Do we need more than just Campag, Shimano & SRAM?

[ZG862]

Re: Re:

Not to pick on the poster, but threadless stems were cited as being modern design failures. On the contrary, I see them as being far better. If I look at old Cinelli stems, a stem swap often meant a seized steerer and then removal of tape and levers (maybe cables too) be for what should be a 5 minute job, which it now is. The Cinelli 1A nose bolts either seized, rounded off or snapped and the 1R wedgy thingy was awkward. On top of this bars creaked like billy-o depending on how hot the weather was.

Probably not going to be a popular post on here, just trying to be objective

It's OK - I have a pretty thick skin and don't feel picked on at all. The post was soliciting considered debate - which we have - so I'm happy.

Seized steerers are generally caused by slap-dash assembly (i.e. without any grease), which is hardly a design problem. You are right that it would take longer to swap stems, but don't forget that historically we only had brake levers to worry about and no cables passing through the bars or under the (consumable) tape. I used stems as an example because the current fashion is not only (subjectively) ugly as a pig in lipstick but also presents the kind of surface that I really don't want any of my soft parts colliding with in an accident. It also does not allow infinite height adjustment as the older design does (which I personally use much more than reach adjustment - but that may be as you suggest because it is a little more time-consuming) nor does the modern setup make it any easier to tweak the lever body position (on the contrary in fact).

I don't get squeaks from my 1R but that could be because I'm not strong enough anymore to give it the necessary beans.

I do think that modern pedals are a vast improvement on toe-clips and straps though. I'm also surprised that hub dynamos haven't had a resurgence given the tiny current demands of LED lights and powered shifters. An exhausted battery is quite literally a dead weight, although I suppose the same could be said about a generator on a bright day and a flat road.

 

[pigman]

Re:

I could go on ...
Modern shape handlebars are so much more comfy, how the lever blends with the curve. I always found the shape of bars awkward bitd, and now with my arthritic hands and wrists I can't use older bars

Modern DP brakes work better

Indexed gears means no seeking that elusive spot a la friction shift

Cassettes are easier to change than blocks

Freehubs mean no broken axles, which I went through regularly, yeh I'm a bit of a lard arse

9 speed upwards cassettes mean you can have wide ratio spreads without the big gaps in gearing.

 

[SimonJC]

Interesting thread; if I was to respond to all the points raised I would be writing here until next week!
One thing about groupsets which for me is a major mistake is that all of them are essentially based around road racing. What I mean by that is if you look at every single groupset range they all basically follow the same pattern - you have a top groupset, and goes down from there. For example, you have Dura-Ace, then Ultegra, which is the same basic concept but a bit cheaper, and 105, same again, all the way down the range. This is the same for Campagnolo as well.
When I started cycling seriously in the mid-90s, this major flaw became very obvious, as I was into time trial racing, and it was clear that no-one produced a groupset for time trial racing. So what I did, and indeed everyone else did, and have continued to do, is have a base gearset, and use customised components.
I used a 9-speed Dura-Ace setup, with a 7-speed cassette, with a custom chainset setup, with a single ring. No one has ever produced a no-compromise groupset for time trialling; so you have to do this. I wonder what sort of innovation Shimano could come up with if they put their minds to a specialised TT groupset?

Another thing which I find interesting is that people think that modern groupsets are truly fantastic, which in many ways they are. So what happens is that you get a groupset that is launched, and the press do their usual gushing praise, but what I have found, is that every single groupset I have ever used, from Shimano Exage 7 speed to Dura-Ace and Record, is that if they are properly adjusted, all of them work pretty much the same. The only groupset that for me was really poor was the 9 speed Campagnolo Record setup, which never really worked properly.

One thing that I do find is a backward step are the moves towards 11 and 12 speed; the chains have a very short lifespan. My current good summer bike is based around Shimano Dura-Ace 9 speed; the 25th anniversary version, probably the last pretty groupset ever made by anyone. I like the Rohloff SLT 99 chain; I estimate that the current one has around 30,000 miles on it, and has virtually no stretch, no visible wear and feels like a new chain (believe me, you can tell when riding!); I have had over 50,000 miles from these chains. At 95kg I am not a light rider, and this sort of lifespan is totally unheard of today. Chainlife is really poor now. If you need a lot of gears that you might get from an 11 speed setup, then use a triple - which of course you can't get anymore with the premium groupsets today, which is a shame.

 

[ZG862]

Re: Re:

I could go on ...

My argument isn't that modern bikes are rubbish, more that with 3 players dominating the market, (all with a "groupset mindset"), I fear for innovation.
Not the "they did a 13 sprocket cassette so we'd better do 14" approach (I agree with SimonJC - the chains are too narrow for the materials we're prepared to pay for) but more the "how do we make it better, lighter and cheaper?", where "better" = more suited for it's intended role (which has me agreeing with Simon again - who is bothering about niches?).

Neither am I saying everything was brilliant in the past btw. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that 52/42+14-28 is rubbish, yet this was pretty much the default for years.

