Are bikes becoming too complicated?

[larson....@gmail.com]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmuO4fV1qq8&t=3348s

I thought this was an interesting discussion, certainly for us Rivendell owners. I know Russ can be polarizing, but I like his approach to cycling and appreciate his thoughts.

Randy in WI

[Robert Calton]

My sense is that the complexity of bikes has risen proportionally with the extent to which riders have agreed to make bicycling complex. Decades ago, we as riders didn't much care about quantifying the power put to the pedals, then in the late 80s, powermeters became a thing. Then as our society became more and more technologically insatiable, electronic groupsets blew up in the early 2000's...then folks decided wireless groupsets had to be a thing (first released only 4 years after the first iPad). Our wireless, digital, always-connected world had to permeate all aspects of our life -- at least all companies did a good job marketing that to us. 

The video makes a good callout with the "Tesla-fication" of cars. Not just EVs, but now we see full ICE cars with giant touchscreens that nestle basic climate controls and radio features behind menus. Cars have over-the-air updates like our smartphones. We continue to pay monthly subscriptions to use features on the cars we own that the manufacturers say should be as-a-service. We're starting to see this with bikes, but on the other side we're also seeing a proliferation of small independent bike shops who rehab older frames with quality new parts and sell those bikes instead of the latest big-box arguments of how bikes should be. The good news is that the pendulum is starting to swing the other way. 

Thanks for coming to my TED talk. 

[Robert Calton]

To add an amusing, cynical thought: can you imagine Shifting-as-a-Service? New fully integrated wireless 5G groupsets charge you $10/month for 1,000 shifts and then you're stuck with a fixie. Or pony up $40/month for unlimited shifts and get your shifting analytics pushed to the latest Shimano E-Tube app. 

[Patrick Moore]

SaaS -- Shifting-as-a-Service, and "your personal power assistant." I love it.

[Mathias Steiner]

please please please let it be an April-Fool's joke

[David Ross]

I watched this and thought it made some really valid points. I think the number one issue is that many riders are aspirational riders and this sort of drives the industry. I was certainly guilty of this as a younger person. I’d like to think that I require 200mm of full suspension and 200mm disk brakes, but I don’t. At my age I’m now cool just riding bikes that address my actual needs. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/4b3d254f-86d1-431d-9e25-734163c182efn%40googlegroups.com.

[Cyclofiend Jim]

I always appreciated solid designs, but definitively stepped off the train in the late 90's. 
I'd been reading GP's writings and spent a lot of time on Sheldon's site. Slowly realizing that simple and dependable beat flashy and light every day of the week. 
I was riding a ton through a California El Nino winter, and the combination of muddy trails and mileage had me grinding up drivetrains about every month. Most of my disposable income was going to chains, chainrings, and cassettes. All those shift-assisting bits and narrow/short teeth just evaporated in those conditions. The only reason I switched to XTR cranks was that the (ridiculously expensive) chainrings were about 3x thicker than everything else. But --- ooof! -- when those had to be replaced..... ugh. 
Then I came into possession of an MB1, took off all the shifty bits and bought a BMX sprocket and a Surly tensioner. Those long, thick teeth on the back wheel refused to grind down, and the chunky chainring worked fine no matter how much grit got ground into it. 
The penny dropped, and I embraced the simple drivetrain lifestyle. 

Jim

[Chris Halasz]

I have to wonder whether the increased cost per square area of the ever popular e-bike vs, say, a simple bike that most folks used to purchase for around town has improved the bottom line of many a bike ship. Of course, we also see the trend of big box bike brands buying out many a good local shop. 

I also have to wonder whether the increased complexity of disc-brake suspension e-bikes doesn't keep more bike mechanics busy, and busy with keeping up the high volume of technical change in the industry, whether electronic shifting or otherwise. 

All that said, the simplicity of the pre-electronic, pre-index shifting, pre-brifter configuration is so much of what appeals to me in a bike. I think the late Danny Kahneman and Amos Tversky identified that we humans prefer utility to value. Maybe that's why I like my Clem so much? 

Besides, don't we obsess enough over the simple stuff? Can't imagine the investment of time debating the details of a carbon electronic wonder gadget. Sheesh. 

- Chris 

[Nick Payne]

On Saturday 25 May 2024 at 2:31:29 am UTC+10 nca...@gmail.com wrote:

then folks decided wireless groupsets had to be a thing (first released only 4 years after the first iPad).

Long before that. Mavic Mektronic pre-dated the iPad by at least a decade, and its predecessor (Mavic Zap, which was wired, not wireless) by almost two decades.

I've been using SRAM eTap for almost a decade, with zero problems. I presently have it on three bikes - two with the original 11-speed Red eTap, and one with 12-speed, a mixture of Force shifters/brakes and Rival derailleurs.

Nick Payne

[ascpgh]

Like cars, I hate that complexities are defining "bicycles". I love my bikes and love riding them. Keeping them functioning versus in service is my objective and there is no more timely arrangement than me being able to execute adjustments, service and repair. Complexity challenges  entropy directly so I prefer to remain closer to equilibrium rahter than rise high above it. 

I read that a growing reason for trading vehicles has been the infotainment program suite/compatibility with owners' cellular devices. Seriously, dumping a serviceable low mileage vehicle because they got a new phone. This represents a huge wasteful egocentricity to me. A new 3000 pound product made from extracted materials, labor and energy consumption to manufacture and deliver because it plays nicer with your new phone.

I abhor that motor vehicles have become considered on par with countertop appliances, many purchased by people who feelings toward them ranges from "don't care" to "dislike driving them" (as long as they can play their music through the speakers). A toaster. A car was how I could connect with my friends when corded phones were under the full family's observation and monitoring. I had passion for my serial progression of cars as I do my bikes.

While not dark ages (I do dyno hubs and wired lighting), I am definitely not "for" the growing technification of bicycles. Not what propels my needs from bicycling. 

Andy Cheatham

Pittsburgh

On Friday, May 24, 2024 at 12:31:29 PM UTC-4 Robert Calton wrote: