you only have to cover 12 teeth of jumps instead of 15. Ditto a 53/39 with 12-23 vs 11 or 12-21 with the compact crank.

Maybe we could use more cogs on the mountain bike side, but not on the road. And at some point soon even there it becomes stupid. 12 cogs I'd think would be the absolute max before the friendly guys in the white shirts show up to take the engineering team away. ut: 

The funny part is that I see this while having had one of the most horrible 'not enough cogs' experiences of anyone ever (single-speed riders, please to shaddup in advance ;-) ). I did the Davis Double Century back in the late '80s, on not much training and a used bike that was set up quite sh***y. But I was too green to know it at the time.

Only 6 cogs in back, on a wide-range 14-17-20-24-28-32 freewheel. I was NEVER in the right gear for the entire *200 miles*, every gear I wanted was well between the ratios I had, all the time. It was super-frustrating and suuuuuuuuuuuuuuucked. 200 miles is hard enough, but 200 miles in the wrong gear?!? Sounds a bit like something they do to ppl at Guantanamo.

That and the 38cm handlebars and tie-on gel seat cover (remember those horrid things?) just totally farked up the ride for me. Total pain, total inefficiency. Didn't get out of bed the next day.

The funny thing is how easy the fix was. Not too long after that I was riding a 7-spd freewheel, 13-26, with 52/39 'rings (old crankset wouldn't go below 42), and it was just about perfect for sport riding. That was almost 20 years ago. So, to be honest, we solved most of this problem a long time ago, for most everyone 'cept the racer/wannabe racer crowd. :shocked: 

Of course, some ppl are greedy and want a 'wide range straight block' or WR near straight block, even if they don't truly need it (and I admit, on some days I may be one of those people). Fine. Go with an 11 or 12-23 10-spd 'sette, and 50/34 compact crank. Mostly one-tooth jumps, and a quite low low. Want super-low, go to a triple. Done.

But even though the problem's mostly solved, the marketing guys want to keep beating the dead horse until money falls out of its ass. And they'll keep doing it 'til bikies finally go, en masse, "Errr... why do I need 16 cogs, again?". :hand: 

And some ppl actually wonder why Grant Petersen and the retro-grouch squad exist. Yeesh. 


.


----------



## MShaw (Jun 7, 2003)

Biopace rings. Ugh. Everywhere but the granny ring on my mtn bike that is! Worked fairly well for me actually!

I just recently bought myself a Regal Ti saddle. Been meaning to try one since the late 80s... Wow! Heaven on a bike!

M


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

MShaw said:


> Biopace rings. Ugh. Everywhere but the granny ring on my mtn bike that is! !


Omg... totally forgot about those things. Hated 'em from day one! :skep:


----------



## B15serv (Apr 27, 2008)

These are all great points. personally id like to see some 80's/ early 90's paint schemes come back... what so wrong with white bikes covered in neon orange, yellow, lime, teal etc. graphics. I do like the fun socks since i wear them to work and all, it sounds off but im allergic to most black socks but cycling ones seem to work fine. I agree with you all on the gears too... i ran a 12-25ish ultegra on my mountain bike and was fine so an 11 speed road bike is just not needed. I definately agree with the abundance of disc only mountain bikes... ive ridden a good amount of trails and my v brakes never failed me... they could stop on a dime just like all my friends discs. the carbon everything is getting really annoying too..... i understand the concept of a carbon frame but to me they feel like they dont have a soul. my aluminum with carbon stays is comfy enough for me. carbon forks rock and all but bars and stems are simply heavy overpriced eye candy.


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

this sums it up pretty good.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> Carbon fiber bars & stems. They're actually heavier than alloy.


I agree about stems (most are just carbon fiber wrapped), but what alloy bars weighs less than the Zipp SL (165 g)?


----------



## leviathans_child (May 23, 2008)

carbon bars and lighter for sure


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

bigpinkt said:


> this sums it up pretty good.


On the plus side, the gentleman in the pic will be free to legally marry whomever he wants in my great home state of California come Monday. :lol:


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Electronic shifting.

Why can't we admit there's not really that good a reason apart from "We Can!"????


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Ugly-ass 'extreme' paint jobs. 













.


----------



## B15serv (Apr 27, 2008)

carbon bars have the potential to be lighter. however look at the price difference.... regardless of what they claim the FSA k wing carbons are about 240g for over $200. my scott alloy bars that came stock on the bike are 235g. I understand that carbon can be lighter but for every carbon bar there is an aluminum one that is within 15g for about half the price.


----------



## AlexCad5 (Jan 2, 2005)

smokey422 said:


> +1 on the 11 speeds. I'm still using an 8-speed drivetrain and have never wanted more gears. It would be nice if there were a wider selection of drop-barred bikes that would take wider tires and would allow the bars to be mounted higher without one of those ugly 3" risers. Rack and fender mounts would also be nice.



I guess you don't do a lot off fast group rides, where someone else is setting the pace. Trying to hit a particular speed without the right gear combination is agonizing. Of course if you are so strong that you are the one that is always setting the pace, this is a non-issue.


----------



## AlexCad5 (Jan 2, 2005)

B15serv said:


> carbon bars have the potential to be lighter. however look at the price difference.... regardless of what they claim the FSA k wing carbons are about 240g for over $200. my scott alloy bars that came stock on the bike are 235g. I understand that carbon can be lighter but for every carbon bar there is an aluminum one that is within 15g for about half the price.


 You buy a K wing for it's ergo shapes not it's weight. That long reach and drop don't work for me, but you can't make shapes like that with aluminum.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

AlexCad5 said:


> I guess you don't do a lot off fast group rides, where someone else is setting the pace. Trying to hit a particular speed without the right gear combination is agonizing.


Okay, but you gotta admit, with 10 cogs and compact cranks, we're close to being completely straight-blocked out as it is.

We really _need_ an 11th cog on the road? Prolly not.



.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

AlexCad5 said:


> I guess you don't do a lot off fast group rides, where someone else is setting the pace. Trying to hit a particular speed without the right gear combination is agonizing. Of course if you are so strong that you are the one that is always setting the pace, this is a non-issue.


If you deal at that level of minutia, 11 speeds aren't gonna do it for you either..


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

*sacrificing durability for weight*

I think the worst trend has been super-light parts and frames that sacrifice durability for a few grams. Unless you are an elite racer, how is this a good idea? I also think the new 11 speed drivetrains are well beyond the point of diminishing returns.


----------



## Mootsie (Feb 4, 2004)

*Small front wheel and not a Terry*

Once popular with tri geeks. Now popular with fixed freaks. Never popular with a century rider.

https://brad.sweat365.com/files/2007/11/shogun-1.jpg


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

Anything that benefits the manufacturer yet is passed off as an improvement to the cyclist.

1. 10 or 11 speed groupsets..They sell new parts but do very little for the cyclist.

2. Threadless headsets/stems..

3. New BB designs...external bearings, blah, blah, blah

4. Anything proprietary...frames that require special BB, headsets, or seatposts..These kill resale value..


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

Almost all but the OP's contribution are merely retro-grouch rantings. I hate carbon fiber reinforced plastic, but it really doesn't make cycling worse. - TF


----------



## smokey422 (Feb 22, 2004)

AlexCad5 said:


> I guess you don't do a lot off fast group rides, where someone else is setting the pace. Trying to hit a particular speed without the right gear combination is agonizing. Of course if you are so strong that you are the one that is always setting the pace, this is a non-issue.


You're right, I don't do a lot of fast group rides, matter of fact I don't do any. 95% of my riding is done solo and I'm more concerned about getting a nice workout and enjoying the scenery than I am about becoming the next Lance. At 56 years old I have nothing left to prove to anybody. If racing with your friends makes you happy, I'm glad for you and more power to you.


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

smokey422 said:


> You're right, I don't do a lot of fast group rides, matter of fact I don't do any. 95% of my riding is done solo and I'm more concerned about getting a nice workout and enjoying the scenery than I am about becoming the next Lance. At 56 years old I have nothing left to prove to anybody. If racing with your friends makes you happy, I'm glad for you and more power to you.


It ALL makes someone happy which is why it is silly to say we don't need this or that. It makes someone's riding more emjoyable. - TF


----------



## Blue Sugar (Jun 14, 2005)

Mr. Versatile said:


> Carbon fiber bars & stems. They're actually heavier than alloy. Seats that are more like butt floss than anything to sit on. Titanium bolts/nuts/screws. Compact style frames - IMO they're fugly. +1 on the socks. Road tires with tread. Computers that measure speed, ave. speed, time ridden, time of day, cadence, lap times, split times, altitude, % of grade, power output, heart rate, wind speed, temperature, direction, humidity, time of sunset/sunrise, calories, toenail hardness, earlobe length, how long it's been since you last shaved and showered, whether or not your hands are clean, tire pressure, how full your bladder is, and your average rectal temperature.


I find the rectal temperature probe to be particularly uncomfortable.


----------



## roadfix (Jun 20, 2006)

I've been riding a fixed gear for 15 years so far so this is not a trend.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

TurboTurtle said:


> It ALL makes someone happy which is why it is silly to say we don't need this or that. It makes someone's riding more enjoyable. - TF


But, you have to differentiate... is a trend or particular piece of equipment making someone's riding more enjoyable because it actually provides a significant benefit, or is it temporarily/falsely making it more enjoyable because the marketing for that trend/equipment SAYS it's just soooo awesome, and you buy into the marketing? :idea: 

One is BS, the other isn't, and that's the diff.


.


----------



## Treker (Nov 7, 2007)

Y Foil and Soft Ride frames. I don't know about the ride since I have never been on one, but they are just bu++ ugly, IMO. I'm glad they never caught on.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

TurboTurtle said:


> Almost all but the OP's contribution are merely retro-grouch rantings. I hate carbon fiber reinforced plastic, but it really doesn't make cycling worse. - TF


I'm the OP, and I say, what's wrong with retro-grouch rants? They have a tendency to be right. :smilewinkgrin: 

I don't know how retro I truly am (haven't worn wool yet, but I'm meaning to), but I definitely am results-oriented. It's not enough to be a _new_ tech/piece of equipment, you also have to be better than what's in use now, and in a 'big-picture' way too... none of this, "here's something that's 10 grams lighter for twice the price and half the durability". That's BS that no one would put up with in any other industry.

Can you imagine someone marketing a sports car that made you only a tiny hair faster for twice the money and half the durability? :skep:


.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Treker said:


> Y Foil and Soft Ride frames. I don't know about the ride since I have never been on one, but they are just bu++ ugly, IMO. I'm glad they never caught on.


Outlawed by rule before they could be fully developed. Otherwise, they'd own the market by now.


----------



## danl1 (Jul 23, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> I guess it'll stop when we all have 11-28 straight blocks?
> .


And what's missing from that thought train is that straight blocks ain't particularly useful. Great down at the 11-12-13 end, but the 25-26 end is pretty silly. The 'right' gear is 8-10% away, no matter the tooth count. If you've got the juice to power an 11, a SRAM 11-26 on a compact ought to get up anything that a road bike should be on. If a mere mortal, a Campy 13-29 will do fine, silly egos notwithstanding. 

While it's a not-yet item, electronic shifting is another solution in search of a problem. Gotta admit though, being able to slip buttons under the bar wrap in a couple of locations might not be the worst thing.


----------



## Dinosaur (Jan 29, 2004)

Carbon seatposts, stems and handle bars. Mostly zoot affect that really doesn't do anything. 

Ultra narrow saddles (like 132 and under width). The biggest mistake Selle Italia made was stop the production of the Flite saddles. San Marco, on the other hand, still pumps out the Rolls and Regal.


----------



## danl1 (Jul 23, 2005)

AlexCad5 said:


> You buy a K wing for it's ergo shapes not it's weight. That long reach and drop don't work for me, but *you can't make shapes like that with aluminum*.


I can't... But "They" can...


----------



## danl1 (Jul 23, 2005)

Dave Hickey said:


> 2. Threadless headsets/stems..


I go back and forth on this one. Quills certainly have advantages, and definitely have soul. But threadless are stronger, lighter, and easier to adjust (the headset, not the height.) There's also something to be said for no more jammed wedges. 

And while they're only circumstantially related, open faceplates rawk, ugliness notwithstanding.


----------



## Treker (Nov 7, 2007)

asgelle said:


> Outlawed by rule before they could be fully developed. Otherwise, they'd own the market by now.


Just curious, but what made the Y Foil and SoftRide designs so good that they would own the market by now? What were their main performance advantages over a traditional double triangle design?

Jay B.


----------



## Dajianshan (Jul 15, 2007)

Fill body shock Mtn Bikes as the default bike for family leisure-road riding.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Treker said:


> Just curious, but what made the Y Foil and SoftRide designs so good that they would own the market by now? What were their main performance advantages over a traditional double triangle design?


