[andimon1]

Hey yall,
can anyone explain to me why Shimano refuses to go ISIS? Dont get me wrong, they make the best shifting cranks out there, but why are they stubborn about doing what everyone else is getting into? Its pure greed in my eyes.
Raceface/Truvativ/FSA cranks all the way...
Andi

 

[merrill_josh]

All too true, they wouldnt let anyone use their system unless they paid so now "anyone" got together and made their own system and Shimano is toooo proud and greedy to use it.

 

[riderx]

Shimano came up w/ the splined BB/crank design and decide they wanted to be the only ones to make it. A bit short sighted if you ask me (see Apple computers vs. IBM to see an example). So, a group of manufacturers got togther and did the open standard ISIS thing. When Shimano realized this was taking off, they decided to license their design on a limited basis. I believe Specialized and a few other manufacturers are making Shim. style cranks. I think it will be too little too late though.

 

[Phreaddy]

See the latest issue of Bike magazine. Very balanced story. You all seem to forget that Shimano probably spends more on R&D than all the ISIS companies combined. They have the right to protect, and/or profit from their innovations.

I'm no raving Shimano supporter. I think they change standards too much, practice too much planned obsolesence etc., but that's beside the point here.

 

[ToddM]

Why do you think shimano will never make a threadless headset and has not for years. They won't pay diacomp to license the design like everyone else does.

I'm sure shimano would never admit their design was not the best by using the ISIS. I wouldn't be surprized if they come out with a new "revolutionary" spline patterns like ISIS but not. Much like they did when they came out with V brakes.

 

[andimon1]

I do beleive tht shimano stuff is among the best in the sifting department, but i would never buy shimano cranks, just because they are too original for me. I am totally up to date with the whole ISIS and shimano crap, but if you think about it, they would probably actually make more money switching over to ISIS, that sticking with their own crap and not liscnecing anyone for anything...which makes for money for them. ISIS is a simple design, and i dont understand why everyone would try to get compatibility with other companies about the stuff. Besides are the companies out there just to supply the best for the average MTN biking Joe. (at least thats what Shimano claims)
Andi

 

[riderx]

Originally posted by Phreaddy
They have the right to protect, and/or profit from their innovations.

I agree, but from a business perspective, they could still make money from licensing. This way, they have 2 revenue streams. One from selling their own BBs and cranks, and another from license revenue from other companies using their BB and crank designs.

In the early days of the PC, IBM chose to license their design and Apple chose not to. Now, something like 90% of the PCs are IBM clones - And it didn't put IBM out of business, but it's almost done that to Apple a few times.

Shimano has enough other products that they probably won't ever be in financial danger from this crank/BB decision. But, they must have realized they made a mistake in not licensing their product, because they have changed course and are licensing to limited companies. Apple tried this one a few years ago too, but it was far too late for them to make a success of it.

 

[Phreaddy]

Actually, if memory serves, IBM got outsmarted by NOT protecting their intellectual property well enough. They don't make a dime from the millions of PCs, what we used to call "IBM-compatibles" or "IBM clones." And they don't actually make many PCs for the consumer market anyway. For the last several years, they've tried and backed off a few times.

Further, I think Apple actually BOUGHT the company they had licensed their operating system to -- it was a case of the licensee making the product better and cheaper than the licenser.

Finally, it's a standard business strategy to refuse to license your technology until someone else comes up with something of comparable quality -- and then license it to keep competitors from going with the other choice, which is exactly what Shimano has done here. For them to have done anything else would be irresponsible to their shareholders. You said, "Shimano has enough other products that they probably won't ever be in financial danger..." but what you're arguing goes against the whole idea of capitalism! We can certainly discuss that too, if you like.

 

[riderx]

Originally posted by Phreaddy
Actually, if memory serves, IBM got outsmarted by NOT protecting their intellectual property well enough. They don't make a dime from the millions of PCs, what we used to call "IBM-compatibles" or "IBM clones." And they don't actually make many PCs for the consumer market anyway. For the last several years, they've tried and backed off a few times.

Well, you are right about the IBM licensing. It was MS and Intel which pulled off the licensing coup here. The end result is there are many more PC clones (using MS and Intel) out there than Apple computers.

Originally posted by Phreaddy
Further, I think Apple actually BOUGHT the company they had licensed their operating system to -- it was a case of the licensee making the product better and cheaper than the licenser.

Actually all indications are Apples cloning attempt backfired. Instead of expanding marketshare like they wanted to, the clone manufacturers became their competitors. Since Shimano is already the dominate player in cranks, it is doubtful this would happen. Regardless, the point is, Apple tried to open up their technology for others to use in an attempt to capture some of the large market they were missing all of those years IBM clones were dominating. It was too late.

Originally posted by Phreaddy
Finally, it's a standard business strategy to refuse to license your technology until someone else comes up with something of comparable quality -- and then license it to keep competitors from going with the other choice, which is exactly what Shimano has done here. For them to have done anything else would be irresponsible to their shareholders. You said, "Shimano has enough other products that they probably won't ever be in financial danger..." but what you're arguing goes against the whole idea of capitalism! We can certainly discuss that too, if you like.

