Innovation or Industry Scam?

Video Dan Barham
Date Apr 19, 2015

Like many of us who ride mountain bikes, Vernon Felton from Bike Mag is pissed. He’s pissed because the industry can’t make up its mind. Because the bike industry needs to make a new 110 wide front axle that is 15mm in diameter (tag line – It may not be as stiff but it least it’s not lighter!) because the existing 20mm by 110 standard just won’t do. Okay – maybe I’m projecting what I’m pissed about onto Vernon – but there’s more than enough to go around right now.


Vernon asked tough questions. How were the answers?

 

Trending on NSMB

Comments

jared
0
jared  - April 24, 2015, 3:43 p.m.

The part that is missing from this discussion is actual dates. Everybody they spoke to, was vague.About two years ago, is open to a lot of interpretation and means little. This video was a good attempt but unfortunately misses facts to make it truly believable.

Reply

boycotttrek
0
boycotttrek  - April 23, 2015, 12:59 p.m.

What I learned is to NEVER BUY A TREK

Reply

kristi-kagy
0
Kristi Kagy  - April 23, 2015, 9:26 a.m.

So…if I understand this correctly, the benefits of a 27/29+ bike which were outlined could be obtained by, well, becoming a better rider? So, in short, better cornering technique and skills practice could give you every benefit you would get from a brand new, pointless, 5K steed? And how does the unskilled rider that, supposedly, these individuals are targeting handle the obvious penalties of a fatter, heavier tire? At what point does innovation become a handicap? At what point do we solve issues with skill with technology? I love many of the progressive ideas and technologies emerging today (to see this much creativity in the bike industry is awesome), but, I really don't see the need for a different bike for every single thing - especially something so minor. Wouldn't energy be better spent looking at exciting suspension/frame designs or ways to get technology onto bikes for less $$? Why don't you listen to your consumers? You aren't Apple. We know what bikes we like; we know how bikes are made; we know the geometry and the numbers better than you might. We're creative - playing and tinkering in our garages, wondering what if…We know what we want. Try giving it to us - as opposed to distracting the market with another gimmick. Your consumers aren't saying "innovate" - they are saying "get smarter with those innovations; make them more affordable." Try listening. And you know what happens when we stop talking? We stop giving you money.

Reply

rob-s
0
Rob S  - April 22, 2015, 12:15 a.m.

How on earth does this help local bike shops, especially not the franchise stores? They now have to stock another range of tyre sizes, wheels, rims, tubes, etc.? Or does the consumer have to add ordering & delivery time from the importer to any part required?

Reply

craw
0
Cr4w  - April 22, 2015, 8:06 a.m.

Only CRC and the like will be able to keep that much stock, or distributors. Either way the consumer won't bother going to the bike store to be told to wait when he could just order it himself and have it show up at his door.

Reply

tim-robson
0
Tim Robson  - April 21, 2015, 2:52 p.m.

Concept for the vid is awesome. Maybe oversold it a bit? Would have liked to have heard SRAM's response on the 157 rear and 15×110 front question, and I also would like to have heard what Specialized's response would be in the context of the piece. Very informative on the whole, though. Three and a half stars. Margaret?

Reply

mrk
0
MRK  - April 21, 2015, 1:41 p.m.

Since 1996 I've owned A seracen, GT, Garyfisher, 2 Giants, Kenesis 3 Treks, Santercruz 2 Kona's 4 Cannondale's and a BMC, and they all have been 26ers, and all been more than good enough, I laugh off all the fads, some are good and some just suck, It's goo to have be able to chose what wheel I want but really I just want to have a bike I can get parts for and ride, hype bollox free.

Reply

anthony-cadieux
0
Anthony Cadieux  - April 21, 2015, 11:18 a.m.

The thing I understand from the guys at Trek is if every other company pisses the consumers off so why don't we do it too!?! It's innovation right?