Much lower drag than a traditional double diamond frame, but they were heavy and some people didn't like the ride. With the advances in carbon fiber design since then, I believe both these could have been worked out.


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

asgelle said:


> Much lower drag than a traditional double diamond frame, but they were heavy and some people didn't like the ride. With the advances in carbon fiber design since then, I believe both these could have been worked out.


Beam bikes are still used by RAAM riders for their comfort.

Also, if you are talking about 'if they weren't outlawed', we all would be riding 'bents (except for the weird retro-grouches with beards, etc. on their double diamonds)

TF


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

TurboTurtle said:


> Also, if you are talking about 'if they weren't outlawed', we all would be riding 'bents (except for the weird retro-grouches with beards, etc. on their double diamonds)


I believe the significant disadvantages associated with recumbents are not as easily overcome through material and design refinements as non-double diamond, traditional position frames.


----------



## sbglax13 (Apr 21, 2008)

Can you imagine someone marketing a sports car that made you only a tiny hair faster for twice the money and half the durability? :skep:


.[/QUOTE]

Yes. 
Ferrai f430 0-60 = 3.5. $180K
Corvette Z06 0-60 = 3.7. $66K
(Car & Driver)
Maybe not the best comparison, a Ferrari to a Chevy. But the Ferrari is still only a hair faster and almost three times the money. The Corvette is a faster car in every way but its still not a Ferrari.


----------



## Mr. Jones (Jul 4, 2006)

Dinosaur said:


> Ultra narrow saddles (like 132 and under width). The biggest mistake Selle Italia made was stop the production of the Flite saddles. San Marco, on the other hand, still pumps out the Rolls and Regal.


They discontinued the flite? Seriously? I thought they just came out with some weird team issue design. Whatever. 

I don't think that ultra narrow saddles are a dumb idea. The most comfortable saddle I've ever ridden on is a Selle Italia SLR. While I realize that that is not a super light saddle, the narrowness definitely appeals to me. It might be dumb if they discontinued all wider saddles, but offering a product that appeals to many people and that they continue to use comfortably doesn't seem dumb to me.


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

SystemShock said:


> I'm the OP, and I say, what's wrong with retro-grouch rants? They have a tendency to be right. :smilewinkgrin:
> 
> I don't know how retro I truly am (haven't worn wool yet, but I'm meaning to), but I definitely am results-oriented. It's not enough to be a _new_ tech/piece of equipment, you also have to be better than what's in use now, and in a 'big-picture' way too... none of this, "here's something that's 10 grams lighter for twice the price and half the durability". That's BS that no one would put up with in any other industry.
> 
> ...


Nothing wrong with retro-grouch ranting, but I thought you were looking for things that actually made cycling worse - like 20mm clinchers. BTW, the 'high pressue' part is still very much with us.

As far as exponential pricing on barely incremental improvements - everything is like that. The Ferarri/Vette thing is one. For something more mundain, you think a $2000 kitchen sink is really that much better than a $500 dollar one? (I really don't know what sinks cost.)

TF


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

I see most of the current 'new things that don't work' being in nutrition. Sometimes I think there is more science in astrology than popular nutrition. - TF


----------



## croscoe (Aug 8, 2007)

Compact frames 
11 Speed cassettes? Seriously?! Bah!


----------



## Blue Sugar (Jun 14, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> On the plus side, the gentleman in the pic will be free to legally marry whomever he wants in my great home state of California come Monday. :lol:


Is that David Hasselhoff?


----------



## Visitor302 (Aug 6, 2005)

What about those cruisers with the automatic shifters?

Also, i'm not sure what ya call them, but they were 3 cogs/wheels inside a plastic case, that you put a solvent in, and i'ts suposed to clean your chain...


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

asgelle said:


> Outlawed by rule before they could be fully developed. Otherwise, they'd own the market by now.


Own the market? Which market, the clueless Fred market?

I remember riding with a buddy who was on a team sponsor by them, It was a while back but I think it was Comptel, Nutrafig or Sierra Nevada. He hated it. It was so distracting to riding behind him as he bounced around. 

You can still buy them if you want. The 650 one looks like it would be a great crit bike. http://www.softride.com/bikes/bikes.html

I think you can still ride them in USCF, just not UCI....otherwise CSC would be using them for sure.


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

The never-ending quest to sell "Pro-Level" equipment to recreational riders with deep pockets.


----------



## CoLiKe20 (Jan 30, 2006)

SystemShock said:


> Ugly-ass 'extreme' paint jobs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I disagree, Klein has some great pain job...


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

TurboTurtle said:


> Nothing wrong with retro-grouch ranting, but I thought you were looking for things that actually made cycling worse - like 20mm clinchers. BTW, the 'high pressue' part is still very much with us.


I think the majority of things mentioned in the thread do/did indeed make cycling worse.




> As far as exponential pricing on barely incremental improvements - everything is like that. The Ferarri/Vette thing is one. For something more mundain, you think a $2000 kitchen sink is really that much better than a $500 dollar one?


The Ferrari/Vette comparison only addressed part of what I said, though... the other half was "and a lot less durability". I've heard Ferraris are finicky, but GM hasn't exactly been a paragon of reliability either (though they have finally been trying of late).

Then of course, there is the big unspoken X-factor... the Ferrari will help you get laid more than the 'Vette will, if one is into impressing the bimbo squad. An overpriced unobtanium bike component won't do that, unless you know some verrry different women than I do. :shocked:

So I think the comparison breaks down some, if you catch my meaning. :wink5:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

> Can you imagine someone marketing a sports car that made you only a tiny hair faster for twice the money and half the durability? :skep:





> Yes.
> Ferrai f430 0-60 = 3.5. $180K
> Corvette Z06 0-60 = 3.7. $66K
> (Car & Driver)
> Maybe not the best comparison, a Ferrari to a Chevy. But the Ferrari is still only a hair faster and almost three times the money. The Corvette is a faster car in every way but its still not a Ferrari.


See previous post.... as you say, maybe not the greatest comparison. It would be if 'Vettes were as reliable as Hondas, and got you laid as much as Ferraris did.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

CoLiKe20 said:


> I disagree, Klein has some great pain job...


Was that intentional or a typo? If the former... awesome. :lol:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

TurboTurtle said:


> Also, if you are talking about 'if they weren't outlawed', we all would be riding 'bents (except for the weird retro-grouches with beards, etc. on their double diamonds)


'bents? Nah. I sit on my ass enough at home. 

And, no beard. I guess my Retro-Grouch Membership Card™ is revoked. :frown5:


.


----------



## filtersweep (Feb 4, 2004)

Agonizing might be a bit strong. I suggest riding fixed for awhile to cure yourself of this malady. 

The other issue--- seems like a whole lot of people ride with 53 X 11 as their top gear. How many people really need that 11?

I am still riding 9--- which is fine, considering I have three bikes using 9. I like to share wheels. Maybe I don't know what I am missing, but I doubt it.



AlexCad5 said:


> I guess you don't do a lot off fast group rides, where someone else is setting the pace. Trying to hit a particular speed without the right gear combination is agonizing. Of course if you are so strong that you are the one that is always setting the pace, this is a non-issue.


----------



## murbike (Jan 22, 2004)

Dayglo


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

SystemShock said:


> But, you have to differentiate... is a trend or particular piece of equipment making someone's riding more enjoyable because it actually provides a significant benefit, or is it temporarily/falsely making it more enjoyable because the marketing for that trend/equipment SAYS it's just soooo awesome, and you buy into the marketing? :idea:
> 
> One is BS, the other isn't, and that's the diff.
> 
> ...


That's correct, but we also need to differentiate between what provides a benefit to 'me' and what others can benefit from. Not everybody is (or should be) like 'me'. - TF


----------



## Ricksom (Oct 19, 2004)

The lure of ultra-light bikes and components. I have yet to see scientific evidence that proves lighter bikes make you faster. Besides climbing on long, steep grades, there is no significant advantage to ultra-light bikes. The weight of the body compared to the bicycle is overwhelmingly more significant. Biggest marketing scam of the decade.

Frame/wheel stiffness, drivetrain friction and efficiency, aerodynamics, and tire rolling resistance and shock absorbing ability play a much bigger role.


----------



## MG537 (Jul 25, 2006)

sbglax13 said:


> Can you imagine someone marketing a sports car that made you only a tiny hair faster for twice the money and half the durability? :skep:
> 
> 
> .


Yes. 
Ferrai f430 0-60 = 3.5. $180K
Corvette Z06 0-60 = 3.7. $66K
(Car & Driver)
Maybe not the best comparison, a Ferrari to a Chevy. But the Ferrari is still only a hair faster and almost three times the money. The Corvette is a faster car in every way but its still not a Ferrari.[/QUOTE]
Sort of like someone buying a HUMMER to drive in the city and maybe once every 2 years go out on a dirt road.

But let's get back to cycling. I really respect the dude or dudette, that will slap on a triple crank on their new Look, Colnago, Trek, Cervélo etc. because they admit to themselves mostly, that they're not great climbers.
Keep on riding!


----------



## CleavesF (Dec 31, 2007)

Non-standardization. 

I freaking hate it. Just like how America doesn't use the metric system... with one other country in the whole world. 

26.6, 25.4, 31.8, 31.6, 27.6, 29.9 omfg... millimeters and stuff. 

Make one standard, and keep it. Ditto for headsets (Thanks Shimano, Campy, King and Cane Creek), BB (Thanks Cannondale and Trek!), etc. etc...


----------



## MG537 (Jul 25, 2006)

Treker said:


> Y Foil and Soft Ride frames. I don't know about the ride since I have never been on one, but they are just bu++ ugly, IMO. I'm glad they never caught on.


I used to ride a Softride. Very comfortable to the lower back.
Unfortunately UCI decided they were illegal as of 2000.


----------



## Mapei (Feb 3, 2004)

Plastic bar tape.
Leather bar tape.
Unpadded superlight saddles.
Tire savers. (Those springy things that would scrape your tires while your rode, which supposedly cleaned them off, every revolution.)
Wheels with fewer than 20 spokes.
Ergo-style handlebar drops.
Inability to get high-end clincher tires with pretty gum sidewalls.
Ultralight bottle holders that can't hold bottles in.
No trim settings for front derailleurs.

Unlike most on this thread, though, I love the onward march of technology. I love lighter bikes. I love more gears.


----------



## buck-50 (Sep 20, 2005)

Personally, I think the threadless headset has made cycling worse-

With a quill, sure, it's a little harder to adjust yer headset. But that's a problem, what, once every 2,000 miles or so?

Threadless stems led us to steerer tubes cut super short and stems sitting directly on top of the headset. Which led us to extended headtubes and "compact" frames to compensate for stems that were set too low. 

Threadless headsets led to carbon forks with carbon steerer tubes, which rarely have clearance for tires bigger than 23s. 

Threadless headsets led to more standardization between road and mountain bike, which led to black components. ugh.

A quill stem can be adjusted up and down, which to me has always been more important than adjusting length- I know I need a 110 stem- always have. But being able to adjust it up a little bit? that's huge.


----------



## tindrum (Mar 5, 2008)

black. white, and red color schemes.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Mapei said:


> Unlike most on this thread, though, I love the onward march of technology. I love lighter bikes. I love more gears.


I love technology too. It's just that there's technology in the service of the rider, and technology in the service of the marketing department. Two different things. :cornut: 


.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

croscoe said:


> Compact frames


I'm cool with a couple of degrees of top tube rise, a la something like the Bleriot.

It's when you get into 'extreme' really squashed-down compact frames that resemble a kid's BMX bike that I have to go, "WTF? Someone thought this looks _good_?". ut: 


.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

filtersweep said:


> The other issue--- seems like a whole lot of people ride with 53 X 11 as their top gear. How many people really need that 11?


LOL, I've never gotten that as well. Seems to be a case of, "If I buy it, I'll be able to push it." Err, nope. :hand: 

Guess it could make sense for people who like to pedal on fast downhills and who can't spin. But if it's a fast downhill, I'd rather just get into a nice deep aero tuck and focus on avoiding potholes/pavement cracks. I seem to descend both safer and faster that way actually, but YMMV.


.


----------



## doughboy_88 (Aug 22, 2006)

SystemShock said:


> Ugly-ass 'extreme' paint jobs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


LOL. I'd rock that for the shock factor alone!


----------



## Slim Again Soon (Oct 25, 2005)

*Black stuff*

Like disco, it is this or nothing.

Bring back silver as an option ... please.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

tindrum said:


> black. white, and red color schemes.


+1 --- *YES!!! Thank you.*


----------



## raymonda (Jan 31, 2007)

Disc Brakes on a Road Bike. God, I have a friend who thinks that disc brakes are the best. I picked up his front wheel the other day and i swear it weighed 3bs.