Going against capitalism? Read the full statement, which continues "...from this crank/BB decision." That means, if they DID make a bad decision with the way they decided to license (which remains to be seen years down the road), it would not be catastrophic since they have many other successful products. It has nothing to do with being against capitalism. As pointed out in my first post, I agree they have a right to protect and/or profit from their inventions. It's just my opinion that in the long run they would have been better served by licensing their technology early on and thereby squashing any ideas of ISIS being developed.

 

[shocktower]

It`s just legal crime ,who ever has the most money wins .................................................

 

[Rivet]

Don't blame Shimano, they have allowed licensing for a few years, Cannondale ponied up the money, they use Shimano splines on their Coda cranks. It's just that other companies were too cheap to license from them. This is all moot now, 2003 XTR uses a spline and pinch interface like Bullseye and alot of BMX cranks, check the picture. Also notice no shifter paddles, shifting is by moving the brake lever like STI road stuff.

 

[way2jedi4u]

whoa i never realized there were no paddles...man that sh!ts whack....i'm glad i went full sram.....i love my 9.0 trigger (only have right side...who needs a front deraileur?)

 

[mtnbikej]

The new XTR Disc brake will only be compatible with new XTR hubs. They will not use 6 bolt mounting. They will use a grooved flange and lockring...similar to the cassette.

Nice move.

I think not.

mtnbikej

 

[way2jedi4u]

good call...like i said..i'm a SRAM'er for life as of........3.....2.....1......ding. Adios shimano.....I just have to lose my shimano cranks and I'm done with that company.

 

[indieboy]

the new shimano stuff is crap, they basically shot themselves in the foot by doing waht they have done. they have destroyed their great set of cranks and made their shifters into something extremely scary, lock ring on a set of disc brakes...... NO THANK YOU!!!! that is just asking for something bad to happen. basically if you want to run the new xtr stuff you are going to have to go all or none. the cranks have put the bearings on the outside of the cups much like the old sweetwings cranks used to and the new coda's that are on the scapels, i think they did this b/c of all the new ISIS stuff coming out. the new shifters are going to be a joke..it's an sti type shifter meaning it works like their road shifters. now ok what is going to happen to ppl who have smaller hands, they won't be adjustable, b/c the road shifter certainly aren't...oh well i'm a sram person, i won't have to worry unless they change their shoes, b/c if they do that then i'll be upset.

 

[riderx]

Originally posted by indieboy
i won't have to worry unless they change their shoes, b/c if they do that then i'll be upset.

Switch to TIME and don't look back.

 

[indieboy]

i almost got a pair of time shoes last year, but shimano is our shoe sponsor now so i'm going w/ those.

 

[riderx]

You can run Time cleats on any SPD shoe including Shimano. Unless of course the big S is also giving you pedals.

 

[indieboy]

trust me i know, i was thinking you were talking about shoes, b/c that's what i was talking about. and yeah i'm running them now and hate them. and the big S is hookin us up w/ pedals as well so no big worries

 

[Ranger]

Servus!

Hey, nothing like the schwag train - right indie?!

My roadie pal in Austria gets frames he likes but has to ride Dura-Ace, which he despises. Ah well, free stuff is still free stuff.

Thank God I'm not on the team - sky blue jerseys with a giant pretzel on 'em (main sponsor is a bakery chain). Brrrrr.


As for the '03 XTR discs - wouldn't a solution is to find (or make) IS 2000 compatible discs that work with the calipers? That pretty much circumvents the whole "must use XTR hubs" challenge.

Opinions?

 

[gravity]

you seem to be forgetting that you COULD always run XT stuff instead.

personally, i think shimano equipment is good. it's reliable, average price, and easy to get hold of. however, i dislike the way they keep being arseholes and doing stuff just so everything has to be compatible with them (cranks anyone?). when Rob Eva sets up SRAM in australia, i will hopefully use their stuff (if they ever get their trigger shifters working properly), and if i can afford it. i say shimano for gears, and nothing else. Avid or Funn for levers, Truvativ or Raceface for cranks, DT Swiss (or hadley or whatever) for hubs, and sure as hell DO NOT RUN THEIR WHEELS.

rant over.

 

[prophet6]

Originally posted by Ranger
As for the '03 XTR discs - wouldn't a solution is to find (or make) IS 2000 compatible discs that work with the calipers? That pretty much circumvents the whole "must use XTR hubs" challenge.

Opinions? [/B]

might work, assuming they've left the rotor diameter at 160 or 170, meaning you could just slap on an xt rotor, deal with the weight difference, and ride.
for those out there with machining experince, you should note that making custom rotors isn't that big a deal. mildly time consuming, but what isn't? I looked into moving to aluminum rotors to drop weight and get more power from a smaller (160mm) rotor, but testing showed that it was going to be beyond grabby. whoa. i guess that's why you only see trials guys using proto aluminum rotors....