whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat
- Thread starter Sandwich
- Start date
Metric was an excuse. They wanted to make all the previous models obsolete, and just went with one of the (minor) characteristics of the new ones to drive the whole marketing campaign.
How long until someone starts selling aftermarket linkages to fit the new shocks to old frames?
How long until someone starts selling aftermarket linkages to fit the new shocks to old frames?
Or offset eyelets. Or frame designers now have to have two shock settings. The one clear message from this move is: FUCK YOU, BIKE SHOP. Not that many places could keep up with stocking items in the past, but now it's literally twice as bad.
I've always been an adopter of new technology, but this shit is ridiculous. I love my carbon wunderbiek with zero point engagement hub and carbonz and tubeless and etc, but I'm just about done. I don't want metric shock sizes, I want compatibility and robustness. This is literally just a push to take your money, there is no logic nor strength behind it.
And don't get me fucking started on BOOst. "We need this for stronger wheels and shorter chainstays on 29" bikes." Quickly adopted by 27.5" bikes. Manufacturers start building 29ers with 17.3" chainstays, when 16.9" was possible with plain old regular hubs. UGH.
I've always been an adopter of new technology, but this shit is ridiculous. I love my carbon wunderbiek with zero point engagement hub and carbonz and tubeless and etc, but I'm just about done. I don't want metric shock sizes, I want compatibility and robustness. This is literally just a push to take your money, there is no logic nor strength behind it.
And don't get me fucking started on BOOst. "We need this for stronger wheels and shorter chainstays on 29" bikes." Quickly adopted by 27.5" bikes. Manufacturers start building 29ers with 17.3" chainstays, when 16.9" was possible with plain old regular hubs. UGH.
The sweet irony is, those who have approved of SRAM's BS and spent extra $ on boost to future proof their purchases just got their future proofing shafted up theirs by the same lizard company.
Fuck SRAM.
In 03 I switched to scram cause shitmano started this bullshit that if you ran XTR shifters, you'd need to run the XTR disc brakes, which only worked with their specifically offset XTR disc on their XTR hubs. Fuck it! I switched to scram. But their quality sucked! On our weekly rides (60+ riders) it seemed common that 1 or 2 would bail out with derailleur issues. It was always a scram derailleur where the limit screw would pop out due to those plastic pieces of shit. It was that point I went back to 8spd and mid grade components. I avoid these 2 companies when I can. Hope, Raceface, Hadley, Hayes, Fox, Marzoocchi (for years but not now 
), KS...
), KS...
The worst part about it is if you destroy a part on a trip even resort shops won't have parts for you unless you have something that's on their rental fleet. I love going back to 2002 and having to send myself parts over 3 countries when I'm on a trip just to ride my bike.
They must not have kept doing that, because I'm running 2014 XTR on my fatbike/skinny wheels and it's just like any other brake. Well, let me clarify, they actually work, so not really like avid, but you get the picture...In 03 I switched to scram cause shitmano started this bullshit that if you ran XTR shifters, you'd need to run the XTR disc brakes, which only worked with their specifically offset XTR disc on their XTR hubs. Fuck it! I switched to scram. But their quality sucked! On our weekly rides (60+ riders) it seemed common that 1 or 2 would bail out with derailleur issues. It was always a scram derailleur where the limit screw would pop out due to those plastic pieces of shit. It was that point I went back to 8spd and mid grade components. I avoid these 2 companies when I can. Hope, Raceface, Hadley, Hayes, Fox, Marzoocchi (for years but not now
It was only for a year or two when shitmano released their revamped XTR group. That was the introduction to their center lock brakes I think and it was only on XTR. But a lot of XC racers jumped onto scram (as bike mfgrs did too). I often wondered if shitmano didn't do that, would scram ever become who they are today.
Last edited:
SRAM should go ahead and fire their propaganda team. This year they went out with this metric moronity just in time for April's Fools, but do you guys remember that stupid "made for the top 3%" shit they pulled out for the Vivid Air? Seriously, a guy selling kebab in a Turkish zoco does better at advertising...
