Posted by: thaaad
"This isn't very hard Papa."
I love it, give it a couple minutes kiddo lol. The amount of people who I've heard say something very similar rolling out of Old Buck parking lot only to be sweating and breathing hard 5 minutes later...
HAHAHA. Yeah, it was pretty priceless bringing it back up to her in the last big corner before Old Buck meets the Baden.
Threaded barrel nuts in post mount are like the best internal cable routing systems. They’re at best as good as good external routing at a significant higher cost to implement.
Preach! I still have IS on the rear of my FS (with spacing washers). PM on the HT, but at least it's part of the sliding dropout - cheaper than a new frame, but costlier than an adapter.
And the day I buy an internally routed frame is the day I buy a bag of stick on line guides. No time for that form over function nonsense.
Posted by: Blofeld
TT: which brake mount “standard” is the worst?
I think threaded barrel nuts solve the biggest issue with post mount brakes that was noted - I wonder why they’re not more common? Ideally, bike shops would measure and return borked frames and forks instead of selling them, but I appreciate the ingenuity described in this article to make things work.
I’ve gotta say that I was inappropriately happy when I got to bolt a 203 Avid IS adapter to my fork. It must have been in my parts bin since 2006.
Gimme big chunky IS mounts each end with the same spacing. Maybe even increase the size of the bolt if the stresses are deemed too high. I have IS on the rear of both the Murmur and Krampus. I just wish forks would go back to IS.
Posted by: fartymarty
Gimme big chunky IS mounts each end with the same spacing. Maybe even increase the size of the bolt if the stresses are deemed too high. I have IS on the rear of both the Murmur and Krampus. I just wish forks would go back to IS.
Sure, I’d take a through-hole-on-frame system if it was made as sensibly as you described. Radial orientation, identical front and rear, delete the forest of adapters, and allows for a simple go/no-go test that clips to the axle and tells you if the frame had wonky welds. A bigger bolt size seems like a good idea if just to hammer home that this is not one of the same old timey standards.
Posted by: silverbansheebike
I'm curious about the stripped threads in post mount forks requiring new lowers... i would've figured drilling it out and putting a helicoil in would do, but maybe thats too hack for a shop to do on a customers bike? Or too much effort for what its worth? Not enough surrounding material?
I have done this before - it’s not a repair I’d ever ask a bike shop employee to tackle. I know that the coil should be stronger than the original magnesium threads since it increases the diameter but it’s hard to feel good about the repair. Unless it failed in a straight, over-torquing (that is you hammed it yourself) you don’t really know if the post cracked when the bolt came out. Your upside is $400 for lowers and a bunch of magnesium shavings to burn, so use your discretion!
Posted by: Blofeld
Posted by: silverbansheebike
I'm curious about the stripped threads in post mount forks requiring new lowers... i would've figured drilling it out and putting a helicoil in would do, but maybe thats too hack for a shop to do on a customers bike? Or too much effort for what its worth? Not enough surrounding material?
I have done this before - it’s not a repair I’d ever ask a bike shop employee to tackle. I know that the coil should be stronger than the original magnesium threads since it increases the diameter but it’s hard to feel good about the repair. Unless it failed in a straight, over-torquing (that is you hammed it yourself) you don’t really know if the post cracked when the bolt came out. Your upside is $400 for lowers and a bunch of magnesium shavings to burn, so use your discretion!
I stripped one on a Manitou, back when Fox & RS were still using IS. The terrible sinking feeling in the guts, the rage and guilt...
Probably a formative experience in my evolution to retrogrouch.
Posted by: Blofeld
TT: which brake mount “standard” is the worst?
I think threaded barrel nuts solve the biggest issue with post mount brakes that was noted - I wonder why they’re not more common? Ideally, bike shops would measure and return borked frames and forks instead of selling them, but I appreciate the ingenuity described in this article to make things work.
I’ve gotta say that I was inappropriately happy when I got to bolt a 203 Avid IS adapter to my fork. It must have been in my parts bin since 2006.
Not saying am perfect. But both the Wideangle and Stylus forks are post mount. On the Stylus when I swapped hydraulic front brake for the Paul's caliper I actually threaded in the bolt by hand first on it's own and held the caliper to it to get a rough idea of how many spacers would need. Figured while it was kinda fiddly to do it was far better then trying to fit it multiple times and increase chances of wrecking an expensive fork. Worked well.
Post Mount, Trunnion shocks, pedal inserts on carbon cranks - these and many products are similar in that there are plenty of examples of folks who’ve never had an issue with them.
(Until they do)
But you if you look at enough examples it is certainly indisputable that IS Mount, standard eyelets, and aluminum cranks are better, more reliable, designs.
———
I was having this same conversation about the Fox Float X2 shock today. Aside from being a bad design in terms of what a comparative PIA a basic air can service is, the shocks are certainly not up to Fox’s standard for reliability and consistent performance. If you regularly ride sag wagons with other riders you cannot possibly know someone who has had multiple warranty services, never mind lacklustre performance.
That doesn’t mean there aren’t lots of folks who’ve had great reliability from their X2, or even folks who don’t have a solid performing X2 (although always take that with a grain of salt unless they’ve ridden other shocks on the same bike) but the only way to argue that there aren’t superior choices for the same money is to go full ostrich.
Posted by: velocipedestrian
I stripped one on a Manitou, back when Fox & RS were still using IS. The terrible sinking feeling in the guts, the rage and guilt...
Probably a formative experience in my evolution to retrogrouch.
