On the whole technological innovations tend to make bikes better. No-one is ever going to argue that pneumatic tyres or derailleurs haven't improved riding a bike. But there are some things that we're less sure about. On the surface, the six road bike developments listed in this video should be improvements. Why then, do we find them so downright infuriating? Are we right or should we just get on our bikes and try and enjoy them? And what gets your goat about modern bikes?
Category
🥇
SportsTranscript
00:00Trying to prevent technological advancement in any industry is a bit like swimming against
00:04the tide of schooling salmon. In the case of a cycling industry, occasionally the UCI sticks
00:10its oar in, but good engineering always finds a way around. If we didn't allow technology to
00:15advance we'd probably all still be riding around on the bone shakers of the 1860s,
00:20and we'd probably still think that the rattling experience was as good as it was ever going to get.
00:24En route to refinement some technologies pose more headaches than others to
00:28mechanics, bike testers like myself and also consumers. So which current advancements in
00:35modern bike technology do we wish would hurry up and reach refinement or just get out of the industry
00:41altogether? Number one, proprietary seat posts. In the past bicycle manufacturers would furnish a frame
00:52with a 27.2 millimeter hole and then they'd seek a reliable component brand to finish the picture.
00:58That meant the consumer could swap the seat post easily at any time they wanted to.
01:03As technology has advanced, bike brands have sought better compliance, better aerodynamics,
01:08and reduced weight. And it's no secret that the seat post is a massive part of the compliance story.
01:14Also having CFD and wind tunnel testing in-house means that they can see quite how much difference
01:20smoothing out the lines between the seat post and the rest of the frame makes.
01:24The result? Proprietary seat posts. Rather than seek an external manufacturer to create their seat
01:29posts, they make them themselves or work with a manufacturer to make one that only works with that
01:34frame. So also when we look at proprietary seat post designs, some of them are excellent and work
01:40really well, but there are also some pretty high profile examples where brands clearly haven't got it
01:45right the first time. Now the consumer might get a compliance boost, they might get better aerodynamics,
01:51and they might get a better overall weight. However, they're also tied into using the seat post
01:57for the life of the bike. Not only that, but you are also reliant on the brand to continue making
02:01seat posts in that shape and size. You're a bit screwed if you've got a frame and no seat post to actually go
02:06into it. Now brands do have to continue making the seat post for a number of years after they've stopped
02:12producing the bike. When I asked Giant, they told me that they are still holding stock of a seat post
02:17for a frame that they haven't manufactured for about 10 years. However, people do sometimes hold
02:22onto bikes for a very long time, even for a lifetime, so it is something worth considering.
02:31Next up, internal cable routing. The definition of internal cable routing has changed quite dramatically
02:37in the last couple of years. It used to mean cables that ran into the down tube and top tube to reach
02:43their destination, but they were external at the handlebars. This keeps muck out of the cables and
02:49it does cut down on the maintenance when you compare it to fully external cable routing. However, it was
02:54still fairly easy to actually replace the cables when you needed to. Fully internal cable routing, as we
03:00mean in the year 2021, means that the cables are completely hidden from view. Brands have very many
03:06different methods of achieving this, but as a general rule, they'll run into the handlebars or
03:10underneath the handlebars, through the stem and headset, and then alongside the steerer en route to
03:15their destination. Routing cables in this way mimics the very worst of the London Underground network,
03:21and it can present some pretty substantial issues. Firstly, a headset change requires complete re-cabling.
03:28Speaking to local bike shops, they're saying that a job that used to take five minutes is now
03:32taking half a day. When you add in the cost of the hydraulic cables, you've got a pretty big
03:37maintenance bill on your hands. Secondly, these methods of internal cable routing involve new methods
03:43of engineering, and new methods of engineering sometimes go wrong. Case in point, the Specialized SL7.
