[holelotanutin]

wondering if any body seen the new saint components by shimano????? if so what dya think?

 

[sub6]

yeah, I seen 'em and I think it's a load of proprietary crap.

As far as I'm concerned, the only shimano "freeride components" worth a damn are the 105 (and Ultegra too) rear derailleurs. Those make me happy.

 

[jhusktrials]

I like them alot. What good is technology if you dont use it? Someone has to be at the forefront. Cannondale tried to be that company but couldn't do it. Shimano however has some great ideas. The derailleur being mounted on the axle, that is a great idea. The ability to pull rotors off with one nut, nice. I would like to ride a bike with the goods on it.

 

[Roasted]

No interest in this stuff. I think the rotor mounted der is a bad idea. I just envision an expensive repair job. Proprietary rear hub...I don't like shimano hubs in the first place...proprietary brakes...I want hayes. And this is only the back end.

Proprietary bb connected to a proprietary crank which I believe can only use a proprietary chain guide (I may be wrong on this). And don't even get me started on those shifters. For xc they seem truly innovative and may even be useful, but for freeriding I see misshifting (I got to play on them for a short ride and had a lot of issues with the shifters). And then replacement costs of brake/shifter levers or even just the initial cost is out of this world.

People keep comparing this move to Microsoft. I don't, I liken it more to macintosh in the 80's. But anyways I have started switching to sram and will complete the switch when rapid fire is released for sram components.

Oh and whats with companies only offering 1 method of shifting. Why can't shimano come out with two versions. One with rapid fire and seperate brake levers and one shifter/brake lever combo. Arg...

If shimano really wanted to help and be TRULY innovative create an affordable internally geard hub...(I realize it wouldn't really be innovative) I see that as the ultimate acheivement for mainstream rides when it comes to parts for their drive train. Not another hanging shifter variable.

 

[oldfart]

Can't comment on some of the issues raised but I can tell you the integrated shifting and low normal works very well once you learn the new shifting pattern. I've been riding highly technical North Shore trails like Corkscrew and Pangor yesterday and I've yet to shift in error when I brake. I've been using the new XTR for 2 months, maybe 50 rides or so. But it might not be every persons cup of tea.

The cranks and bb are also awesome. They feel stiffer to me and who cares if its proprietary as long as its better and parts are available.

And I am surprised to find that low normal shifts better than my old standard XTR shifters and derailleur.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by sub6
yeah, I seen 'em and I think it's a load of proprietary crap.

That's what I said when the gray XTR came out with it's new crank/BB setup... how wrong I was.

Not all of the innovations will catch on, but I guarantee that if Chris King and SRAM had come out with the new rear derailleur mount, people would be on it like flies on horsesh!t. The cranks are no more proprietary than the gray XTR, and people haven't seemed to mind running those for the last 5 years. The disc brake rotors are simply a better idea, IMO, than 6-bolt IS (quicker, ligher... and the calipers accept standard rotors anyway if you really don't want XTR/saint hubs. They also accept standard XT/grimeca levers.

and I can't think of anything better for derailleurs (other than internal gears) than getting rid of dropouts... a 70 year old design that has been nothing but a plague for mountain bikes.

 

[sub6]

Originally posted by ohio


and I can't think of anything better for derailleurs (other than internal gears) than getting rid of dropouts... a 70 year old design that has been nothing but a plague for mountain bikes.

Yeah, but if, say, Rocky Mountain designs a bike to take that hub, they'll probably do away with the derailleur hangers. So you are then locked into using ONE choice of rear hub. ONE choice of rear derailleur. And every time you ding a rotor, you have ONE choice of a replacement. Shimano hubs suck ass, I'm sure the derailluer is quite nice but extremely expensive, and ditto on the rotor. I'd rather have the interchangeability, personally...

Granted, an internally geared hub would essentially lock you into one choice of hub and "derailleur" but you wouldn't be breaking them so much, either.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by sub6
Shimano hubs suck ass

The Saint uses angular contact roller bearings, not loose balls like the XT/LX/deores, and extra pawls and more contact points.

 

[sub6]

Originally posted by ohio
The Saint uses angular contact roller bearings, not loose balls like the XT/LX/deores, and extra pawls and more contact points.

that's cool, some of the initial reports I read in Velonews and the like were saying they used cups and cones.

