[Dogboy]

I think Stik is right. The bike industry is not what is once one. Back in the day there use to be tons and tons of little guys trying out new things, some was good, some was bad...but in the end it made everyone push forward.....and i remember the days of getting to try out new proto stuff, let the racers destroy it before you send it out....it was fun to break things for free i tell ya.

I just can't agree with you guys. I think Stik's comments are a gross generalization. I started wrenching in a shop 21 years ago and I've been in the business since then. I'll say there were times when new ideas were first coming into the bike world-front suspension, rear suspension, v-brakes, disc brakes, tubeless, and lots of other stuff, but most of it was initially crap. What seems to work best in most cases are refinements on good ideas. That's not to say there's not innovation, but a lot of times it flops on the first go-round only to be reworked at a later date and then it works-see VPP. But then you get people saying "it's not new, it's just an old idea rehashed". Innovation exists, most people just don't get it right the first time. My 2 cents.

 

[bikenweed]

I'd rather ride a refined FSR set up than some new, latest and greatest, industry spotlight design. Why? Well, there really isn't anything wrong with the FSR set up. I'd rather get a simple bike that a company has spent time refining and perfecting than something marketed for the sheer fact that it is new and different. Combine an FSR design with a properly set up, platform valved shock, and there will be nothing holding the rider back. Is innovation a bad thing? No, of course not. But when almost every company is trying to create the "perfect" design, and most are quite different, I'll stick to the old reliable and save my money for gas to go ride. Once we do find a better design that manages to stick around for more than three years, it'll be worthy of comparison. Could this be the VPP system? Might be, but then again Intense went with the VPP design because "It was time to do something new."

 

[zedro]

FSR patent covers the location of the chainstay pivot.
ICT has to do with the shape of the rocker.

not exactly, the shape of the rocker on the ICT is consequential to the design parameters, not an actual parameter itself. So a walking beam type suspension could never infringe on the ICT patent with a similar rocker design.

 

[ChainWhip]

not exactly, the shape of the rocker on the ICT is consequential to the design parameters, not an actual parameter itself. So a walking beam type suspension could never infringe on the ICT patent with a similar rocker design.

So I wonder why Turner has to put ICT stickers on their bikes this year?

 

[buildyourown]

not exactly, the shape of the rocker on the ICT is consequential to the design parameters, not an actual parameter itself. So a walking beam type suspension could never infringe on the ICT patent with a similar rocker design.

True. To the naked eye, that's how you can tell. The rocker on the Fluxx is flatter than the Burner. Flux is ICT, Burner isn't

 

[zedro]

So I wonder why Turner has to put ICT stickers on their bikes this year?

because he's infringing on the ICT patent....or at least doesnt want to fight about it

 

[buildyourown]

I'd rather get a simple bike that a company has spent time refining and perfecting than something marketed for the sheer fact that it is new and different.

You mean like a DHR?
This thread could become the "sunday vs DHR" debate

 

[ChainWhip]

True. To the naked eye, that's how you can tell. The rocker on the Fluxx is flatter than the Burner. Flux is ICT, Burner isn't

Gotcha...

I wonder if ICT applies Rocky Mountain's ETSX... They're trying to achieve the same thing right?

 

[OGRipper]

I'd rather ride a refined FSR set up than some new, latest and greatest, industry spotlight design.

The problem with this is that at some point, the FSR was the "new, latest and greatest."

If you're saying that you give every design some time to work through the kinks, that's fine. You still support innovation, and you still make technology leaps,
you just don't want to be a guniea pig. That's ok from the consumer's standpoint, but the industry is still going to keep moving forward. I don't think bike technology will ever stop evolving, there are too many things than can be improved, however incrementally.

 

[bizutch]

Ummmm, in my opinion Yakima is offering something $4500.00 more valuable than Sportworks. Theirs comes with lock cores! Which menas I can buy it, have two new lock cores for my ONE Yakima roof rack that locks up all 4 towers, my Anklebiter, my Lockjaw and my rear rack!

Sportworks doesn;t even offer a lock? If my bike doesn't get stolen because it's locked down on my Yakima rack...and I don't have to have a cable lock in the trunk...it just saved me the possibility of my $4500.00 DH bike getting ganked!

That's a pretty simple thing they just ignored.

 

[ChainWhip]

Ummmm, in my opinion Yakima is offering something $4500.00 more valuable than Sportworks. Theirs comes with lock cores! Which menas I can buy it, have two new lock cores for my ONE Yakima roof rack that locks up all 4 towers, my Anklebiter, my Lockjaw and my rear rack!

Sportworks doesn;t even offer a lock? If my bike doesn't get stolen because it's locked down on my Yakima rack...and I don't have to have a cable lock in the trunk...it just saved me the possibility of my $4500.00 DH bike getting ganked!

That's a pretty simple thing they just ignored.

Sportworks has a locking core that will retro-fit to existing racks in the works. Currently, there is a locking pin/cable combo that locks the bikes.

 

[Acadian]

That's a pretty simple thing they just ignored.

Maybe it's because Yakima came up with the idea first and Sportworks didn't want to rip the idea off them?

their hitch racks rock tho...the pic locks to the car and you can buy a special cable that mounts to it.