03:50Specialized recalled that bike because the compression ring, which was acting as a guide for said internal
03:56cable routing, was potentially causing undue stress on the steerer. The US Product Safety Consumer Commission
04:03website says that there were only two instances, and there were no major injuries. However, a steerer
04:09failure is pretty significant if it does happen to you, and the brand was concerned enough to issue a stop
04:15ride notice when it issued the recall. Fork recalls aren't nothing new. Recalls in any industry are certainly
04:21nothing new. However, systems that allow for internal cable routing do seem to be cropping up as a factor
04:27fairly often alongside the search for ever lower weights and ever better aerodynamics.
04:37The next irritant of modern day bicycle design might separate opinion, but I'm presenting the video
04:43and this is my opinion. Next up is aero tubing on climbing and endurance bikes. Ride quality of a bicycle
04:50is impacted by very many factors. The components that you put on the bike, tires, wheels, seatposts,
04:57handlebars, play a vital role, as does the carbon layup, but also tube shapes. Round tubes, as a general
05:04rule, are responsive, quick to react, and generally more compliant. On the flip side, aerodynamic tubing is
05:11often quite boxy, and it's not quite so responsive and can become a bit too stiff. The prevailing voice in
05:17bicycle design says that aerodynamics is more important than weight in the speed equation,
05:22even if you're going at below 15 miles an hour or 25k an hour. Therefore, the direction of travel has
05:30been to improve aerodynamics, sometimes at the sacrifice of weight and sometimes at the sacrifice
05:35of ride quality in terms of tube profiles. If, however, you're more interested in how a bike feels,
05:41then the rise of more aerodynamic tubing on bikes that aren't really focused solely on speed might
05:47seem like a little bit of a shame. Sure, you can make the argument that people buying endurance bikes
05:52who sometimes just want that bit more comfort still want to go fast, but do they want to go fast more
05:58than they want to enjoy the ride? Well, it probably depends on their Strava settings. Not only that,
06:04a lightweight, fun, fast climbing bike can sometimes just make you feel faster because you're really
06:10enjoying the ride. I've certainly been out on both the Specialized Athos and Specialized Tarmac and
06:15I've compared my watts with my overall speed and frankly the difference wasn't huge. Therefore,
06:21if your number one goal is just to enjoy the ride, then round tubes often make a lot more sense.
06:27Next up, wheel and tyre incompatibilities. Direction of travel has certainly been towards tubeless in
06:39the last couple of years. We don't have a problem with tubeless tyres. Lower pressures,
06:43wider contact patches certainly improve cornering at no end and they also reduce fatigue. Now,
06:49some data suggests that actually narrower tyres are still faster on glass smooth roads, but if you can
06:55go out and find me a local route where over 50% of the terrain is glass smooth magical tarmac of dreams,
07:02then I've got a prize for you somewhere. Once compatibility issues are addressed and sealant is
07:08a little bit better at road type pressures, then we will be away with tubeless technology. But I kind
07:14of think there's still some work to do yet. Roadie technology has changed a lot in the last couple of
07:19years and the risk associated with getting it wrong ranges from giving your club mate a sealant
07:25facial on the next chain gang. To spending your entire evening coating a rim in fairy liquid and
07:30using 30 different tyre levers. And just to be clear, there's some artistic license there. Please
07:34don't do that. To finally finding yourself stuck in a ditch by the side of the road because you used
07:40a hookless rim and a non-hookless compatible tyre and pumped it to 200% of the maximum, which also you
07:48shouldn't do. And you shouldn't have a problem as long as you do stick to the guidelines. But there's
07:52always potential for people not to read the small print and that's where the concerns lie. The point
07:58here is that we're not against tubeless technology and we're not against hookless technology. What we are
08:03in favour of is better standardisation and both wheel and tyre brands sitting down and having just better
08:09communication. Next up, and I think this is going to be quite a popular one because we get a lot of comments
08:18about this, is price. It's fair to say that the price of top-end bikes has definitely risen in excess of
08:25inflation in the last couple of years. If you want Dura-Ace, 50mm carbon rims, a power meter and a top-end
08:32frame, you're going to be looking at shelling out £10,000 or £11,000, which is a pretty massive outlay.