Plus even the Cage is a million times better than the old Super Deluxe. I complain about the bike industry coming up with shitty ideas and new standards under the guise of innovation all the time (and stand by those complaints), but overall bikes are a shitload better now than they were 10 or 15 years ago.True that. On the other hand the Vivid is quite a bit ahead feature wise. $460 is still close to $426.72.
Of course the important thing to keep in mind is what actually pushed that progression. It wasn't wheel sizes, hub widths or fat bikes. It was trail bikes mimicking dh bikes (finally), big advances in materials, some better air spring designs, and a hell of a lot better suspension tuning.
Oh yeah and kashima. Where would we be without kashima!
The next ongoing revolution won't have shit to do with flimsy 3" tires, 2mm narrower hub widths, or replacing an existing standard of shock sizes with another standard of shock sizes.
When the EWS is your pinnacle of performance and not WC DH, get ready for the dark ages.........or what will be known on mtbr as the true renaissance
I think endurpo races will die like snowboard racing died. It may be fun to do but it's absolutely boring to watch. When every hack has an endurpo he rides at 20% of its designed speed and gnar, sales numbers will fall again and so will endurpo racing.Of course the important thing to keep in mind is what actually pushed that progression. It wasn't wheel sizes, hub widths or fat bikes. It was trail bikes mimicking dh bikes (finally), big advances in materials, some better air spring designs, and a hell of a lot better suspension tuning.
Oh yeah and kashima. Where would we be without kashima!
The next ongoing revolution won't have shit to do with flimsy 3" tires, 2mm narrower hub widths, or replacing an existing standard of shock sizes with another standard of shock sizes.
When the EWS is your pinnacle of performance and not WC DH, get ready for the dark ages.........or what will be known on mtbr as the true renaissance
Their propaganda team did a pretty good job with Gwin this year. Remember when they found out that Gwin was running mostly SRAM, and instead of taking the opportunity to say "we're excited that the worlds fastest downhiller has chosen to run our products despite not having any direct ties or sponsorships from us, and while we understand the demands of juggling multiple sponsors, we hope in the future we're able to convince him to run a full set of our products," they instead said "fuckit, the world is gonna burn down and everything is going to function like shit, its not even worth running our stuff and he should just piss off."
Flo: I don't know man.......it does relate a lot more to what most people do on mountainbikes. Not as gnarly as dh and not as spandexy as XC. If your average mountainbiker wants to go race, it seems like that's the obvious format. I see it lasting. I think its biggest deterrent is going to be multi-day formats and the space requirements of so many courses. But one day events I see sticking around for a long time.
Snowboard racing was never emblematic of 'what most people do' when they go snowboarding. That was just copying skiing to get some kind of competition going.
Snowboard racing was never emblematic of 'what most people do' when they go snowboarding. That was just copying skiing to get some kind of competition going.
You apparently didn't hear about gwin's spleen removal last month. I read it on one of my church forums.
I mean you can't say it wasn't expected......I mean he DID run a sram derailleur without a sram chainring.
I'm actually surprised he's still alive, much less cancer-free.
there is a little more room in the new shocks for stuff like air springs and dampers.
enduro has the bonus of not being affiliated with the UCI
That old stuff? Really I thought we were beyond that!
You'll notice 'shock sizes' weren't in my first list of bitches.
There's a reason for that.
I'm really not all that butthurt about this one for the exact reason you just gave.......I noticed the conversion list produces a longer shock body per comparable stroke length.
http://p.vitalmtb.com/photos/stories/2016/04/07/max_Metric_Shock_Sizing_711223.jpg?1460088654
Reading sram's reasons for all this is funny though. Other than trek and specialized, shock sizes already were converging into a pretty consistent array of standard sizes.
Last edited:
Hear me out here, but couldn't companies have just gone to a a longer i2i and kept the stroke length the same if they needed more space to work with?
William: That's pretty much what they did.
But for a 6 inch frame design to still have 6 inches of travel with that longer eye to eye, you'd still have to redesign the frame anyway. So even if they'd started making 8.5" shocks with a 2.25" stroke, you'd still have new frame and new shock required.
DC: Sure. But will you finally admit that boost is fucking stupid and that all you had to do was move hub flanges on a 150mm rear hub to get the same thing?