And for the ones who says that if we don't like it well just don't buy it. Just look what happen with 26" wheels; even if you'd like to continue to buy 26" wheel stuff, it's impossible cause everybody stopped making stuff for that wheel size. The same thing will happen here… Even if you don't want to get to the new standards, you'll have too cause you won't find anything to replace your parts except fot the new stuff.

It's clearly about making more and more money with a sport that is already fawking expensive!

Reply

Goiter
0
26 Ain't Dead Yet  - April 21, 2015, 11:43 a.m.

I feel your pain! But don't write off 26″ as being unavailable yet. I've got 3 26ers. One is a 2014 model I just bought at a huge discount (at my LBS). I'm looking for upgrades and parts constantly and there is TONS out there still, especially online. There is not many new 2015 26″ bikes being sold this year (in trail/am/enduro), but there are some. I think 26″ will be around for a while yet.

Reply

anthony-cadieux
0
Anthony Cadieux  - April 21, 2015, 11:54 a.m.

Yeah sorry about that. I may have been a bit too angry and got carried away! I know 26" ain't dead. What I meant is companies don't count on 26" to develop higher hand parts for that size. When I go to my LBS, high quality 26 wheels are rare and the good parts they still have are discounted parts… Tough I know you can find A LOT of stuff on the interwebs 🙂

Reply

Jeromev
0
Jerome Varriale  - April 22, 2015, 7:02 a.m.

The bigger issue is going to be when buying complete bikes. Try buying a complete build next year that doesn't have 110×15 front axle. My gut is telling me "not possible".

Reply

jean
0
Jean  - April 21, 2015, 7:06 a.m.

If we all pick one size (or maybe two) and stick with it, the need for other sizes will die since no one will ever be interested in buying. If you quit buying everything the engineers are pumping out, their products will remain on the shelves collecting dust. That's all!

Reply

grip
0
Grip  - April 21, 2015, 5:53 a.m.

Feels like the only purposes of this video is to give bike companies a controlled environment to "answer" these questions.

Hey, come and ask us some tough questions so that we can tell everyone how it really is.

I like innovation, but lately the bike industry have gone belly up. It is laughable…

Reply

michael
0
Michael  - April 20, 2015, 7:40 p.m.

I'm pretty sure this is a carefully planned sales model, much like computers/phones.

Reply

mikefunk
0
mikefunk  - April 22, 2015, 12:45 a.m.

Exactly. This industry changes to car, phone and any other industry really quickly. Adding marginal changes every fucking year, holding bigger changes just to shave some extra bucks. I am sure they have more "innovations" in the drawers just waiting for next year.

Reply

craw
0
Cr4w  - April 20, 2015, 9:45 a.m.

"Overland Bike" is a special category?

Reply

Nelson1111
0
Just Askin  - April 20, 2015, 9:10 a.m.

Okay, another question, when they compare the 26×4.8 tire size with 29×2.3 - you see how much bigger the diameter of the 26 wheel/tire becomes (even bigger than the 29). If people have been complaining the 29 is a wagon wheel (and the 27.5 was the happy medium)- why wouldn't they be working with 26+? The images seem to suggest by going + size, you're doing the equivalent of bumping up to the next diameter wheel size. Seems by the time you add a 3.0 tire to a 26 wheel, you'd have the same diameter of the new and improved 27.5 wheel size - which I thought we were told was the magic size?
One other question - why does the 27.5×3.0 seems so much huger than a 27.5×2.8? Can't believe the 0.2 makes that much of a difference; to get that much difference in the 29'ers, you had to go from 2.3 to 3.0…

Reply

Nelson1111
0
Just Askin  - April 20, 2015, 8:42 a.m.

So, according to the fancy graph - are the concluding that the small bike compliance of full suspension bikes sucks? Instead of making a whole new range of bikes, rims, hubs and tires - why not just work on that part? Seems hard tails are few and far between - and even Rocky's Sherpa is full suspension. Isn't there that Vorsprung corset which is supposed to improve small bump compliance? Isn't that the simplest solution? guess that's why the bikes are so expensive - all this unnecessary R&D to make a complex temporary solution to a simple problem.