----------



## jukebox (Sep 6, 2005)

Ricksom said:


> The lure of ultra-light bikes and components. I have yet to see scientific evidence that proves lighter bikes make you faster. Besides climbing on long, steep grades, there is no significant advantage to ultra-light bikes. The weight of the body compared to the bicycle is overwhelmingly more significant. Biggest marketing scam of the decade.
> 
> Frame/wheel stiffness, drivetrain friction and efficiency, aerodynamics, and tire rolling resistance and shock absorbing ability play a much bigger role.


Power to weight ratios are very important in cycling, more important for climbing, but still important. A given power will always move a lower weight faster than a higher weight.


----------



## newridr (Mar 7, 2003)

FAIL.

This thread has four pages and nobody's mentioned bolt on aero bars yet?

Not only don't they make cycling better for the average rider, it makes it far more dangerous for anyone in the vicinity of the usually fat ass rider that's using them. I see the weekend warriors weaving their way down the local MUT at the break-neck speed of 16.5 mph and I make sure to give them a wide berth so as not to be wiped out when they hit a bump or go to shift and go down in a heap.


----------



## newridr (Mar 7, 2003)

Power Taps.

I hear the tri-geeks that ride 50 miles a week talk about how if they only could get a power tap, they could monitor and learn and gain more power. I tell them that maybe they should just...ride more. The only power meter I need is whether I can beat my friends up the false flat to the street sign that's our unofficial finish line.


----------



## Visitor302 (Aug 6, 2005)

While I belive disk breaks are a good thing on MTB's,,, I also agree that disks on roadies are overkill


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

those goofy bars that Lemond used in 1990, the ones that curved in at the bottom.

A crash waiting to happen


----------



## saintsfan342000 (May 30, 2007)

Room 1201 said:


> Electronic shifting.
> 
> Why can't we admit there's not really that good a reason apart from "We Can!"????



Agree 100%. Why not just attach a little motor to the bike too to help us when we're heading up those tough hills.


----------



## ashpelham (Jan 19, 2006)

There's a lot of things I've learned about the roadie world since joining the club, around 2001. Coming from a mountain bike, grungy, dirty, hairy legs world, entering the road world was like teaching a sumo wrestler the ballet. Most of what I've learned is good, but a whole hell of a lot of it is euro-pro-wanna-be snobbery, and it frickin' needs to end.

Everybody that's ridin' a nice bike and dressed in full kit and can't take the time to speak when someone speaks to them, needs to check the 'tude at their front door, because no one out here in the outside world gives a crap about it.

That is all.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

ashpelham said:


> Everybody that's ridin' a nice bike and dressed in full kit and can't take the time to speak when someone speaks to them, needs to check the 'tude at their front door, because no one out here in the outside world gives a crap about it.


+1. Fortunately, I have met very very few such jackholes. But that was in the Davis/Sacramento area, years ago. 

I'm starting up riding seriously again, but this time in the Silicon Valley area, i.e. money-land. Pray for me, for I suspect I've landed in decal-sniffer central. :shocked: 


.


----------



## corky (Feb 5, 2005)

Visitor302 said:


> While I belive disk breaks are a good thing on MTB's,,, I also agree that disks on roadies are overkill



people that can't spell brakes.....:blush2:


----------



## zpl (May 7, 2007)

Girvin Flex-stem. 

I worked in a bike shop in the early to mid 90's and it was around that time that Shimano solidified their domination of the market and did a wonderful job introducing "planned obsolecense" (sp?) into their component groups. Since then, good luck finding replacement parts once a couple of years have passed.

Anyone remember the old Deore DX groupset? It had to have been the most bombproof mountain grouppo I have ever used in my life. I consider it an example of Shimano's "old school" product development.


----------



## ZenNMotion (May 28, 2004)

Rants- 
"Training wheels" for kids. Useless and stupid, gets in the way of learning to ride. Bikes steer by leaning, you can't lean with training wheels, the bike handles totally differently. Take the training wheels off, remove the pedals and let the kids push themselves around with their feet while they learn how the bike balances and turns-like a bike. After they are able to cruise around Fred Flintstone-style then try some gentle downhills without pedals, and when that's going well put the pedals back on and let them start to ride. It doesn't take long, and you don't have to run along beside them while they learn.

Non-standard integrated headsets that are available from only 1 source, can't be fixed or replaced with standard tools, and when damaged or ovalized, bye-bye frame.

Road bikes with tight wheel clearance- even race bikes should be able to handle 28mm tires, I do races where a beefy tire is a real advantage and I have to modify my cross bike with road cranks to do it. Plus I don't have to hold back on gravel or dirt roads for training out of pinch-flat fear, my most enjoyable rides include rough roads, ever try to coax a bunch of roadies on a training ride that includes pave? No reason for clearances so tight that you can't do that, an extra 10mm or so on the chainstays is all it takes and there's no downside for climbing or handling, in fact shifting is a little better with longer stays. And brake bridges moved up a few mm's to set up the rear brake pads to align to the center or bottom of the brake shoe slot gives up nothing and makes possible wider tires.

Suspension forks or even full suspension MTBs that rarely leave pavement. If you're not cruising rock gardens you don't need it, adds weight, expense and handling sucks, keep it simple and learn to ride.

Retro style moustache bars. Hey I'm as retro-grouchy as anyone, but these things just suck in my opinion.

Ceramic bearings- gimme a break...

Alloy spoke nipples- weight savings is minimal, what a pain to build with and forget about truing after a year or so, they get welded to your spokes and strip fast with a wrench.

Not all innovations are awful though! Here's a few I can't live without-

Crank brothers pedals- relatively cheap (if you avoid the Ti bits) low/no maintenance, easily rebuilt (even the first models that people complained about), simple brilliant design, you can use any shoe, any model road or MTB style. Want to ride your roadie with MTB shoes so you can walk around a bit mid-ride? Or your warm winter shoes on any bike? My whole fleet has some version of these now.

3rd eye chain catcher. 8 bucks of plastic gold, all my bikes have one and they've saved many a race when doing stupid shifts in tunnel vision.


----------



## aliensporebomb (Jul 2, 2002)

Neon Pink and Green helmets. It looks like someone wearing a watermelon on their noggin.


----------



## SimianSpeedster (Mar 13, 2008)

Slime tubes! Heavyish and worthless for all but the most minor punctures. Invest in a pair of tire levers and a patch kit/extra tube.


----------



## Thommy (Sep 23, 2003)

What about......


integrated headsets (butt-ugly)
aluminum frames with carbon rear triangles (actually ride worse than aluminum)
unpainted "TI" frames (so other people can see your riding titanium)
10 and now 11 speed
one legged forks (Canondale)
credit card instant cyclists who can pronounce derailleur but can't tune or spell it.
Some idiot telling me how great Brooks saddles are, but eveything else on the bike is feather light. I can't see pouring Lawry's Meat Tenderizer down my shorts just for the priveledge of owning a Brooks saddle. Weren't they originally making horse saddles?
Hipster Jack-Asses butchering nice road bike frames.
One more: road helmet with cycling cap underneath, just use a helmet with a visor.

Man, I feel a whole lot better. (exhale)


----------



## handsomerob (Oct 5, 2005)

Thommy said:


> What about......
> 
> 
> integrated headsets (butt-ugly)
> ...


ok... everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I think a few of your issues are a bit unfounded.

1.) Integrated headsets may be dumb, but not because of aesthetics. If you brinnel or somehow mess up the race on an integrated cup, you would have to replace the frame and not just a headset cup. 
2.) I have found that carbon rear triangles actually do have a dampening effect for aluminum.
3.) Unpainted Ti will retain its cosmetic appeal longer than any other finish I know of. I can't think of a better option for a rain bike, mountain bike, or a bike owned my someone that is timid about scratching their paint.
4.) Although I can wrench my own bikes, I don't begrudge cyclists that haven't mastered the tuning of their rig.
5.) It has been said many times over that the weight of a saddle is far less important than the comfort. Putting a Brooks on an otherwise light bike can only be an indication of a rider that values their soft bits more than creating a weight weenie mobile.


----------



## Thommy (Sep 23, 2003)

Yes, just my opinion and for what it's worth I respect your opinion too.


----------



## kiwisimon (Oct 30, 2002)

remember when rear spacing went from 126 to 130 then 135. lots of grouchs were moaning about that back then. "If twelve gears aren't enough then they need to learn to ride more" was something you'd hear from the old timers.
seems like if people have to look back in anger at something as unimportant as bike components they have pretty good lives. Just be glad you are in good health with the economic resources to enjoy cycling.


----------



## Chain (Dec 28, 2006)

Bike snobs...

If someone buys it, rides it and enjoys it then let them be.


----------



## CurbDestroyer (Mar 6, 2008)

MShaw said:


> Biopace rings. Ugh. Everywhere but the granny ring on my mtn bike that is! Worked fairly well for me actually!
> 
> M


I still have one of these. 
https://www.classicrendezvous.com/USA/PowrCam_main.htm







I traded for it about 10 years ago. I broke the bearing race on the fixed cup side . . . . Oppps. Oh well now it just sits.

Mine came setup with 60x42 . . . I have a 60 tooth chainring for 144mm bolt pattern . . . it's fun.


----------



## CurbDestroyer (Mar 6, 2008)

SimianSpeedster said:


> Slime tubes! Heavyish and worthless for all but the most minor punctures. Invest in a pair of tire levers and a patch kit/extra tube.


 . . . not so quick . . . Slime tubes saved my out in a MTB race more than a couple times. In One race I picked up 8 thorns. actually called "Goats-heads" . . . My tires didn't leak even after I pulled them out.


----------



## exracer (Jun 6, 2005)

There is so many to list. 

Mountain biking in the early 90's:

Any part that was mounted to a bike you could get anodized in any color or combination of colors. 

Titanium bolt kits that would save you 10 grams over the stock bolts for 3-4x the price.

Extremely few bike designers/builders understood that suspension was about wheel control. 

Now

Colored Tires - I don't have a burning need to color match my tires to my bike. Black works just fine.

Electronic shifting - Do we really need it?

Marketing carbon fiber as the best material for every single application in the universe.



> aluminum frames with carbon rear triangles (actually ride worse than aluminum)


 Couldn't prove it by me. My aluminum/carbon bike actually rides pretty nice. It even rides better than my Paramount. OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, I know that might come as a shock to some of the "steel is real" crowd out there but it's true. It doesn't mean I don't enjoy riding the Paramount either.


----------



## CurbDestroyer (Mar 6, 2008)

What about the "Flick-Stand"?


----------



## CurbDestroyer (Mar 6, 2008)

This thread could go on for sometime. What about the 80's Euclid/Campy Mountain grpup with "Bullet" shifters?


----------



## russotto (Oct 3, 2005)

What's a "derailleur"?

Oh, you must mean "derailer". Pompous frenchified spellings went out in 1990 or so...


----------



## thedips (Mar 26, 2007)

i gotta toss in here exotic wheelsets....paired spoke lacing... carbon spokes... crazy low count lacing patterns .... etc...:idea:


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

SystemShock said:


> Ugly-ass 'extreme' paint jobs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Holy crap there used to be a guy that rode one of those in the park all the time. I always wondered about that mega beefy fork. His was neon yellow as i recall. 

While we're on the topic of bad products that WTB saddle was a bruiser. Unforgiving as hell. 3 hr ride = compacted spine and guaranteed saddle sores.


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

MR_GRUMPY said:


> The never-ending quest to sell "Pro-Level" equipment to recreational riders with deep pockets.


Amen. All those out of shape toilers see on C-50's, Merlins or DeRosa Kings on a saturday afternoon. I enjoy seeing the bikes but I can't help thinking - poor sap somebody sure saw you coming...


----------



## mecrabby (Apr 10, 2003)

*Mine goes to 11*

Rumor has it that Nigel from Spinal Tap is now in charge of product development for Campagnolo.


----------



## Ricksom (Oct 19, 2004)

In the absence of the effects of gravity (ie. riding on level ground), weight has no effect on how fast you can move.......basic physics. In fact, a heavier weight would be more desirable to resist the effect of sudden gusts of wind and very short hills as the inertia from the extra weight will carry you through it without slowing down. This is shown by ships that take several miles to come to a stop after going at a high rate of speed.

And, where you do climb against gravity, 1 pound lighter on a combined weight of about 200 pounds (bike + rider) will be hardly noticeable. Remember it is the combined weight of rider and bike that matters, as the weight of the bike itself is very minor. It would be wiser to lose 1 pound of weight, shed one water bottle, or have a good crap before riding……than to pay an extra $2,000 for an ultra light weight bike.


----------



## buck-50 (Sep 20, 2005)

CurbDestroyer said:


> What about the "Flick-Stand"?