08:39The cost of production for the brand is without shadow of a doubt less than the addition to the RRP
08:45at the top-end of the scale. Now I do completely disagree with the you can buy a motorbike for that
08:51argument and the reason for that is quite simple. These £10,000 and £11,000 bicycles are UCI Pro
08:57level bikes. They are the same bikes that the UCI Pros are riding. So yeah, you could buy a Honda CBR
09:04650R for just over £7,000 and you still have change left over for leathers and a decent helmet compared to
09:11if you'd gone out and bought that £11,000 bicycle. However, if you wanted to ride the same motorbike as
09:16your MotoGP idols, well then you'd be looking at shelling out the £1 to £2.5 million. So an £11,000
09:25bicycle that's ridden by the UCI Pros on the World Tour stage at £11,000 is absolutely not the same
09:31thing as a Honda CBR at £7,000. So let's just put that argument to bed. And finally, no one is forcing
09:39people to ride those bikes. However, it is completely understandable that people are annoyed
09:44about this price hike because it is substantial and it also affects the rest of the line. One of
09:49the reasons given for this increase in price is that very many brands produce their frames in Asia and
09:55they moved over to Asia many years ago because at the time production there was cheaper. The thing is,
10:01Asia's actually got really good at producing frames now and they're now charging a premium for that
10:05expertise which kind of feels fair enough. Secondly, very few brands actually produce their own carbon.
10:12Giant is a really good example of a brand that does produce its own carbon and you will notice that
10:17their prices are a bit cheaper than everyone else's. Many brands use the manufacturer Torre and Torre has
10:23recently introduced M40x carbon. M40x carbon is significantly stiffer which means the brands need
10:30to use less carbon in order to produce an equally stiff frame and that means that the frame is lower
10:36in weight. Of course M40x also costs more. So there you have rising labour costs as well as rising material
10:44costs. Then factor in shipping costs which have ridden following Covid and in the UK following Brexit and you
10:51do have a perfect storm which will create higher RRPs. However, I think it's fair to say that those higher
10:57RRPs also include a pretty substantial profit. And where does that come from? Well the fact is that
11:03some people are happy to shell out five figures for a bicycle and as long as people keep buying them
11:08then the prices will stay the same. Finally, bottom bracket styles. Who would have thought that the
11:19component that houses the cranks and facilitates the movement of those cranks thus allowing for the
11:24forward propulsion of a bicycle would require so many different styles? And why is it that there are
11:30so many different bottom bracket styles? Well the bottom bracket shell is an area that is very very
11:35important in the stiffness equation and over the years brands have sought stiffer platforms for power
11:41transfer. And of course, as is always the case in the bicycle industry, they've also sought lighter
11:46overall solutions. Finally, in more recent years after the press fit craze, they've also looked for solutions
11:52that eliminate creaks because that's a pretty common complaint. At our last count there were 21 different
11:59styles of bottom bracket and we probably missed one. BB wrong maybe? T47 seems to be a very popular choice
12:06at the moment. Trek has included it on very many of its road frames and it told us quite recently that
12:12it's going to include it on all of its road frames going forward. It's compatible with a great many different
12:17crank diameters. It also shares the same dimensions as a PF30 but it uses a threaded interface which in
12:24theory cuts down on creaks and also makes home maintenance a lot easier. However, the fact that
12:30T47 is a really great solution doesn't really help for you if you've got a Cervelo wearing a BB Wright
12:36or a Cannondale with a BB30. Perhaps what's needed is some overall governing body that could enforce
12:42convergence on one specific standard but they probably end up just swimming against the salmon
12:48and may get hit in the face with a wet fish. And finally, disc bra- no, disc brakes are really good.
13:00I'll give you cable actuator disc brakes, they're really not ideal and not much faster than rim brakes,
13:06but hydraulic disc brakes, I would not go back to the era of the rim brake.
13:10So, I hope that you enjoyed this video. I'm sure there's going to be lots of opinions,
13:15please do air them in the comments. Hit like if you enjoyed this video and do subscribe if you want
13:20to see more. But at this point, at our last count, there were 21 different styles of bottom bracket.
13:28Really? Yeah. F***ing hell. Yeah.