Hahaha, when standard changes just make things worse! I was looking at some 2005 DH bikes the other day - seemed to me like they had things pretty dialed. 150x12 hubs, IS tabs, 73mm threaded BBs, conventional shock eyelets, 1x9 shifting, 2.7” tire clearance…
Then came carbon frames, 650b, boost, pressfit BBs, post mounted brakes and things started to get ugly. I’m putting a rigid fork on and going for a ride.
Posted by: Blofeld
Posted by: velocipedestrian
I stripped one on a Manitou, back when Fox & RS were still using IS. The terrible sinking feeling in the guts, the rage and guilt...
Probably a formative experience in my evolution to retrogrouch.
Hahaha, when standard changes just make things worse! I was looking at some 2005 DH bikes the other day - seemed to me like they had things pretty dialed. 150x12 hubs, IS tabs, 73mm threaded BBs, conventional shock eyelets, 1x9 shifting, 2.7” tire clearance…
Then came carbon frames, 650b, boost, pressfit BBs, post mounted brakes and things started to get ugly. I’m putting a rigid fork on and going for a ride.
Those 2005 standards sound great. Shame the geometry wants to send the rider OTB at the first available moment.
Posted by: velocipedestrian
Posted by: Blofeld
Hahaha, when standard changes just make things worse! I was looking at some 2005 DH bikes the other day - seemed to me like they had things pretty dialed. 150x12 hubs, IS tabs, 73mm threaded BBs, conventional shock eyelets, 1x9 shifting, 2.7” tire clearance…
Those 2005 standards sound great. Shame the geometry wants to send the rider OTB at the first available moment.
OTB potential adds character, right?!
It’s interesting that the 2005 Nomad and 2005 V10 had the same head angle, and the 2022 versions have also converged. It took the DH bike 5 years to stabilize while the enduro bike took 17. I’m hoping to see a 64 degree Blur by 2030…for the sake of the clavicles.
Meats (that's what the people here are called, right?!?), I wish to purchase a new rear hub. DT Swiss this time.
"New" 350 vs. New 240
Does anybody have any wisdom to share? I am thinking 240 to get the newest latest and greatest version of Ratchet but maybe that's flawed thinking with the early release issues. Seems good now though? Stick with the tried and true and slightly less expensive 350? Would prefer max reliability over an improvement in engagement.
Posted by: AndrewMajor
Post Mount, Trunnion shocks, pedal inserts on carbon cranks - these and many products are similar in that there are plenty of examples of folks who’ve never had an issue with them.
(Until they do)
But you if you look at enough examples it is certainly indisputable that IS Mount, standard eyelets, and aluminum cranks are better, more reliable, designs.
———
I was having this same conversation about the Fox Float X2 shock today. Aside from being a bad design in terms of what a comparative PIA a basic air can service is, the shocks are certainly not up to Fox’s standard for reliability and consistent performance. If you regularly ride sag wagons with other riders you cannot possibly know someone who has had multiple warranty services, never mind lacklustre performance.
That doesn’t mean there aren’t lots of folks who’ve had great reliability from their X2, or even folks who don’t have a solid performing X2 (although always take that with a grain of salt unless they’ve ridden other shocks on the same bike) but the only way to argue that there aren’t superior choices for the same money is to go full ostrich.
Although I agree with you on most of these suboptimal new products/standards as such, it's difficult to place the above in the right perspective without any numbers. When you say "if you look at enough examples it is certainly indisputable that [...] are better, more reliable, designs", I wonder how much worse they are in practice vs. their better, older alternatives in terms of actual bikes sold that end up having an issue. Even if you, who works on bikes and suspension professionally, would see, say, a 100% increase in rear shock issues because of trunnion mount, if previously only 1% of bikes ended up having a rear shock issue, that number is now 2% so still a very small chance that it will happen to me. Whereas if that number was first 25% and now 50%, that's a whole different story.
My suspicion is reality is probably closer to my first example because overall my impression is that quality of mountain bikes has increased over the years.
I used to get super annoyed about things like standards changing for no good reason but I mostly lost interest because in practice, once I reluctantly accepted them on a new bike, they never really gave me any issues in the end. Maybe I've simply been lucky? Maybe I just jinxed it? I ride a bike with trunnion mounted X2 shock so it surely is a disaster waiting to happen! ;-)
Local Politics - Keep it coming. I'm always up for a political discussion.
Posted by: [email protected]
Although I agree with you on most of these suboptimal new products/standards as such, it's difficult to place the above in the right perspective without any numbers. When you say "if you look at enough examples it is certainly indisputable that [...] are better, more reliable, designs", I wonder how much worse they are in practice vs. their better, older alternatives in terms of actual bikes sold that end up having an issue. Even if you, who works on bikes and suspension professionally, would see, say, a 100% increase in rear shock issues because of trunnion mount, if previously only 1% of bikes ended up having a rear shock issue, that number is now 2% so still a very small chance that it will happen to me. Whereas if that number was first 25% and now 50%, that's a whole different story.
My suspicion is reality is probably closer to my first example because overall my impression is that quality of mountain bikes has increased over the years.
I would love to see some failure rate statistics on mountain bike products! I suspect they would expose some preconceptions on cheap vs premium products as well as on mean time to failure as you mention above. Hard to say if there’d be enough lead time to protect buyers at the bike shop, but it would certainly improve used bike buying confidence.
The other statistic I’d like to see is on warranty claim acceptance/rejection. For instance, maybe a post mount makes more sense than IS for the manufacturer. Stripped threads are a pretty clear case of improper installation which wouldn’t be covered. An install snafu on an IS brake mount could look a lot like a casting or carbon layup error which would be a bingo for Mr. Hamfist.
Forum jump:
