Opinion: Five Things The Bike Industry Could Do Better

There's no doubt that bikes are better than ever. Technology has advanced to a point where most modern bikes ride really well if set up correctly. But from a rider's perspective, there seem to be a few glaring areas where most companies could be doing much better. So while some seem hell-bent on adding ever more advanced materials and electronics to our bikes in the hope of making us ride 0.1% faster, I'd humbly suggest there are lower-hanging fruits if product managers genuinely want to improve the user experience.

---

Better suspension set up guides

Suspension setup is seen by many as a dark art. It's usually overlooked and often skewed by outdated ideas or downright myths. Even measuring sag (step one for any suspension tuning) is more complex than it sounds, and if you go to any trailhead you'll see plenty of riders with visibly-too-soft suspension. Now that many high-end bikes come with three or four different damping adjusters on both the fork and shock, plus volume spacers and air pressures to consider, it's easy to get lost and forget the basics. It's a shame because the best suspension is worthless without the right setup.

A suspension setup guide should be specific to the bike model and take into account rider weight, height, and riding style. It should make recommendations for fork and shock pressures (not sag), as well as volume spacers, damping settings, and even related non-suspension settings like bar height and tire pressure (get these wrong and the right suspension settings will feel horrible).

Norco's setup guide is by far the best here, although when I last used it the settings were a little off, so even it could use some tweaks and refinement.

But even a rough starting point is much better than nothing. And with most brands, you're on your own. If you have a non-RockShox shock, you usually have to look up the shock stroke before you can even begin working out what sag to aim for. That's needlessly unhelpful in my view.

---

More stem spacers

Usually, the most expensive component on a bike is the fork, and once you cut the steerer tube down you can't make it longer again. That's why it's so frustrating when bike brands insist on cutting your $1,000+ fork's steerer as short as humanly possible. More than one product manager has admitted to me that the main reason for this is aesthetics.

I've argued before that bar height is just as important as saddle height, and no self-respecting cyclist would put up with her saddle a few centimeters too low. But while saddle height is adjustable via the seat clamp over at least a 100 mm range, most bikes come with about 20 mm of stem spacers to play with. Sometimes less.

Yes, you can swap the handlebar rise, but this usually only gives you another +/-20 mm or so and isn't as easy or cheap as swapping a stem spacer. If nothing else, it would be nice to have the option to try a higher bar height before deciding whether to buy another bar.

Yes, you might end up cutting the steerer tube down, but this is a ten-minute job with a ten-dollar pipe cutter.

---

More proportionate sizing

It makes sense that bigger riders are able to pick a bigger bike, and these days, even the tallest riders can find something long enough. But if you look into the details, the increase in sizing is not in proportion. Not even close.

For example, the YT Capra 29 is available in five sizes from Small to XXL. YT recommends the small to riders of around 160cm, and the XXL to riders of 197cm - that's a difference of 23% in rider height. Across that range, the reach grows by 19%, but the stack grows by just 4%. So although taller riders get a considerably longer reach, their cockpit is barely higher. Adding stem spacers would help, but see my last point. Riders on the other end of the spectrum likely have to put up with their bars too high.

YT is ahead of the curve (barely) in that the chainstay length (aka rear-center) grows from 438 mm for sizes S-L, to 443 mm for XL and XXL. But that's a difference of just 1.1%, while the front center grows by 12%. That means taller riders have a much more rearwards weight distribution than shorter riders.

The obvious solution to this last point would be to lengthen the chainstay on the larger sizes in proportion to the front center, but this only makes sense if the ratio of front- to rear-center lengths is correct on the smallest size, because you can't make the chainstay much shorter. The Forbidden Dreadnought is one bike with genuinely proportionate rear-center lengths, but when I tested the XL (which has a 480mm chainstay length at sag) I found as many downsides as upsides, so perhaps smaller riders are riding chainstay lengths that are too long?

---

Clear up unnecesary standards

It's hardly a hot take to say that ever-changing and proliferating standards are unpopular. But I actually think the bike industry is relatively good at making things cross-compatible - try swapping the wheels on your car with your neighbor's. And in many cases where a new standard has been introduced, there is at least some sort of reason. For example, Boost hubs made wheels stronger, and the switch to metric shocks added options for frame designers while (in theory) making the shocks more reliable.

But there is no need for 30.9 and 31.6 mm seat posts; straight-pull and J-bend spokes; 6-bolt and Centerlock brakes; XG, HG and Microspline freehubs, or 31.8 mm and 35 mm handlebars. Pick one, please.

---

Make frame bearing swaps easier

Most bicycle components are designed to be serviceable, and most maintenance tasks benefit from detailed online instructions and dedicated tools. But when it comes to replacing frame pivot bearings, you're on your own.

While some desert dwellers rarely need to replace these buggers, here in the UK I know people who do it more than once a year. And for a task that routine, it seems most frame designers haven't thought very hard about how the bearings are going to be replaced. They're sometimes recessed in hard-to-reach areas with curved surfaces, making it hard to use a proper bearing extractor tool. Swapping bearings can often require an unnerving combination of ingenuity and brutality to get the job done.

Many brands boast about having high-quality bearings, grease, and seals designed to improve bearing lifespan, but really this only delays the inevitable. Just like the oil in your car, sooner or later it'll be time for a change.

What I'd like to see are frames designed with bearing swaps in mind, with detailed instructions on the easiest and safest ways to do it, including the tools required, plus reasonably priced bearing kits, and/or a list of required bearing codes on the manufacturer's website.

---

What would you like to see bike manufacturers doing differently? Sound off in the comments. You never know - someone might actually take note.