 

[Woz]

As said, I think this is great topic for a ramble / rant / debate. Now that I'm charged with some wine and chilling out, plus I'm in the road section, I'll let rip a little. There is a massive contradictory in terms going on. I'm of the view that anything from 1910 till say 1970 was nothing more than fiddling around the fringes of development and just improving on a very minor bases what was done before. Any component manufacturer in the day was essentially doing the same thing, but yes, the quality was overall substantial.

It was the biggest realisation for me working on this: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=406532&start=130 the engineering and quaility manufacturing for something 100 years old can not be faulted. No real gruppos either, hell most parts are unmarked.

So for sure you can add the Parellogram derailleur and QR skewer thanks to Campag, but in a way it stops there till what - 1985?.

Road bikes were stuck in the dark ages until Bernard Tapie came along. You got a functioning intelligent clipless pedal - the rest stayed the same until STI / Ergo Power moved the gear controls where your hands are. Apart from that the majority has been taken from the heady MTB development days. Threadless headsets, replaceable rear mech. hanger....and now disk brakes FFS.

So what is new today? Nothing, just the same old messing around the fringes and some technology transfer between cycling disciplines - a little size difference due to "perhaps" more intelligent design thinking or marketing rubbish or because using different materials are employed. Oh, and adding another sprocket. Again. :roll:

Every component manufacturer is essentially on the same band wagon, and yes, to get around to the original OP it's all pretty much a bore in my mind today. They are producing the same things. So far nobody mentioned UCI; just how the *uck did electronic shifting get into a human powered sport and honestly did anyone get finger numbness from changing gear with Bowden cables? How can that trickle down technology be of any serious use whatsoever to an everyday cyclist? The complete contradiction to anyone who wants an uncluttered bike.

Personally I like what some smaller manufactures are doing, Middleburn, Herse and Royce is very brave and glad they exist and what they are doing, but sadly I don't see them on the edge of innovation. A bit like Stronglight just producing quality refined parts.

Probably some of the France last standing companies like Look, Time or Mavic (if they survive) may come up with something but I feel the framework to move is pretty much limited for major steps forward and as before it will be fiddling around the fringes of development and just improving on a very minor bases what was done before. Would be great if Mavic could mastermind a gruppo again, but please.....not Lego inspired this time around

Shimano will probably try something new and stupid (read dusted off old idea or get on a stupid hobby horse integration obsession), and I really hope Campag can do something - possibly radical and produce a gruppo for say gravel or CX bikes which is sound, sensible, shiny and a bit exotic.

 

[Woz]

Re: Re:

.... ugly as a pig in lipstick but also presents the kind of surface that I really don't want any of my soft parts colliding with in an accident.

One word "Kore". Although marketed as "Knee Saver" rather then "Dangly Bits Saver", the old ones are a thing of beauty.

EDIT: Forgot to mention, four weeks ago took two 1R stems to the tip with the same fault - cracked wedge. Design / material fault or end user kept cranking it up to stop the creaking? Don't get me started on early Thomson Elite stems either...

 

[ZG862]

Re: Re:

"Kore".

Did some web searching and... you're right!! :mrgreen:
Are you talking about the kind of thing found on a "Banshee Darkside 2015"?

 

[pigman]

Re:

I'm not sure what wholesale change you can make to a bike or without it being a bike. Essentially it's always going to be 2 wheels in a line that needs to be powered by the rider, needs something to sit on and something to steer with, all hung on a frame. No matter what improvements you make, it's just tinkering around the edges.

Cars are the same. At the start of the last century, someone invented the internal CE, stuck it on a platform and put a wheel at each corner, and this is what we still have. The changes in between were just tinkering on the edges - disc brakes, servos, electronic ignition, fuel injection etc and like bikes, more gears.
# maybe electric cars are the first radical change in over 100 years

 

[Woz]

Re: Re:

"Kore".

Did some web searching and... you're right!! :mrgreen:
Are you talking about the kind of thing found on a "Banshee Darkside 2015"?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Kore-Road-26 ... SwIShbkOOk

Just the thing for a retro alloy road frame with oversized tubes and visible welds.

Will say though, totally out of place on skinny gas pipes

 

[legrandefromage]

Re: Re:

I'm not sure what wholesale change you can make to a bike or without it being a bike. Essentially it's always going to be 2 wheels in a line that needs to be powered by the rider, needs something to sit on and something to steer with, all hung on a frame. No matter what improvements you make, it's just tinkering around the edges.

Cars are the same. At the start of the last century, someone invented the internal CE, stuck it on a platform and put a wheel at each corner, and this is what we still have. The changes in between were just tinkering on the edges - disc brakes, servos, electronic ignition, fuel injection etc and like bikes, more gears.
# maybe electric cars are the first radical change in over 100 years

Er, cars are governed by huge amounts of legislation and are a very bad analogy

and just because; theres been electric vehicles for as long as theres been combustion engines

so forget the car, leave it in the cupboard and concentrate on bicycles - leave it! I've locked the cupboard and hidden the key.