Too Many Standards

[Ozrider]

A nice article on the proliferation of new "standards"
It must be a nightmare for bike shops to keep stock items, as there are just so many non standard BBs, headsets, axle widths, etc that it boggles the mind.
It is really time that manufacturers sit down and set some industry standards and stop trying to outdo each other with innovations that offer little or no real benefit.
What are your thoughts and experiences?
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/arti ... fit-43896/

[eric]

https://xkcd.com/927/

[Calnago]

My thoughts echo those in the article. I'll further add that none of the newer BB "standards" work as well or with as little maintenance as good old BSA threaded. I get that with new carbon layup technologies wider BB's provide some more real estate to make things wider and wider. I used to tell people who asked me to fix their creaky Pressfit BB's to take it back to where they got it. They would. And they would get, usually, just some added grease which doesn't fix the problem, just masks it for a short while. If there is a consistency in the whole thing, it's that it's a crap shoot if a bike has a good install and no creaking or a poor install and constant problems. Now I'll sort of pick and choose which bikes I feel I want to fix or not. But that shouldn't be a decision I or anyone else needs to make. They should work from the outset and if they don't I blame the manufacturers for producing frames with poor tolerances etc. Anyway, I'd say don't get me started but it's too late [emoji12].
I'll stop there.

[Valbrona]

The major brands exploit the bike buying public. Consumers really need to organize into a group for their voice to be heard.

[spookyload]

The way shops manage to keep up is not stock all of the "standards". They stock lower end Shimano stuff. If you need anything, they order it. Unfortunately I can order it in just as fast as they can provide it. Thus the downward spiral of the LBS.

[grover]

I'll play devils advocate as food for thought.

The best compromise between comfort, stiffness, weight, aerodynamics for the intended purpose is acheived through total system engineering. Being restrained to a bottom bracket standard for example may bring tradeoffs in other areas. You may end up with a heavier frame or a less stiff frame than the engineers could otherwise achieve by creating their own method for the frame/crank interface.

Should we look the other direction. There used to be car mechanics, now there's a BMW mechanic or a Mercedes mechanic as skills, tools and design are so specific to each brand. A BMW mechanic could service a Mercedes, but not as well as a Mercedes mechanic.

Maybe bike shops need to start becoming more specialist to a brand rather than trying to do everything to a mediocre standard. A Trek dealer has tools, knowledge and parts to work on BB90. A Specialized dealer has tools, knowledge and parts to work on OSBB.

This is how technology progresses and bikes get better. It also means that often the stock build is highly optimisted, other parts aren't always cross compatible and there's less fun in tinkering and customisation.

[Rick]

We want a "standard".
But there is really very little incentive for the bike industry to standardize. Every time they come up with a new "standard", they market it and sell it as "better", and people buy it.

Tool manufacturers and aftermarket suppliers also get new product sales by catering to the new standard, or in making adapters for it.
It isn't really a "nightmare" for shops because they have more clueless customers coming in for help.

[tekhna]

Couldn't agree more. You know the bike industry has gone off the deep end when weight weenies is the voice of reason in the wilderness.

How many true innovations have there been in the bike industry since 2000?
Widespread adoption of threadless headsets, improved carbon layup techniques, aero wheels and frames (arguably), wider wheels. Electronic shifting, maybe.

Everything else is marketing garbage or incremental improvements. Integrated seat posts, bottom bracket changes, disc brakes, all marketing junk. Shifting in some areas has gotten better but incremental improvements, not wholesale change.

[russianbear]

I specifically bough a lower end Ridley Noah frameset because it didn't have an integrated seatpost or pressfit bottom bracket. Both of those "innovations" can suck it.

[raisinberry777]

I specifically bough a lower end Ridley Noah frameset because it didn't have an integrated seatpost or pressfit bottom bracket. Both of those "innovations" can suck it.

This was one of the things I liked about my Chinese carbon frameset too - it sticks with the standards.

[stormur]

Mostly it's not "standard issue" ( with 1 exception, but this later ) , it's quality issue. Many manufacturers has troubles to follow "standard " measurments on their frames. That cause all "creaking" issues in BB, most derailleurs hiting spokes etc.

Are manufacturers ( not most expensive ones ) which frames build accuracy is stunning, are with crap one ( even these pricey ) .

Exception : Other thing is some manufacturers are building they frames according to some specs, and these specs happend to fit 1 groupset manufacturer maybe not only, but installing other one will/ can make your life bit miserable , or can/will limite you in some choices.

Next thing is mechanics skills. That's REALLY issue.

Tools to equip very fancy workshop ( with anything imaginable there ) cost less than nice bike on Dura Ace Di2. It's CHEAP comparing to other businesses. And you can buy all being "non business" customer.

Detailed assembly/ service procedures are "on the plate" in the net. There's no lack of know-how to get. Easy part.

my 0.02€