In engineering terms, a standard refers to something that a bunch of smart people have agree is a good solution. The bike industry seems short on that, John says. Patrick talks about his recent experience at a National Interscholastic Cycling Association skills clinic for coaches.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 46:01 — 63.2MB)
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS
Show links:
CushCore TRAIL Set – Cushcore
Sportful Supergiara Jacket
I’ve been a NICA coach for 5 years. Finally made it to Level 3 coach. Every year I feel like I am learning as much from the kids as I want to be teaching them. But the main thing, I always try to remember, is to facilitate kids having fun riding bikes in the woods.
A rebuttal of sorts. I think the desire for industry standards amongst bicycle manufacturers is no less hopeless than pining for the opportunity to stick a Ford part on your Honda. Maybe one hundred plus years ago this may have been more conceivable. Technically Honda did not exist then, but you get my point. As any industry expands everyone wants their own better mousetrap and whether/how it benefits the end user is not always clear.
Specifically I would be willing to wager that if either of you did blind testing of mountain bikes (more my thing as my dalliances with road bikes have been few) with 135, 142, 158 and SB 157 rear axle spacing you would not notice any difference in performance. At the moment those first two sizes are basically dead; most companies settled on 148, but a handful swear we really should be on SB 157. I had a bike with SB 157 and its predecessor with 148 and found zero performance differences. However what I did notice was that the SB 157 was more of a PITA as it required different chain line acrobatics, a new rear wheel and other nonsense to make it go. Oh and it’s not compatible in any way with anything else. Yay.
Now let’s “pivot” (SB 157 and press fit bb advocates, meh.) to the drivetrain arms race of the last 15 years. It doesn’t bother me and there have been some terrific innovations from it. I know you are blue company fans, but the red company simply came up with a better mousetrap and it’s taken their competitors years to catch up if they even have. I was single chainring guy (MRP Chainguides FTW!) before 1X dropped and while at the time I was still running 10 speed, it was clear to me that front derailleurs were not long for this world. My favorite thing that occurred at the onset of the one X world order was small companies popping up to hack into that system. Wolf Tooth and OneUp lead that charge and have continued to make awesome stuff. Hacks of Transmission are already occurring so hooray for the little guys! Love ya’ll but sorry guys; in Stevil voice: “I’m a SRAM guy.”
Lastly, I have to take exception to Robot’s CC review. I believe a huge factor for him having a positive experience was NOT having to install or remove them himself. I ran it six years ago and found it’s damping benefits negligible, but hooooo weee I am pretty sure I made up new explectives during the installation efforts. At my size (Clydesdale) the damping effect was barely noticeable. However it was crystal clear what a colossal PITA it was to install and then even worse remove them trailside when I did get a flat and needed to install a tube. Additionally the extra rolling weight sucks. I have hard time believing this would not be an issue for you John. I stick with Huck Norris. Simple, light weight, inexpensive, almost no flats and solid rim protection without the mishigas that plagues Cushcore.
Phew! Everyone smile and wave!