Mountain bike technology has progressed at a breakneck pace over the last ten years, and while that's led to entirely warrented frustration and confusion due to rapidly changing standards, that progression has also resulted in bikes that are better than ever. Dropper posts have become ubiquitous, front derailleurs have gone the way of the Dodo, and open dropouts with quick release skewers are nowhere to be seen. But that doesn't mean there isn't any room for improvement, and while the next advancements to come down the line may not be as drastic as the introduction of suspension, or disc brakes, they'll still have an impact on how a bike performs out on the trail.
If it were up to me, there are a few changes would come sooner than later. But don't worry, I'm not proposing any new hub spacing standards or wheel sizes...
Dropper Posts That Drop at the Push of a ButtonRemember the days of trying to decide whether or not a steep descent was worth getting off your bike and lowering your seat for? Me too, and I don't miss them for a minute. Sure, it's possible to get down some pretty nasty stuff with your seat post raised sky high, but it's not nearly as fun (or safe), which is why dropper posts have become so popular.
But what if it was possible to drop your seat down at the push of a button, rather than needing to lower it with your body weight? Think about it – you shouldn't be seated when you're descending, but that's exactly what's necessary to get that seat out of the way before dropping in.
I'm not the first to suggest this idea, and I'm sure I won't be the last, but I'd love to see it come to fruition. Imagine if there was a small toggle switch mounted next to your left grip – push it in one direction the seat rises up, push it the other way and it lowers. Of course, that's easier imagined than executed, but I'd love to see someone give it a try. Oh, and bonus points go to the magician who can figure out how to accomplish this without any electronics or batteries.
Better Flat Pedal ShoesI split my time between riding flats and clipping in, but I'll admit that I don't ride flat pedals quite as much these days. It's not that I think one style of pedal is superior to the other; it's just that there are so many nice clipless shoes out there, well constructed options with BOA dials, velcro or ratchet straps to fine tune the fit, while most flat pedal shoes still stick to the same model – they're basically slightly stiffer skate shoes with a sticky rubber sole.
Of course, flat pedal shoes need to have a more flexible sole than clipless shoes, but there's no reason why all of the other bells and whistles can't be carried over for all the flat pedal fans out there. Maybe the fact that Sam Hill took home the EWS champion on flat pedals will give a little more weight to what some would consider a trivial request.
Short Cage, Wide Range? I spent over a decade wrenching on bikes as a full-time mechanic, and an unhealthy number of hours were spent wrestling with temperamental front derailleurs that never seemed to work quite right. The arrival of wide-range 1x drivetrains has been a welcome one, except for one thing – long cage rear derailleurs are back again. It's a tradeoff that's necessary, at least with the current designs, in order to allow the derailleur to extend all the way up to those extra-easy gears, but I wish it didn't come at the cost of reduced ground clearance – that lower pulley wheel is just begging to get snagged on a branch or a rock. Luckily, most derailleurs can take a fair bit of punishment before bending or braking, but wouldn't it be nice if it was tucked even farther out of the line of fire?
I stumbled upon a photo of a bike I used to own the other day, one that I'd equipped with a single ring, 10-speed drivetrain and a short cage Shimano Zee derailleur. Of course, that setup didn't have nearly the range of SRAM's 10-50 tooth cassette, a range that I regularly take advantage of in order to ease the pain of ascending the steep climbs near my home, but still, I'd love to have a short cage derailleur and a wide range drivetrain. I know, that's easier said than done, but I feel like there has to be some garage tinkerer out there with a solution that doesn't involve bolting on a heavy gearbox.
More Slack, Short Travel Trail RippersThe enduro craze is still in full swing, and there's no shortage of long, low, and slack bikes on the market with 150 – 170mm of travel. But what if those same geometry principles were applied to shorter travel machines? Kona was on the right path with their Process 111 back in 2013 – that bike's still one of my all-time favorites – but there still aren't nearly enough options in that category for my liking.