 

[Acadian]

BTW...I didn't start this thread as a debate Yakima vs Sportworks, I just picked that as an example.

 

[James | Go-Ride]

I sent Bizutch a PM about this, and I don't want to create another cylinder-lock disaster, but the Yakima core lock system is a total joke if you know how to disable the system. Cable and U locks, guys. They are the only way to go.

 

[toodles]

I'd be interested in seeing what innovation is present in the bike industry being used on some of the long-term problems rather than a few manufacturers fixing somehing that isn't broken. An example of well used innovation is e.13 and polycarbonate bashrings - saw a problem and did something about it.

I've been racing DH for 8 years now and it seems like everytime I put a bike together I come up with the same problems. Only recently did Avid come up with a lever pull adjustment (vs. lever reach), something I've wanted since hydraulic brakes took that feature away from most of us garage mechanics.

Nobody asked for half of the "innovative" new products that come out every year, but we're still getting flats, knocking our deraileurs off and finding we've got to grind brand new components to fit them on to our bikes. On that topic, ISCG has been a beautiful thing in my mind, can we once and for all get a true "standard" brake mount. C'mon, having 7 or 8 different mounts makes our industry look ridiculous.

I can't agree innovation is dead - new materials, platform technology, outboard BB bearings, (some) new standards, better designs and extra features are proof enough of that.

 

[Acadian]

Only recently did Avid come up with a lever pull adjustment (vs. lever reach), something I've wanted since hydraulic brakes took that feature away from most of us garage mechanics.
.

Hope C2's were adjustable, but not really suited for DH tho

 

[lovebunny]

well look at kona. there still making plenty of money. they found a design, stuck w/ it, and continue to make money off it. so i guess some companies just find their niche and stick in it.

 

[zedro]

well look at kona. there still making plenty of money. they found a design, stuck w/ it, and continue to make money off it. so i guess some companies just find their niche and stick in it.

yes, it's called marketing.

 

[Metal]

An example of well used innovation is e.13 and polycarbonate bashrings - saw a problem and did something about it.

Back when I used to ride BMX bikes, it think it was Kink and some other companies that had a lexan or a similar material as a grind plate. E13/Evil just brought it to the Mountain bike world and fine tuned it.

 

[Incubus]

Nobody asked for half of the "innovative" new products that come out every year, but we're still ...knocking our deraileurs off...

Shimano's Saint/Hone has taken huge steps to address this, but it isn't cool to like Shimano. Oh well, until SRAM finds a similar solution...

 

[toodles]

Shimano's Saint/Hone has taken huge steps to address this, but it isn't cool to like Shimano. Oh well, until SRAM finds a similar solution...

Any benefit Shimano brought with their system was negated by the lack of compatability with anything, including itself (do Hone and Saint have the same axle size?). Besides, I was more talking about gearbox style solutions not beefing up solutions.

 

[trialsmasta]

Back when I used to ride BMX bikes, it think it was Kink and some other companies that had a lexan or a similar material as a grind plate. E13/Evil just brought it to the Mountain bike world and fine tuned it.

Watch is buddy, speaking such truths could get you lynched

 

[trialsmasta]

Shimano's Saint/Hone has taken huge steps to address this, but it isn't cool to like Shimano. Oh well, until SRAM finds a similar solution...

It seems like eveyone in the industry hates Shimano, however I have been very impressive with their 2005 line up. SRAM hasn't been napping either, now that they have teamed up with Truvativ and Avid, Shimano better watch out. Did anyone take a look at Rock shocks new motion control damping? Thats innovation right there.

 

[MtnbikeMike]

well look at kona. there still making plenty of money. they found a design, stuck w/ it, and continue to make money off it. so i guess some companies just find their niche and stick in it.

But how many people rave about the suspension performance of a Kona?

 

[MtnbikeMike]

Any benefit Shimano brought with their system was negated by the lack of compatability with anything, including itself (do Hone and Saint have the same axle size?). Besides, I was more talking about gearbox style solutions not beefing up solutions.

Those two groups were designed for two different applications. There's really no reason to mix the two, and Shimano kwnos this. They're not going to shrink the axle size of their Saint hub so someone can put it on a trailbike with a Hone derailleur.

 

[zedro]

But how many people rave about the suspension performance of a Kona?

well, they did in the previous century...

 

[toodles]

Ah ok, just thought it was being presented as a budget Saint grouppo.

 

[CreeP]

well it is
and they all have different splined disc mounts, it makes it nearly point less for anyone else to make a disc brake system that works with shmano's new stuff.

the fact is that the companies who drop off do so because either their innovation isn't taken seriously, it doesn't work, or they can't afford to keep producing it. Or it just doesn't look the part. You know what I'm talking about.

 

[OGRipper]

yeah its stupid (but typical) if the xt/xtr, saint, and hone splines are all different. I can sort of understand that saint and hone would be different than xt/xtr (slightly bigger diameter), but saint and hone should be the same, and personally I think they should all be the same.

I kind of like the splined set up but good old Shimano figured out a way to make me stay away...

So take the group-specific splined hubs/rotors, dual control, and low normal, add it all together and what do you get? Another fed up long-time shimano user moving to SRAM.