Reply

kilomoke
0
KiloMoke  - April 20, 2015, 7:56 a.m.

what about "26+" so I can just put bigger tires on my existing wheels and move up to the new 27.5 frames and not buy new wheels fork etc?

Reply

CraigH
0
Craig Hunt  - April 20, 2015, 8:30 a.m.

26+ already exists, it is called a fat bike.

Reply

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - April 20, 2015, 4:52 p.m.

ahem

Reply

bikemagisnowconfirmedgarbage
0
BikemagIsNowConfirmedGarbage  - April 20, 2015, 6:20 a.m.

Wow you guys missed April Fools day by quite a many days.. You guys completely avoided the real questions. What a freaking joke. It was wrong of me to even except anything from "journalists" these days. How far is this video from being a sell-out, even if you guys weren't paid?

Let me tell you knuckleheads some basics:

If a company was 100% devoted to making the best 26er Enduro bike, they won't have to buy molds for 27.5 front and rear triangles, and 27+ front/rear triangles, and 29er front/rear triangles, and 29+ front/rear triangles. And then add 8 additional molds for a "small" and "large" size front triangles. That's 16 molds… wow and those apparently cost $10,000 to make…. See what that means?

It means a company can maintain the same profit margin while offering bikes at a much lower pricepoint than its competitors… which in turn would probably drive sales! But instead, you guys are being like Silicon Valley and investing into absolutely retarded trends. Pulling the "iphone" talk with this? Are you fucking .. this is retarded.

So now I ask: how is this asking the tough questions? Seriously? Were you guys paid by Trek/Sram to fly over and ask those retarded questions? Sure it's for the completely uninformed people, but HOW ARE THESE THE TOUGH QUESTIONS?

I'm at 6:34 and you guys completely avoided asking the 15x110mm question. And the biggest FREAKING question of all is "will making these retarded new sizes have an effect in the prices of the current standard bikes?" Like NOT MAKING ANYTHING CHEAPER?

What. The. Fuck. Is. Journalism.

Mountainbikingwillalwaysbeexpensiveasmotocross

Reply

Faction
0
Derp  - April 20, 2015, 7:28 a.m.

100% agree.

Reply

CoilAir
0
CoilAir  - April 20, 2015, 9:43 a.m.

One correction: carbon bike molds cost more like $50,000 - $100,000 to make, which makes your argument even worse.

Reply

vernon-felton
0
Vernon Felton  - April 20, 2015, 10:19 a.m.

Really? We didn't ask both companies if they were just creating new shit to sell new shit? Oh, yes, we did. In both cases. On camera. When has that happened in the bike industry before? Never. You honestly think we didn't pose tough questions? Look…You don't like the answers they gave? Sure, I understand that. I'm also annoyed every time a new standard comes out. What I'm bringing to the table is the next step: trying to find out what was in peoples' heads when they did that. I'm guessing people would prefer that we had made a video dismissing a relatively new genre out of hand. That's fine for Internet forums. That's what people do. They hate. Blindly. My job is to ask questions, get answers and give you the fodder to make your own decisions. Do you find Rocky's take on this compelling? Trek's? Rocky's more so? None at all? Fine. Discuss away. That's the whole point. Finally, we shot 4 friggin' hours of tape-including a bunch on 15×110….there is no way in hell that anyone was going to watch anything longer than 12 minutes of it. A lot of good stuff is sitting there on the editing room floor…which pains me, but that's how making videos (well, the ones that aren't simply about guys shredding loam), works. I have a 4,000-word screed waiting to go live on Bikemag.com The video was supposed to be the broad brushstrokes. Anyway, I have no problem with you not liking the video, but this BS about not asking hard questions when no one else has had the balls to do this on camera….well, it's annoying. At that point, you're willfully ignoring what's there. I'd say more, but it will only add to the douche-factor that sticks to you when you defend yourself online.

Reply

Henry-Chinaski
0
Henry Chinaski  - April 20, 2015, 10:41 a.m.

That folks, is a good ole fashioned internet ass whuppin.

Reply

tanker-overflow
0
Tanker Overflow  - April 20, 2015, 11:24 a.m.

Actually, it's a wordy paragraph of perception management, a/k/a marketing.

Reply

Henry-Chinaski
0
Henry Chinaski  - April 20, 2015, 11:43 a.m.

Response seems straightforward to me. Which perception of mine is he aiming to alter? Please help me. I have a strong impulse to go out and buy a 27+'er.

Reply

yeahyeahillsignup
0
YeahyeahIllsignup  - April 20, 2015, 3:22 p.m.

Well I'd like to think that asking "are you trying to scam us and sell us shit?" is not actually a hard question. Of course the answer will be no. This is a merely a way to say : "You have been attacked, what is you defense?". It is basically the easiest way out you can offer.

Harder questions could have been how do you prove that those new solutions are indeed improvements. The trek guys mention that 29+ is hands down the best option. What do they back this with? That's what I wanna know.

Everyone made the switch to 650b after being told that it was better. However, very little proof has been published of what makes it better.

There is also much talk of stiffness in regards to the new axles. How is it quantified. How do we know how much more stiffness is better? Is there a point of diminishing return?

The rocky guy talks about 27.5+ as being more appropriate for beginner riders, is that true for for 29+ aswell? What do the trek guys think about this?

What can be done with those standarts that can be done with regular tires? The promotional video for the Rocky Sherpa didn't show anything that couldn't be just as fun on a regular bike.

I too was a bit disappointed with the video. You seemed to accept the company's answers without counter attacking. It's ok if you want to showcase the company's PR. It's not ok if you're trying to demonstrate hard hitting journalism.

Reply

Faction
0
Derp  - April 20, 2015, 6:04 p.m.

^ hire this guy to ask the questions, because he gets it.

Reply

Faction
0
Derp  - April 20, 2015, 6:28 p.m.

Mr. Felton, I respect you as one of the better journalists in mountain bike media. Truly. Thank you for your great work. But BMINCG makes very valid points, especially in his rebuttal. This lack of dissenting opinions if unique to cycling, mountain biking in general. I don't understand why, but if there are valid points being spoken against a direction the industry is going, its almost taboo to go against the grain. Naysayers should be applauded, because they are the checks and balances that keeps it healthy. Far too many people in mountain biking are afraid to speak out for fear of being shunned. I have experienced it too many times. It often comes down to who tows the party line, mixed with a whole lot of cronyism. Call bullshit when you see it.

Reply

tanker-overflow
0
Tanker Overflow  - April 20, 2015, 10:06 p.m.

I didn't say he was trying to alter the perception of a random internet entity who calls himself Henry Chinaski. Looks to me like Felton is ducking and dodging, offering woulda-coulda-shoulda and deflecting onto the draft article he hasn't published. He didn't ask any hard questions, but comes out of the gate in his defensive rebuttal insisting there are no other hard questions, and what hard questions exist, he asked every one of them.

Good for you winning with internet snark, though. That's even more perception management. You're trying to convince yourself that you've out-smarted someone on the internet with a deflection done smugly. So we have Vernon Felton and Henry Chinaski dodging with smug self-assurance. Meanwhile, softball questions and dodges continue to rule the MTB "journalism" (paid writers who may as well be conduits for manufacturers and their marketing gurus) world. I guess we should celebrate. Image trumps facts, critical thought is for what's kept under wraps or not even examined, and you, Henry Chinaski, feel clever.

What a great world.

Reply

tanker-overflow
0
Tanker Overflow  - April 20, 2015, 10:19 p.m.