 

[rekt23]

IMO, Shimano is building what everyone wants in a component system. Tough-as-balls brakes, which can be used with the six bolt standard or with the new spline, shifting that works like a champ, I don't want to bunny-hop a log and find myself two gears lower on a downhill with sram shifters. The debate about the hubs is all for naught, I believe that Hugi is now borrowing the pattent on the spline for Shimano hubs. The rear mech. is a non issue, because we've all been there before. I believe that being mounted to the hub gives a more positive connection to the gears, no more bending those der. hangers back. I've read that Shimano really did their homework before sending this stuff out. Even going as far as to paint the der. with red paint and sending it through a rock garden to see where they needed to beef up the material. Long live progress.

 

[Tweek]

Originally posted by sub6
that's cool, some of the initial reports I read in Velonews and the like were saying they used cups and cones.

That would suck exponentially, if true.

 

[Tenchiro]

I just think the Saint group is ugly. The crank arms are humungous and everything else just has that weird futuristic look...

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by Tenchiro
I just think the Saint group is ugly.

Can't argue with that...

The cranks look like trucker's arms.

 

[indieboy]

i think a bunch of ppl have their panties in a bunch over all of this stuff. if you don't like it don't ride it. i understnad that most of you guys are concerned that it will change industry standards but before it can become a standard frame makers have to agree upon making it a new standard which is pretty damn hard to do for many reasons. i for one can say when the new xtr stuff was released to the press i thought it was goin to be a big flaming pile of SHIET, however i was wrong, the stuff rocks. i can only figure the same w/ this groupo. the sport can't want won't advance if you don't like the technology come along to push it along the way.....

 

[Incubus]

My .02...

I like the look and design of the cranks. I can use them on their own. Cool.

I like the look and design of the rear mech. If I want to use it, I need to also use a Shimano hub. Didn't really want to, but I guess... why not?

Oh wait, If I have a Shimano hub, I have to use Shimano brake rotors. Those are pricey...

And do I have to use Shimano brakes too then?

My biggest gripe with Shimano is how they refuse to let others adopt their 'standard'. Where RaceFace, King & Truvativ have an open invitation to anyone who wants to manufacture ISIS interface components. Shimano does the exact opposite. Find me a non-shimano Octalink bb.

 

[srf]

Does Shimano actively prevent people from using designs like Octalink, or do companies just not want to follow suit?

 

[D_D]

Originally posted by srf
Does Shimano actively prevent people from using designs like Octalink, or do companies just not want to follow suit?

You would have to pay shimano to use it if shimano have the legal means to stop you (patents etc.).

When the alternative standard is just as good as the shimano one (isis) why bother paying shimano when you can use the other one for free.

 

[indieboy]

Originally posted by D_D
You would have to pay shimano to use it if shimano have the legal means to stop you (patents etc.).

When the alternative standard is just as good as the shimano one (isis) why bother paying shimano when you can use the other one for free.

true, but if you put a patent on something wouldn't you want to get paid for someone else making money off of something you designed.......

 

[oldfart]

Originally posted by D_D
You would have to pay shimano to use it if shimano have the legal means to stop you (patents etc.).

Like Specialized do with their Horst link. And Manitou with their twin piston chamber, and 5th Element with their shock etc etc etc.

If you pay the bucks in time for research and development to build a better mousetrap and pay for the patent, there's no problem in asking for a licence fee or refusing to allow others to use the design.

 

[D_D]

Originally posted by indieboy
true, but if you put a patent on something wouldn't you want to get paid for someone else making money off of something you designed.......

Yes but why would people bother when there is an alternative open standard that is arguably better.

 

[indieboy]

Originally posted by D_D
Yes but why would people bother when there is an alternative open standard that is arguably better.

i'm speaking in general terms, not just on the Isis vs Octalink, b/c honestly i'd rather have isis cranks over the octalink for several reasons.

 

[Incubus]

Originally posted by srf
Does Shimano actively prevent people from using designs like Octalink, or do companies just not want to follow suit?

I know that Shimano is allowing other companies to make cranks (blackspire is one). I'm not sure if Blackspire pays them. I also know that they're not allowing anyone to make bbs. How, I'm not sure. But you'll never see an octalink bb made by anyone other than the big S.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by Incubus
Shimano does the exact opposite. Find me a non-shimano Octalink bb.