Hey, as ugly as it was, the flick-stand was a great idea for townies- locks the fork and the front wheel, bike stays upright no matter what it's locked to... 

Not so necessary on that carbide-coated AD in the picture, but on anything with cheap 80's paint, the flickstand was a godsend.


----------



## Guest (Jun 18, 2008)

russotto said:


> What's a "derailleur"?
> 
> Oh, you must mean "derailer". Pompous frenchified spellings went out in 1990 or so...


Or you could look at it as just spelling things properly.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Ricksom said:


> In the absence of the effects of gravity (ie. riding on level ground), weight has no effect on how fast you can move.......basic physics.


Make a list of all forces acting on bike and rider and think about this again. There are forces other than from increasing altitude where gravity plays a role.


----------



## Ricksom (Oct 19, 2004)

Tire rolling resistance from tire deflection (due to weight of rider + bike).
Weight of lazy legs pushing down on crank.
Weight of valve stems causing wheel to slow and accelerate as it rises and falls.
Decreasing air pressure as you gain altitude....thus lowering wind resistance.
Anything else???? Is this a test? What else is significant, as the above mentioned is not.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Ricksom said:


> Is this a test?


Only if you care whether what you write is accurate or not. Sadly, your statements are not. Gravity (weight) plays a significant role in speed even on flat ground through the rolling resistance contribution. This can be seen easily enough through analyticcycling.com

I also notice "no contribution" has mysteriously morphed into not significant. Curious.


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

SystemShock said:


> But, you have to differentiate... is a trend or particular piece of equipment making someone's riding more enjoyable because it actually provides a significant benefit, or is it temporarily/falsely making it more enjoyable because the marketing for that trend/equipment SAYS it's just soooo awesome, and you buy into the marketing? :idea:
> 
> One is BS, the other isn't, and that's the diff.
> 
> ...


Some parts of the country have some paved 12% climbs (logging roads mostly). Recreational riders often find that they need both compact cranks and a 27 on the rear. They may like speed on decents and want an 11 as well. If that is the case they'll have to make up a shimano 11/27 (many do) and they'll find that the cadence jump from the 21 to 24 is simply too big and painful. I'd love to have an 11 speed 11/26 or 11/27 cogset for just those occassions. The Sram red 11/26 would be great but it won't work on my Dura Ace wheels.


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

Blue Sugar said:


> I find the rectal temperature probe to be particularly uncomfortable.


Yeah but how could you possible ride without the information it provides?


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

OK
Now that we have the entire Huffy cycling team posting in one spot, it's important to add bikes without kickstands or wheel driven generators.


----------



## barbedwire (Dec 3, 2005)

Dumbest improvement in bikes is the threadless headset. It's an answer to a question that never existed.


----------



## raymonda (Jan 31, 2007)

Tubless tires....... Man, just buy some sew ups, will you!


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

I still use two bikes with threaded headets so I certainly don't think threadless is a huge improvement but it does have some advantages (somewhat easier to adjust + slighly lighter). What I can't stomach is the integrated headset. Negligable weight advantage, non-standard, potential frame damage - I gotta ask why?


----------



## B15serv (Apr 27, 2008)

so when are we going back to fun neon 90's colors? I want to be able to buy a brand new bike in white with some teal and pink graphics... maybe throw in some pink cables and a chrome quill stem with some toestraps on the pedals. and of course gumwall tires..... oooooooh id love it, throw some orange bottle cages on that beotch and go ride for days. by the way i am so serious about this


----------



## Ricksom (Oct 19, 2004)

I find there are two types of people in this world of cycling. Common sense business thinkers, and detailed oriented scientific thinkers. The latter will obsess with every conceivable factor and force, paying attention to things that contribute less than 0.1% increase in efficiency, power, speed, and control….and most importantly, pay the high price for it. The former will look at the price of these marginally important technology factors, and focus on losing body weight, eating healthy, and training better.

In the end, who is the fool being sucked into paying thousands of dollars to improve their average speed of a 3 hour recreational group ride by 1/2 mph, when good training and a healthy diet will improve it by 3mph or more.

By the way, simply pumping up the tires to higher pressure will solve the rolling resistance issue. Yes, I know, you are going to say that too high a pressure causes too much resistance from road roughage, causing excessive vibration of bike and body, slowing down average speed. Hmmmm, is this really an issue of bike weight???


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Ricksom said:


> I find there are two types of people in this world of cycling. Common sense business thinkers, and detailed oriented scientific thinkers. The latter will obsess with every conceivable factor and force, paying attention to things that contribute less than 0.1% increase in efficiency, power, speed, and control….and most importantly, pay the high price for it.


I believe you have it backwards. The scientific oriented thinkers can understand both the benefit and cost associated with factors and make an informed decision based on their own life priorities and cycling goals. The non-scientific thinkers are swayed by marketing and folk lore and never fully appreciate the benefits (or lack thereof) and then justify their decisions based on perceived changes which is just another way of saying wish fulfillment.

Also scientific thinkers have long ago rejected the false dichotomy of having to choose between training or equipment selection but not being able to have both.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

SwiftSolo said:


> Some parts of the country have some paved 12% climbs (logging roads mostly). Recreational riders often find that they need both compact cranks and a 27 on the rear. They may like speed on decents and want an 11 as well. If that is the case they'll have to make up a shimano 11/27 (many do) and they'll find that the cadence jump from the 21 to 24 is simply too big and painful. I'd love to have an 11 speed 11/26 or 11/27 cogset for just those occassions. The Sram red 11/26 would be great but it won't work on my Dura Ace wheels.


At some point, don't you just get a triple?  

'cuz otherwise, the manufacturer end-game for the scenario you describe ends up being something like a 13-cog near straight-block (11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23-25-27... aieee). :shocked:

Looking, err, interesting on paper, but I'm not sure I want to shift through it. And what's the dropout spacing? Eeeyikes.

.


----------



## burtronix (Jun 20, 2007)

SystemShock said:


> But, you have to differentiate... is a trend or particular piece of equipment making someone's riding more enjoyable because it actually provides a significant benefit, or is it temporarily/falsely making it more enjoyable because the marketing for that trend/equipment SAYS it's just soooo awesome, and you buy into the marketing? :idea:
> 
> One is BS, the other isn't, and that's the diff.
> 
> ...


You're overlooking the enjoyment somebody gets when their ride costs more than their riding buddies can afford. Same reason somebody drives a Lexus or a Jaguar instead of a Toyota or Ford. One person's BS is another person's filet mignon.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

Rather have a good burger than a filet


----------



## murbike (Jan 22, 2004)

CurbDestroyer said:


> What about the "Flick-Stand"?


When used on touring rigs, it was brilliant.
It took me a while to find the flick stand on that ride, though, because my eyes were drawn to the scrotum looking thing near the seat tube. What the he!! is that thing?


----------



## smokey422 (Feb 22, 2004)

Chain said:


> Bike snobs...
> 
> If someone buys it, rides it and enjoys it then let them be.


+1,000.


----------



## scrambles (Jun 10, 2008)

B15serv said:


> so when are we going back to fun neon 90's colors? I want to be able to buy a brand new bike in white with some teal and pink graphics... maybe throw in some pink cables and a chrome quill stem with some toestraps on the pedals. and of course gumwall tires..... oooooooh id love it, throw some orange bottle cages on that beotch and go ride for days. by the way i am so serious about this


The scary thing is he really isn't kidding.....


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

*a few current blots*

$200+helmets. Most of the time, you're paying for more vents, which means AIR/EMPTY SPACE!

Latex tubes. I've been reading internet cycling boards for over a decade, and from what I read, the fail or leak rate is at least 50%, yet they still exist.

CF waterbottle cages. 

Jerseys featuring children's cereal or cartoon characters. Rider's think these are "cute". They're an embarrassment that perpetuates the roadie "Look at me, I'm a circus clown!" image. 

Ceramic bearings. F-off!!


----------



## tempeteOntheRoad (Dec 21, 2001)

*San Marco...*



Dinosaur said:


> Carbon seatposts, stems and handle bars. Mostly zoot affect that really doesn't do anything.
> 
> Ultra narrow saddles (like 132 and under width). The biggest mistake Selle Italia made was stop the production of the Flite saddles. San Marco, on the other hand, still pumps out the Rolls and Regal.



San Marco user to make the greatest saddle form me: the San Marco Titanio. 200grams, plain, wide enough, ultra comfy. It was rebadged for Bontrager before the buyout by Trek.
Now they don't make it. 

I use the ASPide after a good 5-6 years on the Selle Italia Flite, but it's not the same. 

A part of me misses it dearly!


----------



## bwhite_4 (Aug 29, 2006)

filtersweep said:


> The other issue--- seems like a whole lot of people ride with 53 X 11 as their top gear. How many people really need that 11?


I live in flat Florida and I use this gear at least 3 days a week while sprinting (friendly sprints with friends). If I didn't live in such a flat area, I probably wouldn't need it. Additionally, I would think that anyone who races would need this gear.


----------



## russotto (Oct 3, 2005)

Jesse D Smith said:


> $200+helmets. Most of the time, you're paying for more vents, which means AIR/EMPTY SPACE!


Well, yeah, but if I could get a helmet which was 99.44% air and still worked, I'd pay more than $200 for it. I forgot my helmet yesterday and rediscovered how good it feels not to have a styrofoam cooler on your head when riding.


----------



## tempeteOntheRoad (Dec 21, 2001)

I love all things bike. I'm a bit of a retro-grouch though. I ride a sloping Litespeed Siena, 9 speed Ultegra, anf a few bling-bling lightening here and there. I've been biking for a long time and tryed a lot of gear.

My current beef is about all carbon rims... They are very expensive and represent quite a leap of faith here in Quebec... I could not imagine riding on the tough roads around here, and specially not in the rain with those hoops. I can imagine the durability of those if I was to pick up a little stone in my brake pad and start gouging a rim sidewall. Why would I need that worry?

Then there is the bottle holder that don't hold. 
The after market super zoot brake caliper that don't brake.
The glueless patch that don't stick.
The carbon railed saddle (on a mountain bike!?!)
(...)

"A five pounds saddle is as good as a five pounds seat"

Cheers.


----------



## Ziemas (Jan 18, 2005)

Carbon fiber bottle cages. I've seen way too many broken ones ever to have faith in them. Plus the weight savings is almost non-existent.


----------



## filtersweep (Feb 4, 2004)

At 120 rpm, a 53 x 11 = 47 mph vs. 43 mph at 53 X 12---- and 120 isn't that fast of a cadence... and there are not that many "anyones" who can hit 47 mph on a sprint.



bwhite_4 said:


> I live in flat Florida and I use this gear at least 3 days a week while sprinting (friendly sprints with friends). If I didn't live in such a flat area, I probably wouldn't need it. Additionally, I would think that anyone who races would need this gear.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

filtersweep said:


> At 120 rpm, a 53 x 11 = 47 mph vs. 43 mph at 53 X 12---- and 120 isn't that fast of a cadence... and there are not that many "anyones" who can hit 47 mph on a sprint.


Good point. Maybe if Hurricane Katrina was at one's back... :lol: 



.


----------



## Kuma601 (Jan 22, 2004)

The whole lightweight progression and more is better path. The marketing depts can continually fuel the upgrade treadmill. While not all recent products I view as "bad", they were answers to products which in their prior form were functioning fine. 

Threadless headsets. If I wanted a bit of an increment on a quill stem...I loosened a bolt and moved it up. It didn't effect the headset load adjustment nor was I looking for spacers to equal the distance to where the top cap is positioned. Cut the steerer, you are committed to that position short of flipping the stem. Don't cut and you have a stack of spacers. 50-50 to me on threaded or threadless...I have to adapt. 

The redundancy of manufacturers to mark their bikes from all angles of visibility. Head tube logo and pick *only one* down, top or set tube to put the company name. When I roll out I feel the bike is a rolling advertisement. Every flippin part has big fonts visible...where is the subtle clean look? 

Jerseys have always been loud but I'm glad I can still find solids or two tones in subtle color schemes.


----------



## ChuckUni (Jan 2, 2003)

Threaded Headsets and Quill stems. Stupid interface that doesn't actually hold the stem solidly, has a tendency to seize, harder to adjust, more parts than needed, plus the need to thread the steerer tube. On top of this most of the stems have one bolt bar clamps without a removable face plate. Stems flex considerably because of the lack of a solid interface, which get worse the more you scoot the stem up. Also, those that have a half foot + of quill sticking out...this is as ugly as a riser stem, but makes less sense mechanically. 

Gears. An excuse for all manufacturers to make 2 year old parts obsolete by changing something so the old stuff is no longer compatible with the newer stuff.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

I'll vote for the drilled out Ti Kool stop brake pad holders that cost about 100 bucks and save about 11 grams over pads that cost 1/3 as much--not really a component I want drilled to a bare minimum anyway.