" You seemed to accept the company's answers without counter attacking.
It's ok if you want to showcase the company's PR. It's not ok if you're
trying to demonstrate hard hitting journalism."

It's just bros hangin' with their bros, while gettin' some ducats out of it. We're supposed to envy them as "insiders." It's pretty pathetic. "Oh Vernon, you're so cool you even get to ask them questions which you'll later describe to your audience as tough ones. How privileged and lucky you are. Livin' the dream."

It's not even journalism, let alone hard-hitting inquiry or critical examination. It's fluff. But that's what Bike Mag has been since it began. Selling the image of livin' the dream. Why should we expect them to dig deep and turn on the inquisitor's bright spotlight?

Reply

tanker-overflow
0
Tanker Overflow  - April 20, 2015, 10:26 p.m.

You could prove you're actually willing to dig and look closely with -hang on, I think it's coming to me- oh yeah. Proof that you actually asked those tough questions and didn't let up, and got the marketing shills to admit they change standards for the same reason the grocery store occasionally moves around its inventory, for the same reason google dumbs down its android OS appearance rather than refining it, for the same reason Hollywood makes lousy remakes of lousy 70s TV shows or movies rather than making something new and interesting. It's all about the money flow, and who cares whether you're essentially ripping people off by telling them you've got something "new" that's an "improvement" only to absolute rookies and people who buy bikes to talk about or photograph but only occasionally ride.

You could do that, Vernon. But you won't.

Reply

Henry-Chinaski
0
Henry Chinaski  - April 20, 2015, 11:43 p.m.

I’m honored that you wasted that much bandwidth to tell me I was being smug. If my anonymous user name harshes you out, you’re welcome to shoot me a PM on the board next time you’re on the North Shore, and we can hash this out on a ride.

I thought Felton asked some pretty straightforward questions, and he did so face to face. Should he have pressed for more elaborate answers? You and the OP seem to want some quantifiable metrics that show the “advancements” to be worthwhile. Would this justify the marketing for you?

Reply

tanker-overflow
0
Tanker Overflow  - April 21, 2015, 6:42 a.m.

You're really good at deflection and triangulation. So I'm wasting bandwidth but you aren't and Vernon isn't. I see. Yes, you're great and I'm a piker.

I don't recall asking for quantifiable metrics, but definitely -- you should keep pressing me on things I haven't talked about, since that distractive straw-man gambit isn't wasting bandwidth.

Look at the big brain on you.

Reply

Faction
0
Derp  - April 21, 2015, 6:46 a.m.

Will you marry me?

Reply

Henry-Chinaski
0
Henry Chinaski  - April 21, 2015, 7:06 a.m.

My big brain wants to know what questions/answers would satiate your need for critical examination.

Reply

mikefunk
0
mikefunk  - April 22, 2015, 12:38 a.m.

Well, he is right here

Reply

vernon-felton
0
Vernon Felton  - April 23, 2015, 8:01 a.m.

Tanker Oveflow, the proof is in the friggin' video. Jesus, dude, be rational for a second. You don't like the answers they gave because, frankly, you are convinced that you are right and they are wrong.

First, are there stupid "innovations" that bring very little to the table? Absof@cking-lutely. I've spent 20 years cutting to the chase and being honest as a writer-this ain't my first rodeo, guy. And, no, that doesn't make me co- opted (which is something you've already claimed….interesting since I'm sure you don't actually know me…of course, using your real name and being personal accountable for your comments might be a step in the right direction for starters).

Watch the video: I've clearly asked both companies if they are just making this to sell new crap and I've asked why they (in this case, Trek) didn't just go with pre-existing (DH) standards to get that bigger wheel on the bike without resorting to Boost.

I gather you would have liked me to either smack someone when they give an answer that I may not like or to yell or to act, in other words, like someone ranting on an Internet forum. That is not, however, how a real, conversation works. For starters, to do so would be to assume that I am actually right on all counts and that they are inherently wrong. You don't operate in journalism-if you are actually doing the job correctly-under assumptions that you are infallible.