It's pretty easy to argue that they're protecting it because they don't think others can make parts to their standards, and it would cheapen the patent.

You don't see Chris King licensing the ring drive, do you?

You see plenty of the cranks because they are willing to license it for a lower price than the BB. Could be that making the cranks is easier so they trust more people to do it. If it were about money, it would make more sense for them to just license the BB, as I bet they make more money off the cranks than a BB.

 

[Devoracer77]

Here's what I've been taught about parts and bikes:
#1, it doesn't matter what bike or compnets you ride, its the rider, not the bike
#2, Shimano produces everything themselves exclusivly because it's a no brainer that if you have a complete XTR group produced with the same machines in the same factories, it will work flawlessly. For shimano to give the rights to other companies to produce a Octalink BB for example, they would risk allowing other companies to screw up on the production, and in return, give the OCtalink BB system a bad rep. If you have full 2003 XTR, and nothing else, its going to work better than a bike with a XTR rear derraliur, LX cranks, and XT shifters, and so and so forth. It would work better because when the skunkworks testers design and test the products, they are usually doing so with the entire grouppo. Its a very simple concept. Thats why Sram needs to create a full grouppo, because the Sram chain isn't made for Shimano chainrings, or any others really. And the Shimano chain isn't made for a sram cassette. THey will all work together, just not as smoothly.

 

[Incubus]

I'd agree with you if they made the crank-side interface licensable from the get-go. They didn't however. It was only after the introduction ISIS that this went down.

I guess that cranks are more idiot proof than are BBs, but the whole thing still seems a bit shady.

Originally posted by ohio
It's pretty easy to argue that they're protecting it because they don't think others can make parts to their standards, and it would cheapen the patent.

You don't see Chris King licensing the ring drive, do you?

You see plenty of the cranks because they are willing to license it for a lower price than the BB. Could be that making the cranks is easier so they trust more people to do it. If it were about money, it would make more sense for them to just license the BB, as I bet they make more money off the cranks than a BB.

 

[Incubus]

Originally posted by Devoracer77
Here's what I've been taught about parts and bikes:
#1, it doesn't matter what bike or compnets you ride, its the rider, not the bike

This is true to some extent. If it were entirely true, DH pros wouldn't need 8" of travel front and rear. Or XC pros wouldn't need Carbon fiber bits and pieces.

In the end, it is about the ride. But some frames and/or components most certainly give a competitive advantage.

 

[indieboy]

Originally posted by Devoracer77
Here's what I've been taught about parts and bikes:
#1, it doesn't matter what bike or compnets you ride, its the rider, not the bike
#2, Shimano produces everything themselves exclusivly because it's a no brainer that if you have a complete XTR group produced with the same machines in the same factories, it will work flawlessly. For shimano to give the rights to other companies to produce a Octalink BB for example, they would risk allowing other companies to screw up on the production, and in return, give the OCtalink BB system a bad rep. If you have full 2003 XTR, and nothing else, its going to work better than a bike with a XTR rear derraliur, LX cranks, and XT shifters, and so and so forth. It would work better because when the skunkworks testers design and test the products, they are usually doing so with the entire grouppo. Its a very simple concept. Thats why Sram needs to create a full grouppo, because the Sram chain isn't made for Shimano chainrings, or any others really. And the Shimano chain isn't made for a sram cassette. THey will all work together, just not as smoothly.

if you are truely a devo racer and if john kemp just read what you posted ONLINE about your sponsors products i'm quite positive you'd hear an ear full......

 

[indieboy]

Originally posted by Incubus
This is true to some extent. If it were entirely true, DH pros wouldn't need 8" of travel front and rear. Or XC pros wouldn't need Carbon fiber bits and pieces.

In the end, it is about the ride. But some frames and/or components most certainly give a competitive advantage.

nico only used like 5 or 6 inches, if it's good enough for him it's good enough for the rest of you

 

[Devoracer77]

Originally posted by indieboy
if you are truely a devo racer and if john kemp just read what you posted ONLINE about your sponsors products i'm quite positive you'd hear an ear full......

I am a devo racer, and I love Sram's stuff. Their XO stuff in particular is awesome. My comments were not ment a demeaning or a negative way, I'm just stating my opinion on what they should be doing. I don't know how that would result in a earfull from Kemp. If it came across that I don't like Sram, thats not true, just for the record.

