Standardization?

Would it be good or bad for bikes in general? I'm not talking wheel size, but with things like headsets and bottom brackets. The rear axle width is annoying...but I guess it's a way of moving forward.

A bike manufacturer can come out with any random change and call it a "standard". It may be standard for their bikes...but not with others. With bikes...the word standard doesn't really hold much water. There is not one bike in the garage to where I can pull off all the parts and fit them to the next. It would probably make rim and tires easier to fit. Some tires are super easy to get on and some...I have to struggle to get on. Right now...I can't even break the bead on my Schwalbe's to take the tire off. I had to cut a Rocket Ron off my Specialized carbon rim. I just got some new wheels built up on my GF's 6F...those tires (Spesh) went on super easy. Carbon rim came from the same manufacturer.

From what I can see...it's anything but standard when it comes to bikes and the parts that go on them.

I would imagine this would make stocking parts in a bike shop much easier too.

 

It is called planned obsolescence....it is how we continue to buy new stuff.

 

As mentioned, someone comes out with something new and cool, its a standard. Like the new T-47 standard bottom bracket. So now problems solver can come out with another dozen adapters to adapt a BB86 to T-47. There are too many BB and headset "standards" and they do it too keep us constantly buy new parts.
How lucky are we to get taken for a ride to keep up with the Jones.

 

I try to stay close to my "standard" by riding a bike with a Shimano external bb. I make sure my forks are cut to the same steerer length and that they have the same crown race.
My hubs have to be sealed bearing with 9-15-20mm caps for the front and 10/12, 135-142mm caps for the rear.
When I find rims that work well with the tires I run, I build a couple of sets. Currently that means WTB rims with DT hubs that set up nicely with Maxxis tires.

That is the Rossage standard and your standard may or may not be up to standard, given that your standard may not be quite standard in the ever-changing standardization wars.

 

This!!! And same could be said for Stans Flow EX rims and Maxxis.

(But I too prefer the DT Swiss hubs)

 

I guess it's like cars. A standard engine/tanny/tire size will for in most cars.

Considering this, we are lucky can choose the brakes, wheels, frames, cranks, tires we like.

 

Yeah it's just too bad our bikes cost as much as a damn car...

 

Lol...anybody feel like we're getting trolled by the bike companies?

When I was looking for my a new frame last year...I looked for a frame that would fit the parts I have on hand. 142 wheels...threaded bottom bracket. I've got bikes with parts that are not interchangeable...which is pretty annoying. I want to try those new Boost wheels on my Banshee...but I can't. I want to swap cassettes...but can't because different hub bodies.

I'm looking to build a FS XC bike at the end of summer. Again I'll be looking for 142 and threaded BB. It'll be open mold out of China. At least they give you a choice of what rear end and BB you want.

 

My favorite standard example is UST. Some really good work went into that "standard" with Mavic, Huntchinson, and Michelin contributing. Then later with Maxis, Kenda, Conti aligning with Real UST tire offerings.

The "standard" provided the industry with criteria for tire design including bead shape, casing requirements, production tooling criteria (check a real UST tire for flash, vents, or parting lines in the bead face and you won't find any) and that no sealant would be required, and that the tire could be mounted by hand.

The standard was a great system and I am sad the industry split for what we used to call "ghetto tubless" style systems with tapes and sealants.

And then the "tubeless ready" tire offerings of the mid 2000's that ignored the "standard" as Stans was elevated to crown prince of tubelessnes.

Never "burped" a real UST tire on a UST 819 or 823

 

I had the first generation tubeless on my 02 NRS. At that time I wasn't convinced about tubeless and only rode them a few times. Never had a problem but was always worried about getting flats and having to put tubes in.

I would buy UST if I could find a rim I liked. I think Mavic is the only kne actually making UST rims, i could be wrong but let me know if someone else is doing so.

 

Giant PTRX 1. True UST. I have one on the front (from the Path takeoff wall). Giant sells them on their website and I assume dealers can get them.

I have never had an issue with mine. As soon as I either find the rear wheel or have the extra ducats to buy it from Giant, I'm getting it. No muss, no fuss.

I believe the standard is ETRTO. See www.etrto.org

 

That is a tough rim to find, i will keep looking and thanks for the info.

 

Real UST tires were heavy and the sidewalls were very, very stiff. By comparison, today's tubeless ready tires are supple and light, yet hold up very well. I imagine the variation is pretty severe though - thus a need for standardization. I have Maxxis Minions on Stans Flow EX and it's a perfect combo. No burping. Mount without a compressor. Light and supple.

 

I have a good example. UST.

This is true. And the arc30 Onza combo I am running works great and reliable also. A couple burps in 5 months. The side walls are very supple and strong that is a more modern characteristic I enjoy.same on maxxis and newer wtb's I have ridden, supple sidewalls that make more traction at low pressure. but I ride with guys that constantly have tire issues. And guys trailside always with tubless tire issue. And all sorts of mounting issues and rim tape issues .UST never had that. I never used to run sealant in my Michelin UST's and I literally got so used to never ever getting a flat I stopped carrying a tube and pump for a long time before I stopped riding in 2013

 

The problem with UST was that they couldn't get any non-french rim manufacturers to get on board, and the tire design was horrible.

But we can thank UST for the great tubeless tires that came out from the manufacturers that didn't want use the standard.

 

The last tire I mounted was a Minion SS and it beaded up and held air before I even had time to add sealant. Essentially, tubeless. Of course I added sealant for the flat protection and because I like the smell.

 

UST would have been doomed by hookless rims anyway... moot point.

The bike industry is actually shockingly good at maintaining standards. Even with the obsolescence and persistent new standards. For example, the automotive industry only utilizes standards when they are forced (OBD2 and CAN Bus). This is why you have a bazillion different bolt patterns for wheels, and etc etc.

I actually can't think of another industry that so consistently embraces standards from one company to the other better then the bike industry.

 

At the same time...bikes are not exactly rocket science. Bike are evolving to the point to where whatever changes there are...they are marginal...and it's these marginal changes the bike companies are marketing the hell out of. Most of these changes seem like they are made for the top 3% of riders that can fully make use of them. How much stiffer are Boost wheels really? I have yet to see any numbers released on how much stiffer they are compared to a 142 hub'd wheel. All I see are "feels stiffer to me".

We already have a 20mm front axle...but there is a new one coming out...and it's not compatible with the new forks without some kind of adapter. Is the new 20mm front axle that much better than the old one?

Bike manufacturers are making everything confusing. It sucks to be a cycling noob buying a new bike.

These are just ramblings from me...take them as you will.

 

The idea that this chart needs to exist drives me freaking nuts. 1, or 2 maybe 3 options should be all the frame designers could ever need.