Have you, for instance, actually built this bike with 16-inch chain stays and a 157 axle and an 83-mm bb and pedaled the shit out of it for months? No. You haven't. Nor have I. Which is why I can't say that they are lying that such a machine is less ideal than what they've cooked up using Boost 148.

Internet forums, like this are a different realm entirely. Forums offer people an opportunity to call everyone else out as liars or sell outs without providing any proof. Frankly, that's both easy, inaccurate and just bullshit.

You can get all Troll on my arse and say that I didn't ask hard questions, but really, at this point you are ignoring the actual content of the video and are simply pissed that I did not scream at them that their answers were lies.

The Jerry Springer-style interview is entertainment, not journalism. While I'm not deluding myself to think that we are doing is Pulitzer Prize caliber journalism, I am still committed to the following: ask questions, listen, ask more questions, get the conversation on the table, and let people decide for themselves…as opposed to me ramming my message down their throats. The video is supposed to make you think. The follow-up article on bikemag.com is designed to do the same: to make you better informed about why something is happening and to give you the tools to have your own, informed opinion on the matter. That is journalism. What you would like is a form of vitriolic hackery that is increasingly popular today. It's also bullshit.

No one in the bike industry, to date, has made a video like this. No one has asked blunter questions of a manufacturer. Go ahead and show everyone the links for those videos if you can. I'm waiting. Show me. Show everyone else on this forum. Go ahead, here's your chance to shine. I'm waiting.

In fact, as every other media channel got wind of this thing coming down the road, they almost all opted to simply run a long form press release about it. We did something a lot harder. And, no, we didn't paid to do it. This comes out of Bike's pocket and edit budget because, frankly, we are not interested in just running press releases all damn day.

You are completely off base in your assessment of this video. I get that you are pissed that a new standard is coming down the pike. I can't stand new standards either, but that doesn't mean that every damn one of them is a sham. Did I tell you to go out and buy into this stuff? No. I very clearly said that you could say "Screw it." and just ignore this to your heart's content. That, if I wasn't somehow being clear enough for you, is not a ringing endorsement to buy Product A or Product B. Did I herald plus-size as the next big parade that you should rush out and join. Clearly, I didn't.

But you know, here's the bottom line: why don't you make your own damn video in which you publicly stand up from behind your chatroom handle, go to Trek and Rocky and, say, Specialized and simply dismiss everything they are doing here as a scam, ignore what people are saying to you and basically act like an arse who is more interested in getting their point across than actually fostering a conversation. Lord knows, it'd kill on the Internet forums.

Reply

toaster
0
Toaster  - April 23, 2015, 2:31 p.m.

The problem isn't that you didn't ask the correct first question - you did. The problem is you didn't ask the correct second question.

You asked if they're inventing things just to sell shit. They said no, their inventions have tangible benefits. This is pretty obviously true, and some basic armchair engineering shows that there is an advantage to these products.

But the second questions should have been: At what cost? Does the minor benefit that Boost brings to the table outweigh the massive downside that now there's yet another axle standard requiring new frames, new hubs, and which will inevitably lead to higher costs across the board along with lower resale values.

You finished the video by saying that it all comes down to me - I can buy whatever suits me best. But that's a bullshit cop-out. Of course I can buy what I want, but now every little ridiculous sub-genre is spread insanely thin, everything costs 30% more than it should because there's so many different standards, all of which require different molds and tooling, and there's even less support in the LBS for any given part of the bike since they can't be expected to stock 87 different types of axles just because Trek thinks they've come up with "something fun that they'd sell to their friends."

Reply

vernon-felton
0
Vernon Felton  - April 23, 2015, 5:15 p.m.

Toaster, that's a fair point. We tried to get at it with other questions, but you're right: the "At what cost?" question is a good one.

Reply

toaster
0
Toaster  - April 23, 2015, 5:26 p.m.

