Quantcast

What will happen w/ + Spacing Standards?

kidwoo

Celebrating No-Pants Day
Aug 25, 2003
21,994
1,681
In my pants
"You seen son, when we were your age, mountain biking was small enough that it was run by people who cared about the sport, because they all did it themselves. They even used to make design decisions based on what made bikes better. Hard to believe now I know, but it's true"
 

SubV

Chimp
Jun 24, 2015
8
2
I tend to adopt new standards a bit late and am careful about buying frames, forks and hubs as a result of this. I find the ever changing standards roughly as annoying as most folks posting in this thread, but I have a different take on this "plus" standard that seems to be gaining momentum.

Here's why: the fitness and athleticism buy-in for new mountain bikers is pretty damn high. Most folks introduced to the sport are in their heels for a fair amount of time. They get more gassed than they have known since middle school wrestling on the climbs, and piss their pants on the downs. Most normal humans ride bikes in the mountains because of how much damn fun it is to descend. So if the + bikes give a more forgiving descending experience but aren't as stupid heavy in the wheel department as the current, fucktarded fat bikes I see more and more of, I would hope that + bikes grow the sport a little.

Posted from your Mom's house.
 

vinny4130

Monkey
Jun 11, 2007
304
98
albuquerque
Giants overdrive 2 wasn't that bad of an idea, any tapered 44 upper head tube can be od2 the cup,bearing, spacers and stem change but that's about it. It's was an existing head tube standard that maxamized the steertube size. In my opinion about the same as 35mm bars not 100% nessary but does increase stiffness. I own a bike that is od2 and its not a giant.
 

Vrock

Linkage Design Blog
Aug 13, 2005
259
24
Spain
I don't care about the front hub, it's a dirty cheap part and easy to change. The rear hub is another history, it's quite expensive and it forces you to change too many parts. If you want to build a Symetric rear wheel you can use an asymetric rim or an asymetric rear triangle, just like Cannondale and Pyga are starting to use...
 

dropmachine

Turbo Monkey
Sep 7, 2001
2,923
10
Your face.
The bike industry is awesome. I'm pretty sure they base i on the car industry, and try and introduce as much buttfuckery as they can without inciting a revolt. 142...fine, I get it. People are too stupid to line up axles so they need slots. Fine. I'll concede that there are a lot of dumb people out there. And fine, people are too stupid to understant 20mm and will always think its too heavy, so out comes 15mm. Sigh. Fine. I see why you did that industry.

But going from 15mmx100 to 15mmx110? Boost 148 instead of just using 150mm? 94 different BB standards? Giant Overdrive?

I can't wait for whatever comes next, especially if its a SRAM press release.

"SRAM is proud to introduce Boost lite 146+™!! Featuring 146mm wide hubs with a 1mm ramp on each side, now stiffer by 01381% according to Bobs™ calculator™ of stiffyness™. Featuring new Painal™ Bearings, ButtBlood™ lube, Dryshaft™ spokes, and something else witty that indicated how hard you're gonna get it. ™".

Fuck you industry guys, fuck you right to hell.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
36,254
2,985
Sleazattle
In the future either side of your rim and hub and BB will be independently controlled and infinitely variable to provide the optimal hub/BB/rim width for your riding conditions. This will initially be controlled by a series of levers on your handlebar but will eventually be computer controlled. No gearbox bike will ever be successful but eventually a chainless quantum entanglement drive will be developed. None of this will make biking any more enjoyable but eventually chains and parts for fixed width systems will no longer be available.
 

HAB

Chelsea from Seattle
Apr 28, 2007
10,489
839
Seattle
I don't think it can't lean, but the transition's probably pretty interesting. I'm not sure who they think might buy this. It might have been better packaged, with different tire tread, and perhaps tassels, as a tavern-to-tavern ride.
Okay, way harder to lean, and with an abrupt transition. My point stands.

A bar bike makes more sense, but if you're so hammered that balancing a normal bike is a challenge, you're probably better off not being anywhere near traffic. :D
 

jonKranked

Press Button, Receive Stupid
Nov 10, 2005
54,571
4,113
media blackout
Okay, way harder to lean, and with an abrupt transition. My point stands.

A bar bike makes more sense, but if you're so hammered that balancing a normal bike is a challenge, you're probably better off not being anywhere near traffic. :D
if you're drunk enough to think riding that is a good idea, you should probably call a cab. (assuming you can still operate a phone)
 

kidwoo

Celebrating No-Pants Day
Aug 25, 2003
21,994
1,681
In my pants
You can't even give womenfolk a ride on the handlebars
When something is useless as even a bar bike, you've truly reached the pinnacle of uselessness itself.
 

vinny4130

Monkey
Jun 11, 2007
304
98
albuquerque
In the future either side of your rim and hub and BB will be independently controlled and infinitely variable to provide the optimal hub/BB/rim width for your riding conditions. This will initially be controlled by a series of levers on your handlebar but will eventually be computer controlled. No gearbox bike will ever be successful but eventually a chainless quantum entanglement drive will be developed. None of this will make biking any more enjoyable but eventually chains and parts for fixed width systems will no longer be available.
You heard it here first folks the 2016 bionicon lineup!
 

big-ted

Danced with A, attacked by C, fired by D.
Sep 27, 2005
1,401
45
Vancouver, BC
Clearly, this is the result of an engineer getting REALLY fed up with his product manager saying they need to produce a bike with suspension 'forks.'