----------



## Export A (Mar 18, 2007)

filtersweep said:


> At 120 rpm, a 53 x 11 = 47 mph vs. 43 mph at 53 X 12---- and 120 isn't that fast of a cadence... and there are not that many "anyones" who can hit 47 mph on a sprint.


It's not the sprint it's the downhills after those big climbs I overspin a 53X12 on all my rides. only problem is I use a 12X27 and don't want to give up the 27 to get to the top of those hills.


----------



## barbedwire (Dec 3, 2005)

I've read through most of this thread and it appears the majority think that threadless stems are really a stupid equipment trend.


----------



## ChuckUni (Jan 2, 2003)

barbedwire said:


> I've read through most of this thread and it appears the majority think that threadless stems are really a stupid equipment trend.


Well, Jobst Brandt doesn't http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/threadless-headset.html so they are wrong.


----------



## The Human G-Nome (Aug 26, 2002)

"One more: road helmet with cycling cap underneath, just use a helmet with a visor."


A helmet with a visor is known as a MTB helmet. I'll stick with my cycling cap, thanks. Cycling caps are washable, and replaceable, and prevent your helmet from getting stinky over time. You can also wear them at races after you've taken your helmet off to keep the sun out of your eyes. Finally, visors just look stupid. 

For whatever reason, I started wearing a cap about 7 years ago, and I never stopped. Rain, sunshine, cold, hot... makes no difference. It's just what feels right for me now.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

The Human G-Nome said:


> "One more: road helmet with cycling cap underneath, just use a helmet with a visor."
> 
> 
> A helmet with a visor is known as a MTB helmet. I'll stick with my cycling cap, thanks. Cycling caps are washable, and replaceable, and prevent your helmet from getting stinky over time. You can also wear them at races after you've taken your helmet off to keep the sun out of your eyes. Finally, visors just look stupid.
> ...


cap keeps my 1/2 bald head from getting "vent burns/tanned", soaks up sweat and since I wear it backwards, keeps the sun off of my neck!


----------



## The Human G-Nome (Aug 26, 2002)

Touch0Gray said:


> cap keeps my 1/2 bald head from getting "vent burns/tanned", soaks up sweat and since I wear it backwards, keeps the sun off of my neck!


All good points. My hairline isn't the same as what it was 10 years ago. Wearing a cap doesn't hurt. I usually put suntan lotion on my neck, but you can't put suntan lotion on your forehead unless you want to risk it running into your eyes. You never have that issue when you're wearing a cap.


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

SystemShock said:


> At some point, don't you just get a triple?
> 
> 'cuz otherwise, the manufacturer end-game for the scenario you describe ends up being something like a 13-cog near straight-block (11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23-25-27... aieee). :shocked:
> 
> ...


Your imaginary cogset has nothing linear about it. However it can be done in a way that makes sense (11-12-13-14-15-16-18-20-22-24-26) with 11 speeds. A tripple is not the answer because it is heavy and requires special shifters. Reliability also suffers more than doubles as the system wears.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

SwiftSolo said:


> Your imaginary cogset has nothing linear about it. However it can be done in a way that makes sense (11-12-13-14-15-16-18-20-22-24-26) with 11 speeds.


Shimano doesn't seem to like even numbers for road climbing cogs *shrug*. And what's so 'non-linear' about a bunch of 1-tooth jumps followed by a series of 2-tooth jumps?  

Also, I think someone was complaining that 11 cogs were necessary because the jump from 21 to 24 was just sooo big. Well, with your cogset above, wouldn't someone complain that the jump from 16 to 18 is too big?... after all it's a not very different jump (12.5% vs 14.3%) than the 21 to 24 one bemoaned earlier. :shocked: 




> A tripple is not the answer because it is heavy and requires special shifters. Reliability also suffers more than doubles as the system wears.


And yet they're showing up on more and more road bikes, have been for years. Maybe 'dey ain't all dat bad' anymore? 



.


----------



## JohnnyTooBad (Apr 5, 2004)

The Human G-Nome said:


> "One more: road helmet with cycling cap underneath, just use a helmet with a visor."
> 
> 
> A helmet with a visor is known as a MTB helmet. Finally, visors just look stupid.


Bite me! 

I have enough hair on my head to make me plenty hot enough. I don't need a cap underneath to keep the air from flowing.

Yup. It's a MTB helmet. I wear MTB shoes too. I realize that the inability to walk without looking like you're wearing swim fins is the sign of a true cyclist.... 

Finally, 2" cap brims sticking out from under a helmet just look stupid.


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

SystemShock said:


> Shimano doesn't seem to like even numbers for road climbing cogs *shrug*. And what's so 'non-linear' about a bunch of 1-tooth jumps followed by a series of 2-tooth jumps?
> 
> Also, I think someone was complaining that 11 cogs were necessary because the jump from 21 to 24 was just sooo big. Well, with your cogset above, wouldn't someone complain that the jump from 16 to 18 is too big?... after all it's a not very different jump (12.5% vs 14.3%) than the 21 to 24 one bemoaned earlier. :shocked:
> 
> ...


 14.3% is 114.4% of 12.5%. That's getting pretty big when you're up near the big cog. If you're already grinding at a 70 cadence that shift will take you to 80 which is a pretty large split on a really long, tough mountain.

I ride with a number of people with tripples and I'd guess that they have roughly 2 or 3 times the issues that I and the other doubles in our group have. I agree that we are still talking about a 98% dependability ratio.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

SwiftSolo said:


> 14.3% is 114.4% of 12.5%. That's getting pretty big when you're up near the big cog. If you're already grinding at a 70 cadence that shift will take you to 80 which is a pretty large split on a really long, tough mountain.


And going from a 16 to an 18 would take you from 70 rpm on up to 78.75 on a hill. Don't really see the diff between that and going from 70 to 80. I sure can't detect a 1.25 rpm difference. :frown2: 




> I ride with a number of people with tripples and I'd guess that they have roughly 2 or 3 times the issues that I and the other doubles in our group have. I agree that we are still talking about a 98% dependability ratio.


For me, the only worry with triples is Q-factor... with triples its kinda hard to find a low-Q crank. 


.


----------



## Doggity (Mar 10, 2006)

90% of the stuff that comes up over and over again in this thread, in addition to being marketing driven, is coming from the racing segment of cyclists. At the risk of pissing off a lot of serious cyclists who do race, I have to point out the obvious....this stuff is silly because _most_ of us don't race! Do I 'need' a 20 spoke wheel? I do not...I need something that won't leave me on the side of the road if it busts a spoke ie: 32-36spokes, 2 or 3x. 
Same with threadless vs threaded, 23 tires vs 32's, 11 speeds vs 9, carbon rims vs aluminum, 'racing' saddles vs something comfortable to me bum like a Brooks, STI vs plain old friction shifters, proprietary crank/BB systems vs the plain old square taper BB's, etc etc. A frame that'll accomodate real world needs like a rack, 700x35 tires or even (God forBID!) fenders, vs the latest 1500 gram wonder. And why do I 'need' a bike build that puts my head 6 inches below my ass? (No comments please...) _That's_ a real comfortable way to see the countryside you're riding thru... You go too far the retrogrouch way, you end up with a 32lb Rivendell that rides like a pig. I like to go fast sometimes too. But can't we have some...middle of the road _sanity_? Think I'll build me up a Surly Crosscheck...you guys go on ahead.


----------



## schimanski (Jan 11, 2002)

filtersweep said:


> At 120 rpm, a 53 x 11 = 47 mph vs. 43 mph at 53 X 12---- and 120 isn't that fast of a cadence... and there are not that many "anyones" who can hit 47 mph on a sprint.


Many professionals here I suppose. Starting a sprint at top gear for myself is very very rare. I'm pretty sure it's never happened. In reality I seem to outsprint people on lower gear than what they are using. As far as I see it the reason for this is good timing and faster acceleration then pass by and thank you very much. Then again I'm not a pro and never will be.

But I like cassettes starting with 11t. Gives better chainline for 13t which is something I have use for. 

And I'll second everyone who thinks racebikes that can't handle a bigger tyre than 23mm are a lousy trend.


----------



## MShaw (Jun 7, 2003)

Ziemas said:


> Carbon fiber bottle cages. I've seen way too many broken ones ever to have faith in them. Plus the weight savings is almost non-existent.


I got mine free. Otherwise I wouldn't have em on the bike.

Gotta love a buddy that works for the guys that make the stuff!

M


----------



## airs0ft3r (Feb 28, 2008)

One Word: _Italian_


----------



## airs0ft3r (Feb 28, 2008)

Edit Double Post


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

'Triple triangle' design always struck me as a bit pointless. Mainly there to give the marketing dept something to yammer about, whilst providing no real benefit and hitting the bike with an ugly stick:















I guess some might find it cool in the way that some find bulldogs cute. 

_ps--_ Love love *LOVE* the saddle angle in the pic. It's almost like GT designed the bike as a torture device designed to feed your 'nads into the whirling blur of knobbies that is the rear wheel at speed. Diabolic genius! 




.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

airs0ft3r said:


> One Word: _Italian_


huh?............so like Bianchi was stupid for 89 years before Trek was founded? Who jumped on the bandwagon?


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

What about those plastic ear flaps that were supposed to eliminate wind noise? Anybody remember them? Very cool.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

Mr. Versatile said:


> What about those plastic ear flaps that were supposed to eliminate wind noise? Anybody remember them? Very cool.


I want them.....

I rode down the street to my neighbors house the other day...sans helmet..OMG....it was SOOOOOOOO quiet....the noise is mostly from my helmet!!!!!!


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Touch0Gray said:


> huh?............so like Bianchi was stupid for 89 years before Trek was founded? Who jumped on the bandwagon?


LOL. Word. :lol:


...


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

Complaining about other people's innovative inventions on message boards.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

The Human G-Nome said:


> "One more: road helmet with cycling cap underneath, just use a helmet with a visor."
> 
> 
> A helmet with a visor is known as a MTB helmet. I'll stick with my cycling cap, thanks. Cycling caps are washable, and replaceable, and prevent your helmet from getting stinky over time. You can also wear them at races after you've taken your helmet off to keep the sun out of your eyes. Finally, visors just look stupid.
> ...


I never understood the cycling cap thing either. Advanced materials everywhere and you put on a dingy cotton cap? No thanks. I sport a helmet visor.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

Rapid rise for MTBs


----------



## ilan (Nov 27, 2006)

SystemShock said:


> Can you imagine someone marketing a sports car that made you only a tiny hair faster for twice the money and half the durability? :skep:
> 
> 
> .


Yes, it is called Ferrari. Reliability and ease of driving is "boring" for people with too much money, which is one of the reasons that the Honda NSX didn't sell. Other examples are the Honda S2000 and Mazda MX5 which are too easily available to the rabble to interest the rich. 

-ilan


----------



## MShaw (Jun 7, 2003)

Killroy said:


> I never understood the cycling cap thing either. Advanced materials everywhere and you put on a dingy cotton cap? No thanks. I sport a helmet visor.


Ahh butcha see... You can take off a cycling cap when you don't need it anymore! 

IME, the bill blocks *just enough* water to make em worthwhile.

M


----------



## nealric (Jul 5, 2007)

> Yes, it is called Ferrari. Reliability and ease of driving is "boring" for people with too much money, which is one of the reasons that the Honda NSX didn't sell. Other examples are the Honda S2000 and Mazda MX5 which are too easily available to the rabble to interest the rich.
> 
> -ilan


With all due respect, a Ferrari is more than a "tiny bit" faster than a Mx-5


----------



## MShaw (Jun 7, 2003)

True, but where are ya gonna use it *legally?!*

M


----------



## paper warrior (Nov 24, 2001)

I just gotta have "obsolete" quill stems though concede that welded quill stems are better than then traditional Nitto style cast stems. They are stiffer, lighter especially aluminum and come with faceplates though hard to find- best place might be ebay.


----------



## Bill Silverman (Apr 2, 2007)

Did anyone mention aero bars on mountain bikes? That to me is the epitome of stupid equipment (or just plain stupid).


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

SystemShock said:


> 'Triple triangle' design always struck me as a bit pointless. Mainly there to give the marketing dept something to yammer about, whilst providing no real benefit and hitting the bike with an ugly stick:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Mate, that saddle is a plug in unit. Once you try it you'll never go back!


----------



## ilan (Nov 27, 2006)

nealric said:


> With all due respect, a Ferrari is more than a "tiny bit" faster than a Mx-5


Put them on a very narrow winding road with bad pavement and I would expect the MX-5 would do quite well, especially given the skill level of your average Ferrari driver. I remember watching a guy trying to park his 500HP Ferarri Maranello one time, didn't do a great job. In a straight line, anyone with a right leg can drive fast.