I'm not into the whole 'more travel is always better' argument, and for all-around trail riding I tend to gravitate towards shorter travel rigs. I like the precision that's demanded by the reduced amount of travel, but I also don't like feeling like a bike's geometry is holding me back. Transition's new Smuggler with its 29" wheels, 120mm of rear travel, a 140mm fork, and a 66-degree head angle is on the right track, but I'd like to see even more companies follow suit. Trail bikes make sense for the vast majority of riders - not everyone is lucky enough to have terrain that warrants 160mm of travel, but with a few geometry tweaks the next generation of trail bikes can be more capable than ever, no matter if the trail is as steep as Champery or as flat as Kansas.
What would be on your wishlist? 20mm thru-axles? The return of 26" wheels? More inverted forks? Hoverbikes? Gaze into that crystal ball and then lay out your ideas for the future below.
Although i would really like to see a standard design of direct mount chainring interface! What is there, RF cinch, Hope, Sram, E Thirteen, FSA, Cannondale etc etc Literally no need for them to be different!
"Just got a new frame! Only had to get new wheels, dropper post, seat clamp, headset, bottom bracket, and cranks, but goddammit my $35 chainring fit those new cranks!"
If truly standardized dimensions are to happen, make them the ones that allow swapping components between frames.
when you go buy a Santa Cruz V10 and you spend $8000 getting the top of the line build, that's the same thing Minnar is riding. when you go and buy that Kawisaki 450 off the showroom floor for $8000, do you think its the same thing that Eli Tomac runs? Hell no!!! double or triple that price and you'll then start to get into the ballpark of Tomacs ride. Dirtbikes run a ton of old technology.
We have many standards left to celebrate!
22.2 handlebar control diameter,
9/16"x20 pedal threads, (except for ashtabula cranks, which nobody here cares about)
left-hand threads on the left pedals,
44mm saddle rail spacing (with a couple of oddball exceptions that almost nobody cares about,)
2.2x56 spoke and nipple threads
28.6 steerer tubes are pretty well settled out now (nice try OD2)
4mm shifter housing diameter,
10mm x 1mm thread for derailleur hangers.
1/2" chain pitch!
8 x .75 chainring bolt threads...
Sure, they don't all make sense and there are wacky exceptions to most of these as well but they're fairly solid
Who can expand on this list of positivity?
you compared the price of last years stock dirtbike to a "modern day" mountain bike. you can't just look at parts counts. the fact is, an MTB has a much more advanced suspension design.that costs more money the putting together a single pivot MX rear end.
Cost of shipping is nothing. go price out a container shipped form Asia. it is a MINIMAL cost.
"I can go to my Honda shop and pick up last year's 450 less than price of a modern-day mountain bike."
you show me where i can pick up last years 450 MX for $4000 and i'll go buy one. you can get a non-race spec downhill bike for $4000 brand new.
Same boat.. love my 111.
LBS says there is a replacement in the works, possibly under the Satori name rather than Process.
27.5, 140/130 travel, 66.5 degree HA. To put it in perspective, it has 10mm longer reach, 5mm more BB drop, 11mm longer chainstays, and a half degree slacker HA than a Santa Cruz 5010.
We're all trained to ride within our tires capability. Good moto riders get on MTB and tear the tires off. Most of the time mtbers are riding with the thought of how do I keep the tires on and air in them. The thought is always there whether you realize it or not. Tires and/or rims are the biggest restraint
Also I was not advocating heavy tires or rims but rather advAncements in design/tech. Maybe beadlock with tires with integrated inserts and a rim sidewall protector inserted before the beadlock is cinched combined with new materials for tires. Tire materials are antiquated. 400g carbon rim with beadlock and wide sidewall edge with a wild rockr2 that has the casing strength and stiffness of a intense tire wc at the 1050g weight as a one piece cushcore and a dual density rim washer sidewall strip that snaps on
No. Compromising would imply that I had a desirable tire set up previous to running my tubes at 30ish psi but had to give it up in order to keep things where they belong, which I didn't. Unless by compromising you mean that I've given up getting pinch flats and thorn flats by running modern tires and keeping a decent psi in my tubes.
