High standards? 137mm bcd ...

[frkl]

. . .I was put off by the amount of standards that demand other standards that demand other standards. I gave up, although the itch hasn't gone yet.

But, working on my 1978 Gazelle Semi Race, I found the SR crankset takes 137 bcd chainrings. Mmmmm, I haven't found anything suitable yet. Are we just begrudging the new and forgetting the past was not that different?

On this question in your original post, while there were always incompatible standards, i think one of the big differences is how components today are so tightly integrated with each other with standards (or actually non-standards). so precisely this cascade effect you describe. That i think is newer and increasing

When SRAM sued Shim to stop Shim's group spec'ing discounts/penalties, Shim used technical integration through proprietary and interlocking non-standards to accomplish the same thing that had become illegal to do with economics. It wasn't just Shim, of course but this is a good example of using tightly integrated components and non-standards to intentionally create this cascade, where if you choose one thing, the rest of the components are basically chosen for you through integration.

Back in the good old days, if you had a crank with an unusual bcd, that was the end of it, it didn't then mean you need to get the company's special bb, and then use their special chain on their special freewheel that could only be shifted with a specific derailleur and shifters which happened to be integrated into the brake levers, which in turn used a special cable diameter that meant certain brakes.

Or maybe I'm just grumpy today