What will we look back at and say 'now that was stupid'?

neil_sheehan2000

MBUK's recent features on the history of various aspects of mountain biking has been pretty interesting, not least for the bits where they discuss the really stupid ideas that have arisen throughout the history of the sport: the flex stem, disc wheels, etc.

This got me to thinking: what ideas are out there today that are going to look pretty stupid tomorrow? The only example I can realy think of would be hydraulic gears. But there must be more. Do people reckon that in 15 years we'll all be looking at old photos of DH and saying 'what the UCI thinking in enforcing baggy clothes!? Look at poor Steve Peat- he's wearing a tent!', or what?

Anonymous

we will look back and wonder what we were doing with no suspension on the back of our bikes.

Andy B

Really stupid wide bars, the sort loved by racerboi's

Torres

Andy_B wrote:

Really stupid wide bars, the sort loved by racerboi's

I get what you're saying, but they do have their uses.

I feel more in controll with wider bars on my NS than if they were thinner, they don't make the steering as twitchy when the ground points down. However, i wouldn't put them on my XC bike, purely because narrow flat bars (for me) feel better.

Northwind

27 speed, probably.

stevet1992

GT Zaskars
:twisted:

RealMan

inner tubes.

Old Pedaller

I'm afraid it goes well above the level of bits on bikes.

For about 100 years cyclists have been free to go just about anywhere and, more or less, do anything within minimal rules and, even when stretching the rules, most non-cyclists were not too bothered. Until recently.

The biggest regret "cycling" as a movement will have is going high profile on complaining about so much, including the behaviour of every other class of road user and demanding restrictions on them whilst, by and large, refusing to concede the effects of the poor roadcraft and behaviour of a great many people on bicycles. We've left ourselves without an argument on restrictions being the way to solve problems on the road.

The inevitable result will be increased regulation of bicycle use including, alas, barring cycle use on swathes of the road network.

The Northern Monkey

sheepsteeth wrote:

we will look back and wonder what we were doing with no suspension on the back of our bikes.

worm...can....open. hehehe.

Duffer

I think gearboxes are going to be the next big thing in cycling - the old systems of mechs and sprockets are on borrowed time. We'll be looking back in 15 or 20 years time and think how stupid the bikes look with all those cogs and cables.

Anonymous

Old Pedaller wrote:

I'm afraid it goes well above the level of bits on bikes.

For about 100 years cyclists have been free to go just about anywhere and, more or less, do anything within minimal rules and, even when stretching the rules, most non-cyclists were not too bothered. Until recently.

The biggest regret "cycling" as a movement will have is going high profile on complaining about so much, including the behaviour of every other class of road user and demanding restrictions on them whilst, by and large, refusing to concede the effects of the poor roadcraft and behaviour of a great many people on bicycles. We've left ourselves without an argument on restrictions being the way to solve problems on the road.

The inevitable result will be increased regulation of bicycle use including, alas, barring cycle use on swathes of the road network.

who cares about bikes on roads?

Surf-Matt

So sheepsteeth you dye in the wool uber hardcore MTBer - do you fly to your MTB rides? Do you shun any roads by carrying your bike along them? Or is where you live so HARDCORE that it has no roads?

Get real and don't be silly. We are all cyclists - some road ride, some don't.

Most stupid thing at the moment?

Hub gears, 45lb ++ DH bikes and wobbly rear suspension that doesn't work (some does work though).

I also think we'll look back at fit riders and wonder why they bothered. We'll all be chairlifted up every slope, guided down a gentle incline with no sharp edges, then greeted at the bottom with a cappulattecino. We'll also be banned from riding anywhere other than trail centres so we'll wonder why cyclists from now ever bothered with navigation devices.

stumpyjon

Sheep's has or had a road bike

Can't see bikes getting banned on roads, far too controversial. Banning horses might be a good start though, unpredicatable, dangerous poo machines, and a lot of the horses aren't much better.

I hope we will look back and wonder at how we coped when we were officially limited to bridleways etc. off road. I may be hoping for a long time.

Anonymous

Surf-Matt wrote:

So sheepsteeth you dye in the wool uber hardcore MTBer - do you fly to your MTB rides? Do you shun any roads by carrying your bike along them? Or is where you live so HARDCORE that it has no roads?

Get real and don't be silly. We are all cyclists - some road ride, some don't.

i wonder why you are so upset?

i ride a road bike on the odd occasion but the point made above is nowt to do with the subject at hand.

Andy B

Duffer wrote:

I think gearboxes are going to be the next big thing in cycling - the old systems of mechs and sprockets are on borrowed time. We'll be looking back in 15 or 20 years time and think how stupid the bikes look with all those cogs and cables.

most gearboxes use a mech & cassette, they also need cables to operate just as regular mechs do. OK so the system is internal, but it's a lot heavier and pretty ugly too.

gandhi

When mech gears are improved upon, people will look back at that silly single speed fad and wonder what the hell that was about. (Until then I'll stick with single speed.)

Surf-Matt

sheepsteeth wrote:

Surf-Matt wrote:

So sheepsteeth you dye in the wool uber hardcore MTBer - do you fly to your MTB rides? Do you shun any roads by carrying your bike along them? Or is where you live so HARDCORE that it has no roads?

Get real and don't be silly. We are all cyclists - some road ride, some don't.

i wonder why you are so upset?

i ride a road bike on the odd occasion but the point made above is nowt to do with the subject at hand.