In any case, my opinion of overpowered supercars was forged when I watched a Le Mans type sports car race in Florida and it started raining buckets. A Honda Prelude and Mitsubishi 3000 (basically the same cars as you would get at a dealership, except for roll bar etc) were in the lead and then you had to wait, and wait, and wait, for the "real" race cars whose power couldn't be controlled in the wet conditions. 

-ilan


----------



## function (Jun 20, 2008)

SystemShock said:


> _ps--_ Love love *LOVE* the saddle angle in the pic. It's almost like GT designed the bike as a torture device designed to feed your 'nads into the whirling blur of knobbies that is the rear wheel at speed. Diabolic genius!
> .


It's supposed to be like that. It may not be what you're used to, like most of the other "stupid bike trends" but it's setup like that for a reason.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

function said:


> It's supposed to be like that. It may not be what you're used to, like most of the other "stupid bike trends" but it's setup like that for a reason.


Does the bike come with ******, to compensate for the impotence caused from having the saddle nose angled that high against your junk? :lol:


...


----------



## Pshrynk (Apr 23, 2008)

Anything purple, blue or red in anodized aluminum.


----------



## B15serv (Apr 27, 2008)

Once again can we please see the neon colors? I want a paint scheme that looks like it came from a Florida tourist shirt circa 90'


----------



## Cruzer2424 (Feb 8, 2005)

Killroy said:


> Rapid rise for MTBs


This has got to be the _only_ "trend" in this entire thread that I agree with...


----------



## ilan (Nov 27, 2006)

For me, the most annoying equipment trend is fixed gear bikes ridden in urban settings without brakes (not counting the fixed gear) and which are way overgeared. The worst part about it is that these guys are proud of the breaking technique of jumping the rear wheel and locking it so the rear wheel can skid. That just wears down the rear tire for no reason, reminds me of all the inline skaters who use the T-stop which can ruin a set of wheels in one stop, whereas the snowplow stop can be just as effective with little impact to the wheels (I used it exclusively for over a year of skating, so I know).They also don't wear gloves and from talking to a number of them they never knew you could slow down by holding down the front tire with your hand. None of them have apparently ever considered the possibility that the chain could possibly break leaving them with no brakes leading to big breaks .

The gearing thing is also a mystery to them and they ride 48x17 or more, and never heard that the usual training gear is about 42x18, or figured out that with a 48x17 they average less than 80 rpm's at the speeds they're going. 

Anyway, I met a bunch of fairly young guys near my house with their bikes, and I took out my track bike to show it to them and tried to get them to at least use reasonable gears. I also showed them how to brake with the front tire. That worked out pretty well I think, in any case they were impressed by my 1981 bike and components. They said they would consider easier gears and wearing gloves. They had had very bad experiences with other old guys like me, one of them had taken his bike to the local velodrome where the people there treated him like dirt. It confirmed why I've never gone to that velodrome. 

-ilan


----------



## saintsfan342000 (May 30, 2007)

That triple triangle comment brings to mind BMC's unique truss-like construction at the TopTube-SeatTube-SeatStay junction. I've never ridden a BMC bike so I have no idea or opinion as to how it effects rideability, constructability, etc., but it seems like just the sort of thing a company would promote purely for marketing purposes.

An example so you know what I;m referring to:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

SwiftSolo said:


> Mate, that saddle is a plug in unit. Once you try it you'll never go back!


:lol:


...


----------



## jkuo (Mar 30, 2008)

That bike is a dirt jump bike. Hence the super low standover height and the angle of the saddle. It's not meant to be riddern for long distances.



SystemShock said:


> Does the bike come with ******, to compensate for the impotence caused from having the saddle nose angled that high against your junk? :lol:
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## PlasticMotif (Aug 1, 2006)

Bad geometry makes for angular junctions!


----------



## Peanya (Jun 12, 2008)

What bike trend I don't get is why, in Texas (more specifically Houston), bike dealers focus on mountain bikes when there are very few dirt trails and zero mountains or hills?
Not just the mass merchants like China*Mart or Target (zero road bikes of any type), but the specialty shops where over 70% of floor space is reserved to them. /boggle


----------



## iherald (Oct 13, 2005)

Peanya said:


> What bike trend I don't get is why, in Texas (more specifically Houston), bike dealers focus on mountain bikes when there are very few dirt trails and zero mountains or hills?
> Not just the mass merchants like China*Mart or Target (zero road bikes of any type), but the specialty shops where over 70% of floor space is reserved to them. /boggle


When I worked at a bike store we sold mostly mountain bikes ein though there were few trails and no real mountains. People think they're more comfortable and you can do more 'urban' riding with them. I don't necessarily agree one way or the other.


----------



## ToF (Jan 18, 2008)

MShaw said:


> Biopace rings. Ugh. Everywhere but the granny ring on my mtn bike that is! Worked fairly well for me actually!
> 
> I just recently bought myself a Regal Ti saddle. Been meaning to try one since the late 80s... Wow! Heaven on a bike!
> 
> M


I still have a Shimano 600 crankset with Biopace rings on it sitting in a box! Like new!


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

jkuo said:


> That bike is a dirt jump bike. Hence the super low standover height and the angle of the saddle. It's not meant to be riddern for long distances.


Read some user reviews of it. Apparently, ppl are using it for more than just that. :

*http://www.mtbr.com/cat/bikes/freeride-hardtail/gt/chucker-1-0/PRD_364998_1544crx.aspx*

...


----------



## al0 (Jan 24, 2003)

The only problem is that with compact crank I would gladly have 10, not 11 as smallest cog  

I ride 50-34 with 11-23 and am out of gears on high end on at least every second ride.

The problem that I (and many others AFAIK) am unable to ride with high cadence for extended period of time (in my case anything above 110 rpm is problematic). It is roughly 62 kph (39 mph), surely not enough downhill.



SystemShock said:


> Okay, but you gotta admit, with 10 cogs and compact cranks, we're close to being completely straight-blocked out as it is.
> 
> We really _need_ an 11th cog on the road? Prolly not.
> 
> ...


----------



## High Gear (Mar 9, 2002)

leviathans_child said:


> i cant believe campy are going 11 speed...its getting ridiculous...
> 
> eventually will all be riding about on 47 speed bikes with 1 meter seat stay width
> 
> ...



I thought Campy would have more brains to stop at 9...then 10....NOW 11! WTF.
How many riders shift two gears at a time becaus one can hardly be felt?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

al0 said:


> The only problem is that with compact crank I would gladly have 10, not 11 as smallest cog
> 
> I ride 50-34 with 11-23 and am out of gears on high end on at least every second ride.
> 
> The problem that I (and many others AFAIK) am unable to ride with high cadence for extended period of time (in my case anything above 110 rpm is problematic). It is roughly 62 kph (39 mph), surely not enough downhill.


I dunno... I think there's a reason many cassettes don't take a 10T cog/why 10T cogs aren't popular, 
and IIRC it's 'cuz of chordal action causing really small cogs to be less efficient. 

So 50x10 may not be such a great idea after all? Maybe someone else with knowledge of chordal action can pipe in.

Sounds like you need bigger chainrings, not tinier cogs. Of course, beyond a certain speed on a downhill, 
is it not faster to stop pedalling and get into a nice deep aero tuck?

...


----------



## aliensporebomb (Jul 2, 2002)

I forgot about another silly trend:

Carbon kickstands.

Oh and I like compact frames.


----------



## de.abeja (Aug 27, 2006)

saintsfan342000 said:


> That triple triangle comment brings to mind BMC's unique truss-like construction at the TopTube-SeatTube-SeatStay junction... as to how it effects rideability, constructability, etc...
> An example so you know what I;m referring to:



I know on a couple of the models it is because the seat tube is aluminum and the rest of the bike is CF, BMC is of the opinion that is the best way to join dissimilar materials. Other than that I guess it just looks cool.


----------



## Armchair Spaceman (Jun 21, 2003)

*10T & lock ring*



SystemShock said:


> I dunno... I think there's a reason many cassettes don't take a 10T cog/why 10T cogs aren't popular,
> 
> ...


 Gotta get a lock ring in there somewhere, and with a 10T, you'd have your lockring interfering with chain...at least with current chain plate design...OK, so do we next tackle chains & lockrings??

engineers...show us your junk!!!


----------



## flyjoe (Mar 17, 2008)

the 29er


----------



## Armchair Spaceman (Jun 21, 2003)

Blue Sugar said:


> Is that David Hasselhoff?



Looks more like Cadel Evans (pre-Chiara...)


----------



## High Gear (Mar 9, 2002)

SystemShock said:


> Okay, but you gotta admit, with 10 cogs and compact cranks, we're close to being completely straight-blocked out as it is.
> 
> We really _need_ an 11th cog on the road? Prolly not.
> 
> ...


prolly? did you mean probably?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

High Gear said:


> prolly? did you mean probably?


I prolly meant probably. Or I probably meant prolly. Haven't decided yet.

...


----------



## bolandjd (Sep 12, 2008)

So reading through the archives on Bike Snob NYC, I come across this unique slice of velo-pie and immediately think of this thread, as this is essensially an imalgamation of every bad, failed, trend in road bicycling from the last 25 years. Hopefully, the dude at least got the parts on sale.  But the write up is the best part: http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2008/09/i-am-highly-specialized-right-tool-for.html


----------



## BrianN (Feb 11, 2008)

Shimano Front Freewheel System. It allowed shifting without pedaling, for those folks that really could not walk and chew gum.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

saintsfan342000 said:


>


Looks like a lot of stress concentration to this mechanical guy.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

SwiftSolo said:


> Mate, that saddle is a plug in unit. Once you try it you'll never go back!


That saddle is appropriate for that type of riding. Just imagine the bike on a steep down hill course.


----------



## Ibashii (Oct 23, 2002)

bolandjd said:


> So reading through the archives on Bike Snob NYC, I come across this unique slice of velo-pie and immediately think of this thread, as this is essensially an imalgamation of every bad, failed, trend in road bicycling from the last 25 years. Hopefully, the dude at least got the parts on sale.  But the write up is the best part: http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2008/09/i-am-highly-specialized-right-tool-for.html


That's so awesomely awesome that it made reading this entire thread worth it.


----------



## CleavesF (Dec 31, 2007)

bolandjd said:


> So reading through the archives on Bike Snob NYC, I come across this unique slice of velo-pie and immediately think of this thread, as this is essensially an imalgamation of every bad, failed, trend in road bicycling from the last 25 years. Hopefully, the dude at least got the parts on sale.  But the write up is the best part: http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2008/09/i-am-highly-specialized-right-tool-for.html


This bike is so awesome stupid, it's awesome stupid. I really want to ride it because the seat is too low.


----------



## janos (May 15, 2005)

raymonda said:


> Disc Brakes on a Road Bike. God, I have a friend who thinks that disc brakes are the best. I picked up his front wheel the other day and i swear it weighed 3bs.


I don't know man. I've been on some long wet descents, where my brake levers sank all the way to the handlebars. Scared the piss out of me.

I could see someone wanting road discs if that happened to them more than once.


----------



## old_fuji (Mar 16, 2009)

bump
full carbon-fiber bikes at walmart


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

leviathans_child said:


> i cant believe campy are going 11 speed...its getting ridiculous...
> 
> eventually will all be riding about on 47 speed bikes with 1 meter seat stay width
> 
> ...


For better or worse, I've finally achieved '11 speed acceptance'. :skep:

Yeah, I thought it was silly at first (and it still kinda is, since I rode very happily/successfully for many years on 7 cogs), but 11-spd does go well with the newly emerging 'hot' setup... compacts + wide-range cassettes. WR cassettes have become more popular than I imagined, and I've been converted to the benefits of high-rpm climbing. 

So, bring on the really low gears, i.e 50-34 and 11-28 or whatever. And if you're going to run a wide-range 'sette, more cogs does make sense. 

Conversely, 53-39 just isn't great for a lot of average recreational riders, and road triples, while a good match for recreational riders in many ways, are far from perfect- not so great Q-factor, chainlines, more weight and more complexity.

So, fine, bring on the 11-speed, crazy as it seems to be. 

The kinda weird part, though, is when you have a triple and 11-spd. Wow. Does anyone really need 33 gears?  

The whole crazy train probably won't stop 'til we hit Shimano's 14-cog prototype in a decade or so. Unless a good cvt system comes out first. 

42-speeds, here we come. :shocked:
.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

old_fuji said:


> bump
> full carbon-fiber bikes at walmart


'twas sadly inevitable. :nonod:

It'll be time to freak when you see Madones at Wallyworld.
.


