A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

not enough standards



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 19th 18, 05:24 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default not enough standards

https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/

Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels
between two different bicycles.


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Ads
  #2  
Old January 19th 18, 06:38 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default not enough standards

On Friday, January 19, 2018 at 8:24:15 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/

Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels
between two different bicycles.


I don't ride enough trail to understand the problem being addressed. Is there one?

-- Jay Beattie.
  #3  
Old January 19th 18, 07:13 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default not enough standards

On 1/19/2018 11:38 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, January 19, 2018 at 8:24:15 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/

Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels
between two different bicycles.


I don't ride enough trail to understand the problem being addressed. Is there one?


ancient wisdom:
"The crap we sold you last year is no good. Here's the new one."

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #4  
Old January 19th 18, 08:00 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Emanuel Berg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,035
Default not enough standards

AMuzi wrote:

ancient wisdom: "The crap we sold you last
year is no good. Here's the new one."


Is this the reason for the new standards all
the time?

And if there are new standards all the time,
are they really standards?

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
  #5  
Old January 19th 18, 08:50 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,374
Default not enough standards

Slower is better
  #6  
Old January 19th 18, 08:52 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joerg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,016
Default not enough standards

On 2018-01-19 08:24, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/


Like with tires. There is 26", then 700c, then 29", then 27-1/2". What's
next? 28-1/4"?


Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two
different bicycles.


People still do. A friend has half a dozen rear wheels hanging in his
garage and he often swaps them in and out of the various frames he's got.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
  #7  
Old January 19th 18, 09:08 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default not enough standards

On Friday, January 19, 2018 at 11:01:02 AM UTC-8, Emanuel Berg wrote:
AMuzi wrote:

ancient wisdom: "The crap we sold you last
year is no good. Here's the new one."


Is this the reason for the new standards all
the time?

And if there are new standards all the time,
are they really standards?


Only if there is someone around to witness the standard. Otherwise it does not exist.

Some standard changes are necessary for "progress" to occur -- like the switch from 5sp 120mm rear road hubs to 135mm standard for 11sp disc. But then you get all the odd-ball through axle dimensions, including Specialized's proprietary SCS dimensions that lock you into certain wheels. You better like Roval.

There is a new standard (135mm/12mm) for through axle road rear which seems to be sticking, but then there are a bunch of variations -- so in shopping for a bike, you have to decide whether you want to get stuck on the proprietary merry-go-round.

Other changes are less defensible like BB[fill in the blank]. At least pedal threads have stayed the same, except for DuraAce AX. I like modern headsets. Bars have settled on 31.8 -- except if you buy an uber-bike with an all-in-one bar/stem combo, then you're stuck.

What I don't get is the 1X craze on road bikes. http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/aqua...train-in-2018/

-- Jay Beattie.
  #8  
Old January 19th 18, 09:31 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joerg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,016
Default not enough standards

On 2018-01-19 12:08, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, January 19, 2018 at 11:01:02 AM UTC-8, Emanuel Berg
wrote:
AMuzi wrote:

ancient wisdom: "The crap we sold you last year is no good.
Here's the new one."


Is this the reason for the new standards all the time?

And if there are new standards all the time, are they really
standards?


Only if there is someone around to witness the standard. Otherwise
it does not exist.


Some things develop into de facto standards without any officials to
witness. At least in my world of electronics.


Some standard changes are necessary for "progress" to occur -- like
the switch from 5sp 120mm rear road hubs to 135mm standard for 11sp
disc. But then you get all the odd-ball through axle dimensions,
including Specialized's proprietary SCS dimensions that lock you into
certain wheels. You better like Roval.

There is a new standard (135mm/12mm) for through axle road rear which
seems to be sticking, but then there are a bunch of variations -- so
in shopping for a bike, you have to decide whether you want to get
stuck on the proprietary merry-go-round.


Proprietary would be a red flag for me.


Other changes are less defensible like BB[fill in the blank]. At
least pedal threads have stayed the same, except for DuraAce AX. I
like modern headsets. Bars have settled on 31.8 -- except if you buy
an uber-bike with an all-in-one bar/stem combo, then you're stuck.

What I don't get is the 1X craze on road bikes.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/aqua...train-in-2018/


There is the same nonsense on MTBs. I saw one that a dealer just
modified 12-speed or so with 50T in there. IIRC the cassette cost north
of $350. Some people seem to have money burning their pockets so badly
that they need to get rid of it fast.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
  #9  
Old January 19th 18, 11:55 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default not enough standards

On 1/19/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/


Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two
different bicycles.


I SPIT on the whole 1x movement. There is no way to get the range that
was possible with 2x or 3x, even with a 10-42, and the rear derailleur
has to take up a huge amount of chain between the high and low cogs.

I guess if the mountain bike is transported to the trail-head on a
vehicle, and never ridden on-road, that you can get by without the high
gears.

That said, the front shifter on my mountain bike stopped going into high
last Saturday, and I had to buy a replacement set of Deore shifters, $40
from REI. I opened up the old one but it was beyond my ability to fix
it, so yesterday I changed the front shifter. Definitely can see the
advantage of not having the extra complexity. But on the trail I was on,
which was not steep except for a few short stretches, I wanted those
high gears.
  #10  
Old January 20th 18, 12:45 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joerg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,016
Default not enough standards

On 2018-01-19 14:55, sms wrote:
On 1/19/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/


Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two
different bicycles.


I SPIT on the whole 1x movement.



+1

I also spat on the 2x movement. My road bike has 2x (42/52) but because
it is 35 years old and back then that's all you could get. I suffer on
steep hills for that but as the drill sergeant always said, anything
that doesn't instantly kill you makes you tough.


... There is no way to get the range that
was possible with 2x or 3x, even with a 10-42, and the rear derailleur
has to take up a huge amount of chain between the high and low cogs.

I guess if the mountain bike is transported to the trail-head on a
vehicle, and never ridden on-road, that you can get by without the high
gears.


Even regular 3x MTBs like mine tucker out at 28-30mph because the
biggest ring is only 42T. On the last 4-5 miles home I sometimes wish it
had 52T like my road bike. IOW 4x would be even better. Or coarse steps,
that would be the optimum.


That said, the front shifter on my mountain bike stopped going into high
last Saturday, and I had to buy a replacement set of Deore shifters, $40
from REI. I opened up the old one but it was beyond my ability to fix
it, so yesterday I changed the front shifter. Definitely can see the
advantage of not having the extra complexity. But on the trail I was on,
which was not steep except for a few short stretches, I wanted those
high gears.



Could have used the redneck shifter: A somewhat straight piece of a
small branch with a 90 degree li'l branch (or a nail) sticking out the
side. When a buddy's chain pretzeled and ripped off the front derailer
that's how he shifted. It worked so well that he forgot to order a new
derailer for a few months.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Standards; always room for one more! AMuzi Techniques 26 January 1st 18 06:30 PM
Japanese standards AMuzi Techniques 1 November 25th 14 09:56 PM
Australian Helmet standards Walrus Australia 33 September 20th 05 09:25 AM
h*lm*t standards where's the web site? Bryan UK 5 August 18th 05 09:52 AM
Driving standards Tom UK 20 February 11th 04 01:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.