Yup, and I saw you raised it elsewhere. The problem is that a few companies in the industry know perfectly well that they can throw their weight around and everyone else will follow. And those larger players will benefit - they reap the profits as the marketplace jumps on the new "standard" while smaller players are hemorrhaging cash as they pointlessly re-tool. This dynamic isn't really anything new, but the frequency with which a couple companies are pushing for these shifts is starting to reach a fever pitch.

And as much as I gripe about this stuff, Kudos for not only confronting the issue, but wading into anonymous internet "discussions" about it.

Reply

mark-friis
0
Mark Friis  - April 25, 2015, 5:50 p.m.

I'm with Toaster here. I work with a lot of LBSs and the pressure they get form the big boys to sell this stuff is unreal. They think it's cool, therefore everyone else should.
What happens if you are the sucker that buys one of these "new" standards and it flops. We saw so many suspension types fail that the bikes become useless after a couple of years. I work at a co op where people fish through crates for a part for some (at the time) innovative fork. Now people are forking out thousands for something that might not even be around in a couple of years. But that LBS salesman has to move it, so he'll lie through his teeth to get rid of this dust collector.
The biggest causality will be the LBS. Plus now they have to train staff and mechanics on all this crap.

Reply

ride_whenever
0
ride_Whenever  - April 20, 2015, 3:36 a.m.

The stache looks so slow and such hard work through that last section. Also why no 26+ to put into 650b bikes?

Reply

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - April 20, 2015, 4:52 p.m.

Reply

mikefunk
0
mikefunk  - April 20, 2015, 12:25 a.m.

Great video! Last words are true key to this matter: "Ride bike you have till the wheels falls off". That what I am going to do. Wait 2 years until my bike hits 5 year span and then I consider something new. Till then I am very happy with my bike and I don't need anything else. So stop whining about new standards. It's a good thing. You don't have to buy new gear you just want to. Use what you have and change only when absolutely necessary. Better spend money on bike vacation somewhere rather than on new standard that will bring you 5% difference. My friend says: Buy memories not stuff. Travel more.
Peace.

Reply

litespeed74
0
litespeed74  - April 20, 2015, 6:44 a.m.

Well said. I've been mountain biking for 25 years now and just bought my 5th mountain bike. I usually wait a year or 2 before moving to what's 'new'. I was the last in my clan to get a FS bike, last to go 9 speed, last to go disk brakes, held out on 2×10 and just now decided to go 650b. I listen to what folks are saying and then go ride what I can to see what makes sense to me. I have been spending more money on bike vacations because you're right, memories are better than more bikes and gadgets. Ride what you like.

Reply

kareem-owheat
0
Kareem O'Wheat  - April 22, 2015, 4:39 p.m.

Wow, the dumbest thing I've read on the internet. Let that sink in for a bit. The dumbest thing I've ever read.

Reply

noel-quinn
0
Noel Quinn  - May 4, 2015, 4:33 p.m.

Way to put someone down- while passing your negativity onto them. Good work, Kareem. Let's get an award for Kareem, here

Reply

kareem-owheat
0
Kareem O'Wheat  - May 8, 2015, 5:41 a.m.

You don't have perspective. Let me help you. litespeed74 is well known for using the exact same phrase on others that they don't agree with. I was merely turning the tables on them.

Now, let's talk about your comment…

"Larry, if we cared enough about a hollow, lifeless piece of scum to hope you'd die, I'd say more."

"Clearly you have a head full of homosexual-related information, Bloomsj, no?"

"You are disgusting, Eleanor. They ban feeding the homeless and yet you claim that your local government and middle class support it. When you go to hell, we will all cheer, Eleanor, so hurry up bitch."

Reply

aubra-doss
0
Aubra Doss  - April 19, 2015, 11:59 p.m.

Sounds like a BS thing. Keep changing stuff and everyone gets upgrade-itis.