----------



## lancezneighbor (May 4, 2002)

smokey422 said:


> +1 on the 11 speeds. I'm still using an 8-speed drivetrain and have never wanted more gears. It would be nice if there were a wider selection of drop-barred bikes that would take wider tires and would allow the bars to be mounted higher without one of those ugly 3" risers. Rack and fender mounts would also be nice.


+1


----------



## lancezneighbor (May 4, 2002)

filtersweep said:


> Agonizing might be a bit strong. I suggest riding fixed for awhile to cure yourself of this malady.
> 
> The other issue--- seems like a whole lot of people ride with 53 X 11 as their top gear. How many people really need that 11?
> 
> I am still riding 9--- which is fine, considering I have three bikes using 9. I like to share wheels. Maybe I don't know what I am missing, but I doubt it.


There are even touring bikes sold with a 53X11 top gear. Who exactly is pushing a 53X11 with racks, fenders, and loaded panniers? I often see bikes I would like but the specs are so idiotic.


----------



## muscleendurance (Jan 11, 2009)

leviathans_child said:


> i cant believe campy are going 11 speed...its getting ridiculous...
> 
> eventually will all be riding about on 47 speed bikes with 1 meter seat stay width
> 
> surely theres a point when it's just not optimal...


that point has been reached with 10spd  
but as long as the suckers buy em, they will continue to make them up to 47spd


----------



## muscleendurance (Jan 11, 2009)

CleavesF said:


> Non-standardization.
> 
> I freaking hate it. Just like how America doesn't use the metric system... with one other country in the whole world.
> 
> ...


+1 on the standardisation :thumbsup: :mad2:


----------



## muscleendurance (Jan 11, 2009)

corky said:


> people that can't spell brakes.....:blush2:


people who have such sad lives that they actually comment on other peoples spelling mistakes :frown2: :crazy: ut:


----------



## Ibashii (Oct 23, 2002)

old_fuji said:


> bump
> full carbon-fiber bikes at walmart


From a distance, it looks just like the Fezzari in the banner ad on top of this page.

How much do they get for it? Here you can get full house-brand carbon road bikes from Decathlon and GoSport--two big-box discount sports stores where almost EVERYTHING is made in China--starting at 699 EUR, sometimes on sale for as low as 500. They've got a couple of Shimano parts here and there but mostly stuff I've never heard of. I think the BB is made out of ciment, but I'm not sure .

Still, every now and then I see one at the top of a tall mountain ridden buy a guy in a cotton t-shirt and work boots and I think wow, that guy's hardcore. Climbing up there is one thing, but you gotta have cajones like nobody's business to roll back down on a rig like that.

Just as a point of interest, Decathlon attempted to export its brand of low-budget fitness products to the US a number of years ago, but ran into trouble with some goofy law about the percentage of things a big-box store could sell that are house-brand, which is about 75% at their stores here. I never got the details, but the stores were forced to either change this or shut down, and they chose the latter. No loss for you folks over there.


----------



## old_fuji (Mar 16, 2009)

Ibashii said:


> From a distance, it looks just like the Fezzari in the banner ad on top of this page.
> 
> How much do they get for it? Here you can get full house-brand carbon road bikes from Decathlon and GoSport--two big-box discount sports stores where almost EVERYTHING is made in China--starting at 699 EUR, sometimes on sale for as low as 500. They've got a couple of Shimano parts here and there but mostly stuff I've never heard of. I think the BB is made out of ciment, but I'm not sure .
> 
> ...


i think they're around $500. there is one of these bikes at the local walmart, so i might have to go check it out


----------



## Spinfinity (Feb 3, 2004)

SystemShock said:


> Good point. Maybe if Hurricane Katrina was at one's back... :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> .


Depends on the hills where you ride. Big gears are lots of fun hammering down hills with varying grades.

As for gears, whatever works ought to be available for people. 

In my 30's I rode a loaded bike from the Bronx to Columbus, OH with a 52-42 up front and a 14-24 out back. Only walked once.

In my 40's, a straight block felt important because having lots of gears close together made pace line riding easier

In my 50's I set up a brevet bike with an mtb triple and an almost straight 11-21 9sp out back. Useful for both climbing and fast group rides

Now I like 53-42 up front and 12-32 out back. Years of commuting fixed have given me adaptable legs, I'm seldom in a pace line and still have the brevet bike for mountains.

My stupid trends would be:

Thick chamoises, base layers in warm weather, mini pumps, colored coordinated tires, light colored shorts


----------



## merckx_rider (Aug 20, 2008)

Stupid trend:
I was riding last year and met up with a guy I've seen quite regularly going the other way on my local trail... as we talked I noticed he had only one ring up front and asked him why he did it???? He told me thats the way the bike came... I guess not every manufacturer is going in the direction of more gearing...


----------



## Squidward (Dec 18, 2005)

muscleendurance said:


> people who have such sad lives that they actually comment on other peoples spelling mistakes :frown2: :crazy: ut:


Since forums are basically a typewritten form of communication spelling and grammar are the only thing we see of you. If you don't spell correctly, use the correct word spelling-wise, use bad grammar, don't use punctuation, etc, it reflects on you because that's all we see of you.

In school I was never an English major. Actually, English is my second language and I've never excelled at it in school but spelling mistakes and bad grammar just irks me to no end. I usually stop reading when I encounter it more than once in a paragraph. Do I misspell words? Yes. Do I use the wrong word in the correct context? Yes. Do I do it on purpose? No. Do I make a conscious effort to not make these mistakes? Absolutely. Do I proofread my posts? Two or three times before submitting the reply then once or twice after.

Sorry for taking this off topic. I will not dwell on this subject in this thread again.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

Hipsters


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

lancezneighbor said:


> There are even touring bikes sold with a 53X11 top gear. Who exactly is pushing a 53X11 with racks, fenders, and loaded panniers? I often see bikes I would like but the specs are so idiotic.


LOL, yup.

It's also funny to hear guys complain that "50x11 or 53x12 just isn't _enough!!_" when they're non-racers. I always translate that mentally to, "I can't spin, or figure out how to get into a good aero tuck." 

I dunno... maybe if you live in the Sierras.
.


----------



## lancezneighbor (May 4, 2002)

merckx_rider said:


> Stupid trend:
> I was riding last year and met up with a guy I've seen quite regularly going the other way on my local trail... as we talked I noticed he had only one ring up front and asked him why he did it???? He told me thats the way the bike came... I guess not every manufacturer is going in the direction of more gearing...


I used to have a bike that came as a 1X9. I love that! Nine speeds is more than enough (it was an urban type bike). I sold it just out of feeling guilty for having too many bikes (I know that can't be, I was delusional). The next year's version of the same bike went to 2X9, marketing driven  . I think for the right circumstances it works great, lighter, less complex, less expensive. On the bikes I have with triples on them, I end up using just the middle ring anyway, in town. Is that bad from a wear standpoint?


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

-Stem shifters

-Toe clips 

Not sure about: 
-Carbon rims; I've never owned any, so I can't speculate, but I'm pretty sure that they are stupid for any purpose other than racing. 

-Aero frames; I know that they are all the rage right now and everyone is posting scientific evidence that they are faster. I'm not stating that they are not; I am just curious if the next 15 years or so will substantiate the theory. 

Worst thing ever: Roadie snobbery.
-The vile attitude towards the guy that decided to make some healthy changes in his life, purchased a bike, and showed up for his first group ride just to get criticized for all of the things that he did "wrong": reflectors, spoke protector, tube socks, sunglasses UNDER his helmet straps, and (gasp!) hairy legs.......got so embarrassed that he stowed his new bike in his garage to be sold 5 years later at a yard sale, never ridden again (should have had thicker skin, right?)

-The guy that picked apart and criticized every thing that was "wrong" with a new bike that an elderly guy proudly posted a picture of on this forum, including the colored valve stem covers that his young grandchildren insisted on because they "didn't want grandpa to lose the air in his tires"

-The thoughtless and continuous endorsement of cheating, trash talking, prick racers, paired with the insulting and vehement dislike of any pro (especially but not limited to Americans) that shows signs of being a decent and classy human being (even with impressive palmares). 

-The dismissal that two guys that I work with (and many others) have of any bike that is not a Trek or Specialized as absolute junk. This same disease afflicts some people with similar symptoms: anything that is not Italian is junk, and everything Italian is sexier and better (the "Veloce is better than Dura Ace" mentality, which I have seen). 

-The criticism of any person, with any type of bike, that is riding and having fun.



Oh yeah, square taper and ISIS/octalink bottom brackets. From the perspective of someone that wrenches bikes for a living (me) modern bottom brackets are quite superior.

-Chris-


----------



## TrailMix (Nov 16, 2005)

Bring back silver as an option ... please.[/QUOTE]

+1 !!


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

thechriswebb said:


> -The guy that picked apart and criticized every thing that was "wrong" with a new bike that an elderly guy proudly posted a picture of on this forum, including the colored valve stem covers that his young grandchildren insisted on because they "didn't want grandpa to lose the air in his tires"


I actually like colored valve stem covers. Guess I'll never fit in with the 'cool' crowd. 
.


----------



## ChuckUni (Jan 2, 2003)

thechriswebb said:


> Oh yeah, square taper and ISIS/octalink bottom brackets. From the perspective of someone that wrenches bikes for a living (me) modern bottom brackets are quite superior.
> 
> -Chris-


Opposite for most riders, IMO. External bearing are crap. They don't last nearly as long as square taper, tho they last longer than ISIS/octa garbage. They reduce heel clearance or compromise the crank by making it thinner at the spindle (or both). Some brands with the ISIS style spindle on one side still have the issue of the chance of ruining the interface between crank and spindle. Look like frame warts.

BB30 is closer, but still not perfect as it introduces a whole new frame standard. However, that's what needs to happen if they want to do a big spindle correctly, IMO.

Oh...and +2 on silver parts.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

ChuckUni said:


> Opposite for most riders, IMO. External bearing are crap. They don't last nearly as long as square taper, tho they last longer than ISIS/octa garbage. They reduce heel clearance or compromise the crank by making it thinner at the spindle (or both). Some brands with the ISIS style spindle on one side still have the issue of the chance of ruining the interface between crank and spindle. Look like frame warts.
> 
> BB30 is closer, but still not perfect as it introduces a whole new frame standard. However, that's what needs to happen if they want to do a big spindle correctly, IMO.
> 
> Oh...and +2 on silver parts.



I think what turned me against them is that I haven't had someone come in and say "please fix this, my crank fell off and I crashed and broke my face" with the external bearing bottom brackets. I think I'm going to retract the statement as far as square taper goes; because I really haven't had that problem with that design either. It seems to happen a lot with ISIS/Octalink, though.

I agree about BB30; kinda sucks that the whole standard has to change for it, but it is a great design, I think.


----------



## akatsuki (Aug 12, 2005)

Skinny tires when fatter tires have better aerodynamics and rolling resistance. Same with running ultra high pressures.

Race bike geometry for casual riders. Loss of fenders and racks on those same bikes.

Poorly designed heavy "cruisers" that basically suck instead of being practical like the very evolved Dutch bike.

Those stupid narrow messenger bars for non-messengers who aren't weaving through traffic.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

74+ degree seat tube angles.









It's so weird... in every other way, ppl seem to want to emulate Lance and their TDF heroes.

But, oh lordy no, don't give us any authentic European stage race geometry... which has 72-73 degree STAs. Let's all pretend we're going to ride a criterium tomorrow instead!  

Just weird.
.


----------



## Squidward (Dec 18, 2005)

Cosmetic carbon. This is where a manufacturer puts carbon fiber over a perfectly good aluminum part because "carbon sells". I actually have four components that are cosmetic carbon but I got them for pennies on the dollar so I'm not complaining. I'm not talking about things like carbon fiber cranks with aluminum inserts at the pedal and BB junctions but I am talking about an already heavy aluminum crankset with a layer of carbon fiber on top of it that serves nothing more than to make it look like it is a true carbon crankset. The other components are a pair of stems as well as an aluminum handlebar with carbon fiber laid on the center section only.

Even worse would be fake carbon where they put a sticker with a pattern on it on top of an aluminum part to make it look like carbon from three or more feet out..


----------



## crispy010 (Jan 26, 2009)

> Not sure about:
> -Carbon rims; I've never owned any, so I can't speculate, but I'm pretty sure that they are stupid for any purpose other than racing.


No, they're even dumb for racing! Fragile, brittle, noisy as hell, and usually not significantly lighter than alloy rims. Plus, the braking performance is positively scary. And the fact that crashing hard usually causes your wheel to explode instead of just taco.

And oh yeah, 

Threadless headsets FTW. Quill stems can go jump off a f*cking cliff.


----------



## lancezneighbor (May 4, 2002)

SimianSpeedster said:


> Slime tubes! Heavyish and worthless for all but the most minor punctures. Invest in a pair of tire levers and a patch kit/extra tube.