 

[indieboy]

Originally posted by Devoracer77
I am a devo racer, and I love Sram's stuff. Their XO stuff in particular is awesome. My comments were not ment a demeaning or a negative way, I'm just stating my opinion on what they should be doing. I don't know how that would result in a earfull from Kemp. If it came across that I don't like Sram, thats not true, just for the record.

ahhaha i was only messin w/ you dude, it's so easy to mess w/ the devo kids. you guys have to walk on eggshells pretty much w/ your sponsor stuff. is this adam or which one you little punks is this? but i hope you like the sram stuff b/c that's all you guys get to ride

 

[Devoracer77]

Originally posted by indieboy
ahhaha i was only messin w/ you dude, it's so easy to mess w/ the devo kids. you guys have to walk on eggshells pretty much w/ your sponsor stuff. is this adam or which one you little punks is this? but i hope you like the sram stuff b/c that's all you guys get to ride

haha....no worries man. No this isn't Adam, he doesn't race for devo anymore. I'm a new addition from Oregon. Today was also only my second ride ever on sram, and so far, so good. Who are you? Junior, pro, what?

 

[Repack]

Shimano did license Octalink to Specialized. Shimano makes the BB's still, Specialized does the cranks. Thay did this because bike companies cannot afford to spec their bikes w/ complete groups. If Shimano did not license the design to Specialized, Specialized would not have used any Shimao bb's or cranks. This way Shimano can still make some money and specialized can put "beter" parts "endorsed" by Shimano on their bikes. I don't know the specifics of any other companies.
ISIS is an open source initiative. Companies do this when, in the case of ISIS, someone wants to create a new stsndard and make it as popular as possible as soon as possible. The more companies that use a new design, the more validity the design has. I would guess that those companies who designed ISIS had a serious leg up when it came to getting the ISIS parts to market. Also, how many people out there run the same brand of cranks and bb? As many people in this thread have already pointed out, compatability is a major plus.

 

[indieboy]

Originally posted by Devoracer77
haha....no worries man. No this isn't Adam, he doesn't race for devo anymore. I'm a new addition from Oregon. Today was also only my second ride ever on sram, and so far, so good. Who are you? Junior, pro, what?

ohhhhhhhhhhhh you're darookz's buddy! he was telling me that one of his friends was racing for devo this year. but what's w/ adam, is he not a junior anymore? joey is probably still on the team though, he was pretty young. but no i'm not pro by anymeans, raced junior last 3 years and now having to race expert senior. race for Independent Fab. so hence the name but see ya at nationals yo i'll be in da back tihs year lol.

 

[Devoracer77]

Originally posted by indieboy
ohhhhhhhhhhhh you're darookz's buddy! he was telling me that one of his friends was racing for devo this year. but what's w/ adam, is he not a junior anymore? joey is probably still on the team though, he was pretty young. but no i'm not pro by anymeans, raced junior last 3 years and now having to race expert senior. race for Independent Fab. so hence the name but see ya at nationals yo i'll be in da back tihs year lol.

Yea me and rand (darookz) are pretty good friends. If you were talking about Adam Snyder, yes he is still racing for devo. Ithought you were talking about adam craig. Snyder is racin semi-pro this year. my sn is alexhodge7 if u wanna im me ever. peace out

 

[indieboy]

Originally posted by Devoracer77
Yea me and rand (darookz) are pretty good friends. If you were talking about Adam Snyder, yes he is still racing for devo. Ithought you were talking about adam craig. Snyder is racin semi-pro this year. my sn is alexhodge7 if u wanna im me ever. peace out

oh no, i know adam craig isn't racing for devo anymore. i'm glad he isn't, that boy needs some $$!!! wonder why john threw adam snyder in semi pro that class is a grave yard now.....

 

[srf]

Speaking of licensing it looks like Hugi is licensing Shimano's new disc mount:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2003/news/may30

DT Swiss has also announced that it will be making Hügi 240 hubs compatible with Shimano's Centre Lock disc brake mount. The new hubs come in at 136g (F) and 258g (R), 14g and 54g lighter than their XTR counterparts.

The Hugi 240s hubs feature the same stainless steel, quad-bearing system as standard Hugi 240 hubs. Shimano, Inc. licenses the Centre Lock rotor mounting system.