Reply

craw
0
Cr4w  - April 20, 2015, 9:56 a.m.

I think the bike companies are inadvertently inoculating us against upgradeitis.

Reply

0
mightyted  - April 20, 2015, 5:25 p.m.

Cr4w, I think you just nailed it. Well done…..

Reply

craw
0
Cr4w  - April 20, 2015, 5:39 p.m.

They've made it just about impossible to keep up. The end result is we just stop caring about all this so-called innovation and put off buying gear until we absolutely have to; and then only buying what makes sense as a short term solution, knowing it'll be obsolete before you can migrate it to your next bike.

Reply

0
mightyted  - April 20, 2015, 5:49 p.m.

on the other hand, obsolescence may slow as resale value holds.

Reply

mikefunk
0
mikefunk  - April 22, 2015, 1:03 a.m.

It's not going to happen. People will buy all new shit and companies knows it. Why we have pay to play games, unfinished games for 100 bucks, DLC's, new phones every month, new hub standards? People WILL BUY EVERYTHING! THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS VOTING WITH DOLLARS! Thi simply does not exist so please people stop repeating old non functional sayings.

Reply

craw
0
Cr4w  - April 22, 2015, 8:08 a.m.

Why would resale value hold? Any part I buy now I assume I'll be giving it away when I try to sell it again.

Reply

0
mightyted  - April 22, 2015, 8:19 a.m.

Yep good point.
What I meant was that possibly as more standards get introduced to the market, a major consumer trend may be harder to nail down. 29+ and 27+ seem more geared towards niche riding than trying to revolutionize the industry. So unless most riders want their 6″ AM bikes to have a fat bike feel, these wheel sizes will merely present themselves as options when perusing the buy and sell on pinkbike. Or maybe the whole thing will flop and go away
Bear in mind, I do believe that consumers decided that 650b was legit and provided a better fit and feel for many riders. Which is why the industry went that way.
Adjustable rear axle on the other hand could be interesting to watch in the future.

Reply

craw
0
Cr4w  - April 22, 2015, 8:29 a.m.

The bike industry has realized that the fat bike thing is for real in some places. Finally a way to sell bikes in Michigan and Minnesota in the winter! There are a lot of people riding bikes in the winter now, which is great. So maybe all these + wheel sizes are a way to figure out what works best for these folks. If you're a part of those communities you'll know what makes sense for you. Let the bike industry bear the weight and cost of figuring it out.

Reply

0
mightyted  - April 22, 2015, 8:36 a.m.

Agreed

Reply

john-canfield
0
John Canfield  - April 19, 2015, 11:59 p.m.

Vernon's video is as close as this biz gets to accountability.

Reply

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - April 20, 2015, 4:52 p.m.

sad, but true

Reply

tanker-overflow
0
Tanker Overflow  - April 20, 2015, 10:13 p.m.

You mean as close as Vernon is willing to get, which is a far different perspective from that of what you loosely call "this biz." Does "this biz" include NSMB forum participants? pinkbike forum participants? ridemonkey forum participants? local bike shop owners and employees? friends who gather to build trail and ride? formal riding clubs with dues-paying members?

Vernon Felton isn't god. He's just some guy who writes and gets paid for it. He holds no magical insights. It's far more likely that people who pay attention to the stuff Vernon's trying-at-25%-willingness-to-criticize have more insights on what's happening than Vernon does. His perspective is skewed by trying to make a buck by not offending the people who pay his salary. A man can't see what his wallet won't let him.

Pretty sad that Vernon is considered to be asking tough questions when he's just schmoozing with the folks that make his paid writing gig possible. You know. "The biz."

But let's just say that's the best we can do and the best we can get, right?

Reply

matt
0
Matt  - April 19, 2015, 11:22 p.m.

So in other words, engineers really enjoy making incremental changes and the industry doesn't give a shit how much it costs consumers to follow along. How nice.

Reply

Please log in to leave a comment.