But for a 6 inch frame design to still have 6 inches of travel with that longer eye to eye, you'd still have to redesign the frame anyway. So even if they'd started making 8.5" shocks with a 2.25" stroke, you'd still have new frame and new shock required.
DC: Sure. But will you finally admit that boost is fucking stupid and that all you had to do was move hub flanges on a 150mm rear hub to get the same thing?
Last edited:
Sure. you'd still need a new frame though. The stroke lengths are dividable down to 2.5mm... that should get pretty close to any stroke out there now, the eye to eye's are longer.
Exactly.
Definitely. That doesn't mean all change is good though. For example, I still think Sram's new 12 speed Eagle stuff is fucking stupid, because a 10-50t range is so far beyond what I need or want. I'm sure it'll work well, because drivetrain parts have gotten pretty good these days. Clutch derailleurs are awesome, materials have gotten better, etc. That doesn't mean that I'm wrong to complain that the same shit could be some combination of lighter/cheaper if they'd left it at something like a 10-40t range, which honestly would suit my needs better than a 10-50t. I ride carbon wheels and clutch derailleurs and modern suspension and dropper posts and shit because those things are all legitimately good developments, but that doesn't mean I need to accept every new thing that comes along as being a good idea.
Sure. I wasn't trying to shit all over Sram's entire product line or anything. I'm not even opposed to the 10-50 cassette existing, because I'm sure there are some people that do want it. What I don't understand is making it the only option on the top end groupset.
Yeah. I was at/working for Trek when Boost came up. I tested the bikes (boost vs non-boost) in Sedona. I made the suggestion that a 157 wheel would have been way stiffer (the design goal) and that standard already existed... that was ignored due to q-factor concerns and other stuff.DC: Sure. But will you finally admit that boost is fucking stupid and that all you had to do was move hub flanges on a 150mm rear hub to get the same thing?
Either way- boost wheels fit in non-boost frames and vice-versa. I don't see what all the fuss is about. Most bikes' dropouts measure around 145mm wide with no wheel in them
Edit: Boost forks are sweet on 29ers. It actually makes a noticeable difference. I wish it had been pushed to like 125mm wide though.
Oh I know. That's why I blame you personally for it.
I meant 150 though, not 157. People like to pretend true 150 never existed for some reason.
I had an intense frame that had both 142 and 157mm spacing back when it was supposed to be 135 and 150.
so ahead of the game. Unfortunately crooked brake caliper technology just wasn't up to the task at the time.
Last edited:
why true 150? 157 isn't really wider and you get the stupid tabs to help put your wheel in.Oh I know. That's why I blame you personally for it.
I meant 150 though, not 157. People like to pretend true 150 never existed for some reason.
I had an intense frame that had both 142 and 157mm spacing back when it was supposed to be 135 and 150.
so ahead of the game. Unfortunately crooked brake caliper technology just wasn't up to the task at the time.
you know how i know you suck at bikes?
you owned an intense.
I understand the wider hub flange spacing, but in terms of fork torsional stiffness, how is 20x110 not better in every single way?
Definitely the dark years when the list of 7" travel bikes was about 4 long.you know how i know you suck at bikes?
you owned an intense.
The first one I was looking at was an ellsworth dare.
You would have been about 8 at the time........
20mm front, 150mm (or 157, whatever) rear, universally for all real bikes (not anything 29er obviously). Still plenty of room to mess with frame tabs, chainlines, hub flanges.....
That would have solved everything. Including all the dumbass hub adapters I have around my house now.
And this is fresh in my mind right now because I can't find any fucking 'torque caps' for any hubs that aren't made by sram. I'll buy a fox fork before I buy sram wheels.
Last edited:
I think it's really funny that Fox, who pushed for 15mm in the first place, are pretty much the only people still making a 20x110 160mm fork.i don't know- it probably is better in everyway, but i'm not a fork engineer. 15mm axle was decided on (not by SRAM
So, what's next? Does Reverb need an oval-shaped seat tube in order to stop going kaputt left and right?
Now you've said too much.
I know you know this, but Q Factor yo. Da princesses worried about q factor would have revolved.