Upset? Eh?! :?:

bails87

Surf-Matt wrote:

sheepsteeth wrote:

Surf-Matt wrote:

So sheepsteeth you dye in the wool uber hardcore MTBer - do you fly to your MTB rides? Do you shun any roads by carrying your bike along them? Or is where you live so HARDCORE that it has no roads?

Get real and don't be silly. We are all cyclists - some road ride, some don't.

i wonder why you are so upset?

i ride a road bike on the odd occasion but the point made above is nowt to do with the subject at hand.

Upset? Eh?! :?:

*Fetches popcorn*

stevet1992

*Restrains from prodding debate*

Kiblams

I definatly think that front derraileurs will be looked upon as very silly and primative, maybe even rear derraileurs as technology/manufacturing improves. Surely a few years from now; gearing will be internal and sealed?

I think we possibly have everything else sorted as far as MTBs go... :shock:

stevet1992

Im quite intrested in all the belt drive business ! Internal geared hub, Belt drive + hammerschmidt sounds like a nice idea ! Shame you have to have the frame opened to remove it

Kiblams

Yeah, once they sort out Hammerschmidt and improve internally geared hubs; belt drive will improve a bikes reliability rediculously

Andy B

Ah, but wouldn't improved reliability drive prices up as the parts would last longer so manufacturers would sell less so have to make more money on what they do sell?

stevet1992

Andy_B wrote:

Ah, but wouldn't improved reliability drive prices up as the parts would last longer so manufacturers would sell less so have to make more money on what they do sell?

But you still wouldnt have to replace them as much, Say if belt drives lasted twice as long as running a casette and chain to death .... I doubt manufacturers would charge twice as much so you would still spend the same amount or have a bit in your pocket !

joshtp

i think we will look back and wonder what everyone was doing bolting big heavy felxy and uneccassary suspension systems to the back of their bikes... i also think that people will laugh at long stems and short top tubes, and the triple ring crank will become a beginer/budget only option, with single rings, or doubles being the most common, i also think that cable actuated gears will be laughed at, with electric shifting being the thing.
another thing that will be viewed as obsolete is the hugely ridiculus idea of an exposed chain, and derailer system, that leaves a high tolerance, highly fragile (in real terms, even saint is fragile really, any man with a hammer could brake it) system of small part open to the elements, i think hub gears/gearoboxes/some brilliant now tecnology will be the big thing.

Andy B

How easy would a gearbox be to repair trail side if it did go wrong? not very.

Same goes for electronic shifting.

stevet1992

joshtp/mbukman wrote:

i also think that cable actuated gears will be laughed at, with electric shifting being the thing.

Couldnt disagree more ... Ill'd rather have a cable then electric, What would you do if the battery run out half way through a ride ? Or if you had a break in the electric cable ? Mud got into the connections ?

Great for roadies ... Not so for MTB

joshtp

ok, fair point, but think about this, all sorts of vehicles that go into far more extreme situations than a bike will ever, (imthinking mining mashines, ships, you get the idea....) manage to have perfectlky reliable electronics, all it would take is some tough rubber housing.... the di2 system has proved very reliable, and it hasnt been designed with that in mind, and the huge benefit of perfect gears every shift has got to be good.
as for battery, well remember that it would hardly be a very energy thirsty system, it would only take a tiny amount of energy, if you can have a small battery power a 900 lumen light for hours, then it could shift the od gear, and at both ends of the bike are two spiny things, some kind of dynamo would be an easy adition... and it wouldnt have to be a big drag one, it would only trickle charge....

Kiblams

Te best way to see what is likely (mechanically) on MTBs, we should look to what they have on modern cars and motorcycles. The only obsticle for most of the parts jumping onto bikes is the technology/manufacturing required to make them small/light enough.

Let's face it, if it's efficient, reliable and works well; you will find it on performance cars/motorcycles today.

Anonymous

im not sure whats so ridiculous about the front or rear mech to be honest.

i cant think of an alternative which could replace the current sytem. surely electronic and hydraulic systems are heavier, they are certainly more expensive and i would imagine always will be. the humble chain has never been replaced and is in use in even the swankiest and most expensive equipments.

as for gear boxes, from the little i have seen of them, dont they basicly contain 2 cassettes and a derailleur?

stevet1992

joshtp/mbukman wrote:

ok, fair point, but think about this, all sorts of vehicles that go into far more extreme situations than a bike will ever, (imthinking mining mashines, ships, you get the idea....) manage to have perfectlky reliable electronics, all it would take is some tough rubber housing.... the di2 system has proved very reliable, and it hasnt been designed with that in mind, and the huge benefit of perfect gears every shift has got to be good.
as for battery, well remember that it would hardly be a very energy thirsty system, it would only take a tiny amount of energy, if you can have a small battery power a 900 lumen light for hours, then it could shift the od gear, and at both ends of the bike are two spiny things, some kind of dynamo would be an easy adition... and it wouldnt have to be a big drag one, it would only trickle charge....

Yes but you dont see a ship bouncing down a routy trail and then hitting into a tree ! A bike is more likely to crash or topple over then a ship etc. Also i woiuld imagine that the electrics on mining machines, ships etc is beefed up and a fair bit heavier

Atleast with cables its cheap and you could easily carry a spare !