I get the idea of more traction by less psi and running tubeless, etc, but for my riding, the traction is sufficient and I let the suspension of the bike handle keeping the tires on the trail. When I get my new whip next year, it will be tubeless ready, but TBH, I'm not sure I want the hassle. All I ever hear about tubeless setups is how problematic they can be. And you still have to carry a spare tube, 'just in case'. Might as well just run a tube, take a little more weight and ride more...
I'm also in poor shape, so I find riding at 20-25psi too much work fighting friction anyway.
Tires have changed immensely in casing design, materials, bead design, tread design and rubber compound even in the last 10 years.
The LUST tires were heavy and wooden feeling compared to the Maxxis TR tires. I tested them back to back for Maxxis.
Also lust was 1/4 lb less than dd(actually a touch more thAn 1/4) and 1/4 lb heavier than exo (slightly less) and I found it almost as supportive as a dd(especially after break in). I guess you could cAll a full dh casing more "wooden" but I'd feel more confident in a turn on those than any of them
Yes, there are tougher materials out there but they’re much more expensive and tires are too expensive already since they’re consumable items.
IRC had the PRF (pinch flat resistant) system back in the day. It had a foam layer above the bead to cushion from pinch flats. It worked ok but the casings weren’t very good. What’s old is new again so expect to see this again soon.
Sam Hill in his prime on modern suspension with 90's tire setup would smoke SH on same bike with 90's suspension and modern tires. Same if you compare new geo/bars with 90's tire set up and old geo/narrow bar w new treads. I won't compare brakes because SH probably just taps them. Take the average hacks like us and drop us down Val di sol and I'll take the 6 piston hopes with 220 rotors and 90's tires over a set of Hayes and new treads. A lot of racers still swear by ghetto tubeless. Pros win on a lot of different tires now. One tire or another hasn't made a career but they've effected more than a few negatively because of flats
I assure you that tyre like Agressor in Exo TR is an excellent tyre for a 120 bike in a hilly area. I personally use Minion DHF Exo on front on my hills on my 160 bike. I have Double down on the back. However i won't go anywhere near a bike park without full on DH tyres. I even did all day rides on DH tyres because I don't trust SG, DD, Grid and that stuff in proper mountains.
Weight and skill have a lot to do with it, because if you are a fat dude who just plows through sht, you will get plenty of punctures on exo and even 1,5ply style tyres. A skilled rider generates way more force on tyres in berms than a noob.
Nobody rides exo for enduro? Hahah, Yeah, well, I assure you that people do and those tyres stand for vast majority of tyres on Endur comps because people are too weak to pedal up heavier tyres.
So keep living in your bubble.
Are flats not a problem at EWS?
Have a nice day Champ
I wish there was a way to tell who's point has the most agreement. Hmmm, oh wait.....oh never mind. That bubble isn't pinch flatted as ez as exo
NW
If WAKI spent even half as much time riding as on the forums he would be qualifying for EWS or WC's. The amount of time and energy he spends on these posts is unreal!!!
Exo=slow rider special
Are you on amphetamines? Lot of typing aye..
Can some one invent such a size?
that's getting excessive even for the dentist
(I do enjoy living under that rock, indeed.)
Be nice to have some waterproof flats paired with some over-shoe/gaiters so you can ride for more than an hour in PNW winter without freezing your tootsies off.
Also I dunno about you guys but I could see lacing to the toe like approach/climbing shoes tend to have to better adjust zones of the shoe to a comfort spot being beneficial
of course 5.10s last less. they also are half the price of clip bit anyways
For the derailleurs, couldn't you use a sort cage mech, like super short and the same type of tensioning system used on gear box bikes like the zerode? The cages are long to take up the chain slack, nothing more than that. I know it's just a patch, but it's one we could do today.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy
Not sure about the nightmare. I ride a mountain unicycle (MUni) where short cranks are common (115mm to 150mm at most) but of course on a steep climb (these typically give you a 1:1 ratio unless you have a fancy Schlumpf geared hub) a bit more leverage would have been nice. But I feel the same could work for mountainbiking. I ride mostly standing but for climbing I stand taller (hence also have a bigger range for my legs to move) than when tucking and/or sprinting. Of course the downside is that on a tight flat corner short cranks mean that even when you have the inboard pedal high, it is still going to be lower than if you'd have had longer cranks.
Anyway, this was the out-of-the-box topic, right? You can't be critical in a brainstorm
Never said it was light, but it's not 32lbs. Agree that I'd lose another pound going to a carbon frame such as a following.
And more gearbox bikes/ standardized gearbox frame mounts.
Rode Giant for a while and seems like the big brands like to push the drivetrain and carbon frame while they skimp on the squishy/stoppy bits that really seem to make the biggest difference in my riding.
Or maybe Sam Hill taking home the hardware just proves that there's no real need for a bunch of bells and whistles on flat pedal shoes? Seems like reasonably supportive construction, comfort, and sticky soles go a long way. I'd love a bit more variety in flat pedal shoes - would be nice if the non-FiveTen crowd could ratchet up the stickiness, and if FiveTen could give people with wide feet a Freerider on a wider last (as it is, I'm stuck with the Impact XVI as the lightest option for trail riding, as that's got a slightly wider toe box). But all that other stuff you need in a clipless shoe seems unnecessary on flats.
love the guy, hate some of the crowd, they look like they have nothing to hold on to.
Agree there is no need for bells and whistles, but I would appreciate a locking system for the laces though, much like some walking boots or snowboarding boots.
Flat Pedal Shoes: If only Five Ten could get the rubber to stay on the shoe..........
On my 27.5 enduro bike i run a 28 tooth direct mount oval ring with an 11-36 rear and a zee “wide range” derailleur. As a SOLID expert/cat 1 racer it’s enough for the brutal climbs i ride and top end for jumping at big bear etc... NEVER left me wanting more
-everything is smaller so its lighter
-TONS of clearance (and stronger)
-oval ring efficiency simulates a 42T feel
-CHEAP
I do ride at Kingdom Trails in VT a couple of times a year and I find it's fine for that too.
As for tech I want a system that calculates my speed and angle an adjusts the suss tune an dropper according to gear selection
I want a DW Link 29r trail bike with a carbon front triangle and an Alloy BSA 73 Bottom Bracket, 140mm travel.
A welded Alloy swingarm, no horst links.
A 160mm (DP130mm) Fork with a 6" dropper.
An affordable 1x drivetrain; 32T up front and,
ie: Shimano 10-46 (but Not w a 37 ((41)) 2nd cog)
So come on industry, build me my bike already!
Good flat pedals, on the market now, are about as much as one could ask for. Honestly, old school Shimano DX pretty had it nailed. It's been re-invention for the most part, or copying, ever since.
Most droppers out there work well enough. How about make them RELIABLE? Yes, some are, but it's not consistent yet.
Even rear mechs are pretty much nailed down. Tires, not too bad - consistent width would be cool.
What I'm getting at is technology is not where energy needs to be spent. Rather, put that energy/focus in to actual standards that mean something. Then maybe prices could come down again. $800 for a wheelset? you have got to be kidding.
Also, drop the marketing BS. Prime example was/is Giant's chart a couple years about wheel size, then only to rescind all their "research" and contradict it years later. Wtf was that all about? All the money put in to marketing could be nixed and passed on to savings for the end-users...
But, I will say, we are luck y to live in such interesting times, we do indeed have quite a lot to appreciate, and I do, indeed.
+1 on on more low slack short travel machines. Built up a 150mm frame with a shorter shock and some angled head cups. Besides a wonky seat tube angle that cant be used for any serious time in the saddle it became by far the most fun bike I've ever ridden.
Back in 2012 I had a DH bike with a 150mm rear hub. I am sure there are many still around...
on the logic that 148 is better than 135 because wider is better, surely 150 is better still. It just seemed forgotten