You don't live in Albuquerque.  In Albuquerque slime tubes are almost mandatory. We ae the goathead capital of the world. After one short mountain bike ride along the river I removed 52 goatheads (that does not include what had already broken off) from just the front tire. When I was in Austin I could not understand why anyone would use those tubes. Without slime in my tubes in Albuquerque I would be fixing flats every 3 miles.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

Faux carbon fiber everything. 

Seriously... Didn't know carbon fiber helped impact protection on gloves.. 
Why hide aluminum under fake carbon wrap?!?


----------



## Ibashii (Oct 23, 2002)

akatsuki said:


> Skinny tires when fatter tires have better aerodynamics and rolling resistance. Same with running ultra high pressures.
> 
> [...]


Can you prove that? I don't know any better in terms of actual facts, but it sure goes against anything I've heard in the last 20 years. I love to be proven wrong though: I only recently learned to rely on my front brake a majority of the time during mountain descents.


----------



## Guest (Apr 23, 2009)

Ibashii said:


> Can you prove that? I don't know any better in terms of actual facts, but it sure goes against anything I've heard in the last 20 years. I love to be proven wrong though: I only recently learned to rely on my front brake a majority of the time during mountain descents.


While fatter tires have worse aerodynamics (marginally), they are much better in terms of rolling resistance, cornering traction, comfort, longevity, and usually are within a few grams of weight. Many studies have been done to confirm this, but I can't find one ATM.


----------



## Guest (Apr 23, 2009)

crispy010 said:


> No, they're even dumb for racing! Fragile, brittle, noisy as hell, and usually not significantly lighter than alloy rims. Plus, the braking performance is positively scary. And the fact that crashing hard usually causes your wheel to explode instead of just taco.
> 
> And oh yeah,
> 
> Threadless headsets FTW. Quill stems can go jump off a f*cking cliff.


Fragile: nope
Brittle: well so is an aluminum rim
noisy: sure, but you're in a pack anyway so who cares.
Lighter: definitely, show me a aluminum rim that comes in sub 900 grams. (most are in the +- 1300 gram range for nice ones. That's a full pound heavier if not more
Braking: never had any problems, and don't know anyone that does as long as you use the right brake pads
If your wheel tacos it's trashed, if it explodes (which carbon rims very rarely do, normally just crack) it's trashed, what's the difference.
*Much more aerodynamic* and really not all that more expensive for the cheaper ones


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Ibashii said:


> Can you prove that? I don't know any better in terms of actual facts, but it sure goes against anything I've heard in the last 20 years. I love to be proven wrong though: I only recently learned to rely on my front brake a majority of the time during mountain descents.


I believe Jan Heine and _Bicycling Quarterly_ ran some tests a couple of years back, and found that rolling resistance wasn't all that related to tire width... of the two tires that did best, one was 28mm and the other was 23mm. 

They also found that ultra-high-pressure actually did not help with rolling resistance, IIRC, and theorized that narrow + ultra-high pressure is popular because it _feels_ faster, due to the higher frequency of vibrations transmitted to the rider. 
.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

Electronic shifting.


----------



## cyclingthroughlife (Aug 2, 2008)

sbglax13 said:


> Can you imagine someone marketing a sports car that made you only a tiny hair faster for twice the money and half the durability? :skep:
> 
> 
> .


Yes - remember the Jaquars? or even the Range Rovers...


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

cyclingthroughlife said:


> Yes - remember the Jaquars? or even the Range Rovers...


Yah, but they both didn't do very well 'cuz of it, and ended up getting bought out by Ford.

Neither did crap for Ford, who then had to unload both of 'em to an Indian carmaker.  
.


----------



## seeborough (Feb 3, 2004)

thechriswebb said:


> Worst thing ever: Roadie snobbery.
> -The vile attitude towards the guy that decided to make some healthy changes in his life, purchased a bike, and showed up for his first group ride just to get criticized for all of the things that he did "wrong": reflectors, spoke protector, tube socks, sunglasses UNDER his helmet straps, and (gasp!) hairy legs.......got so embarrassed that he stowed his new bike in his garage to be sold 5 years later at a yard sale, never ridden again (should have had thicker skin, right?)
> 
> -The guy that picked apart and criticized every thing that was "wrong" with a new bike that an elderly guy proudly posted a picture of on this forum, including the colored valve stem covers that his young grandchildren insisted on because they "didn't want grandpa to lose the air in his tires"
> ...


Are we a little bitter?

Whoa.


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

SystemShock said:


> Basically, back then, some 'genius'/moron marketing guys decided that if 700x23 is good, then 700x20 must be even better. Lookit how LIGHT the tires are! Lookit the PRESSURES you can pump 'em up to! What's not to LOVE!?! :devil:
> 
> And bikies, being ever the suckers for the latest trend, totally bought into it... for awhile, anyway. Which then started an 'arms race' to get even narrower... 700x19, 700x18... as STOCK tires on midpriced bikes. In all sizes. Eek! ut:
> 
> ...


Hey, they listened!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now many bikes are coming with 25mm tires and wider rims!!!!!!!!!!!!

because they are better...............................ut:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

ziscwg said:


> Hey, they listened!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Now many bikes are coming with 25mm tires and wider rims!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> because they are better...............................ut:


They kinda are though.

btw, kudos on the seven-year-old-thread dredge. might be a record.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> They kinda are though.
> 
> btw, kudos on the seven-year-old-thread dredge. might be a record.


So...how did you get me an email notification for a reply to your post...in my email inbox?

You're creeping me out over here.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Marc said:


> So...how did you get me an email notification for a reply to your post...in my email inbox?
> 
> You're creeping me out over here.


I didn't do it. Talk to the RBR hamsters.


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

SystemShock said:


> They kinda are though.
> 
> btw, kudos on the seven-year-old-thread dredge. might be a record.


No, I pulled one from 2004 on Thread Dredge Tuesday last month.


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

Marc said:


> So...how did you get me an email notification for a reply to your post...in my email inbox?
> 
> You're creeping me out over here.





SystemShock said:


> I didn't do it. Talk to the RBR hamsters.


You have an email subscription to the thread. Likely, you posted in it and it automatically sends after that. You can change that iby going to Quick Links > Subscribed Threads


----------



## wgscott (Jul 14, 2013)

Serious necropostage.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

ziscwg said:


> Hey, they listened!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Now many bikes are coming with 25mm tires and wider rims!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> because they are better...............................ut:


Some of us, ahem, stayed with "wide rims" and 32 spokes, or, ghast, 36 spoked wheels because of their comfort and durability.

Best rims I ever ran were Weinmann Concave. Their cross section was like an I beam. They were nice and stiff but absorbed shocks and gave a cushy ride.


----------



## MaxKatt (May 30, 2015)

Most excellent entertaining zombie thread for a newbie like me here. 

Struck true gold with this nugget in post #194

Bike Snob NYC: I Am Highly Specialized: The Right Tool For the Right Job


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

MaxKatt said:


> Most excellent entertaining zombie thread for a newbie like me here.
> 
> Struck true gold with this nugget in post #194
> 
> Bike Snob NYC: I Am Highly Specialized: The Right Tool For the Right Job


Bike snob is right. This bike is purposefully set up for the requirements of the rider. He chose a sporty bike to zip around town on, with a small rack to carry stuff. Could it be the four spoke Spinergy in front is a replacement wheel? Anyway, it goes fine with the rear, well, ok, a little too bulky, but so what?

The only thing I can see wrong is the low saddle. But then again, maybe he likes to be stretched out on those handlebars.

Interesting, isn't it, that the one guy who approves of this bike goes by the name of Bike Snob.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

wgscott said:


> Serious necropostage.


'Night of the Living Dead Thread'. 

At least it's a good one. Though as the OP, I am biased.


----------



## Tschai (Jun 19, 2003)

SystemShock said:


> I'm the OP, and I say, what's wrong with retro-grouch rants? They have a tendency to be right. :smilewinkgrin:
> 
> I don't know how retro I truly am (haven't worn wool yet, but I'm meaning to), but I definitely am results-oriented. It's not enough to be a _new_ tech/piece of equipment, you also have to be better than what's in use now, and in a 'big-picture' way too... none of this, "here's something that's 10 grams lighter for twice the price and half the durability". That's BS that no one would put up with in any other industry.
> 
> ...


People do this in cycling and sports cars and what they are buying is exactly what they want. Speed is far from the only goal and the folks that pay large amounts for small returns aren't being fooled. That's what they want.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

rodar y rodar said:


> Disc brakes on mountainbikes to the point where there dang few frames available with canti bosses. I wonder how long until the only new mtb frames with V-brake capablility will say Huffy on the tubes.


post makes no sense. canti were always a pretty vulnerable, drastically inferior choice for any mountain bike. Disk brakes brought immense improvement to mountain bikes, I would argue FAR better improvement than suspension did. Unless you ride on flat land or buff pseudo-trails .. then you are not even talking about MOUNTAIN biking. My god the hand fatigue and imprecise control of cantilevers is gladly passed into history. Not to mention: water and mud.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

SystemShock said:


> Ugly-ass 'extreme' paint jobs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Holy cow this is like some Twilight Zone. Can;t believe how polar opposite your opinions are to mine.

Klein made what I consider the best paint job and colour schemes every put to bicycle frame tubing. And in fact, I bought that exact bike model in that colour in your picture 25 years ago. I would seriously like to buy one like it to hang on the wall of my den, but... so many otrher people love that bike so much the price is through the roof - seriously some folks asking up to $10k for a vintage Attitude.

but hey, each to their own

I dislike blacked out bikes. so bland.

but then .. this thread is so trolling and negative anyways, an invite to hate on things


----------



## bradkay (Nov 5, 2013)

BCSaltchucker said:


> Holy cow this is like some Twilight Zone. Can;t believe how polar opposite your opinions are to mine.
> 
> Klein made what I consider the best paint job and colour schemes every put to bicycle frame tubing. And in fact, I bought that exact bike model in that colour in your picture 25 years ago. I would seriously like to buy one like it to hang on the wall of my den, but... so many otrher people love that bike so much the price is through the roof - seriously some folks asking up to $10k for a vintage Attitude.
> 
> ...


As a former Klein employee at the Chehalis plant, thanks for your kind words. We tried to make bikes that people loved to ride, and their continued popularity (especially in northern Europe) is gratifying.


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

bradkay said:


> As a former Klein employee at the Chehalis plant, thanks for your kind words. We tried to make bikes that people loved to ride, and their continued popularity (especially in northern Europe) is gratifying.


Klein had way better bikes than business model


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

bradkay said:


> As a former Klein employee at the Chehalis plant, thanks for your kind words. We tried to make bikes that people loved to ride, and their continued popularity (especially in northern Europe) is gratifying.


even 25 years later, I think there never has been a faster XC racing bike than the rigid Attitude, or Adroit. Either that or I just got fitter and fast enough to get placings on it, LOL. suspension forks slowed all the bikes down! thanks for the memories. I had 2 Attitudes, the 2nd one had an even more attractive all blue finish


----------



## mik_git (Jul 27, 2012)

I got to ride an Attitde way back in the day, it was very awesome, HLF with mag 21's. That exact bike is still on my wish list of bikes to own (along with a Yo eddy, got my 3 other dream bikes). My 2 fav paint jobs on Kleins are that Dolomite team mentioned and the HLF, people can keep their gators and storms...


----------



## bradkay (Nov 5, 2013)

ziscwg said:


> Klein had way better bikes than business model





Brilliant engineers don't always make the best businessmen... but Gary designed some great bikes.


----------



## bradkay (Nov 5, 2013)

mik_git said:


> I got to ride an Attitde way back in the day, it was very awesome, HLF with mag 21's. That exact bike is still on my wish list of bikes to own (along with a Yo eddy, got my 3 other dream bikes). My 2 fav paint jobs on Kleins are that Dolomite team mentioned and the HLF, people can keep their gators and storms...


I was partial to Painted Desert, but I have a Quantum Race in Chameleon and a plain Red and Black Mantra Race.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

BCSaltchucker said:


> Klein made what I consider the best paint job and colour schemes every put to bicycle frame tubing.
> 
> And in fact, I bought that exact bike model in that colour in your picture 25 years ago.


Condolences. 







(good bikes, beyond awful taste in paint jobs)


----------



## bradkay (Nov 5, 2013)

Well, thank God not everybody likes Matte Black bikes. Those are so ugly - and so damned popular... It is nice to see a splash of color or two (or three!) in the pack.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

*klein pink-green-white paint job...*


















.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

bradkay said:


> Well, thank God not everybody likes Matte Black bikes. Those are so ugly - and so damned popular... It is nice to see a splash of color or two (or three!) in the pack.


yellow... yellow ... YELLOW


----------

