What needs changing on bikes?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Good morning,

You're wasting your time mate. Most on here are luddites who won't change to a Hollowtech chain set and would still rather have the old square taper :laugh:
Can I be an honoury luddite please?

Steel, ✅
Shimano 600 square taper chainset, pre Ultegra, ✅
32 spokes, ✅
Downtube front shifter✅
Tan sidewall tyres✅
Electronic shifting is amazing because... um... hold on, I know this one.
And just one small lapse ❌

IMG_2087.JPG

Bye

Ian
 

rogerzilla

Legendary Member
So! You’re a bike component company designer with thousands to spend on R&D , looking for something to change on components to make existing components obsolete, what do you turn your attention to?
For me it would be the pedal to crank fixing, unchanged for donkey’s years, yet basically a bad design just good enough with steel cranks but which has led to thousands of broken Al. alloy cranks and grazed knees over the years.
That was one of the late Jobst Brandt's personal hobby horses. I believe he even wrote to Shimano and suggested a tapered interface*. The big problem is overcoming the embedded market of pedals using a flat interface. Shops would hate doubling up on it and buyers wouldn't want to buy new cranks, so it would be a "new bike" thing - and new bikes don't come with good pedals, because everyone changes them.

*also removes the need for the LH thread on the LH side
 

Fastpedaller

Senior Member
According to the late Mike Burrows, the only 'new' invention for bikes was the clipless pedal in it's various forms.
Everything else, he reckoned had already been done, but lacked either the suitable materials and / or the techno knowhow to make it work properly.
Was he right - ? :whistle:
476171-132bf386488e89b0ef04902716d07895.jpg
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
That was one of the late Jobst Brandt's personal hobby horses. I believe he even wrote to Shimano and suggested a tapered interface*. The big problem is overcoming the embedded market of pedals using a flat interface. Shops would hate doubling up on it and buyers wouldn't want to buy new cranks, so it would be a "new bike" thing - and new bikes don't come with good pedals, because everyone changes them.

*also removes the need for the LH thread on the LH side

Doesn't seem to bother them with Bottom Brackets ;)
 

PedallingNowhereSlowly

Well-Known Member
Another post said the rider. He is correct, because IMO there are too many luddite cyclist wed to the 1890 DF so called safety bike. They wont admit there are other types of frames and number of wheels that better serve many cyclist. Time does march on.

Recumbants and tricycles are not a new invention.
Some of us have tried and failed miserably with three wheels.
Recumbents can be more difficult to store with the wider seat. Rotate the bars and drop the pedals off a DF and it's a very slim package indeed.

DF bikes are cheaper. And, IMHO good enough. Yes 'bents are lovely and comfortable in what limited experience I have with them (I had a Brox quadricycle - which was amazing for its utility much more than anything else) but these types of posts (luddite - really?) might not have the effect you think they have.

You ride a recumbent and you seem very happy with that. There's absolutely no need to call people who ride conventional bikes luddites.

The main thing that puts people off cycling isn't the bikes - it's traffic, badly behaved motorists (also people), the perception that cycles/HPVs are toys and that people who ride them for transport, or even dare I say as part of a group wearing lycra are deviants.
 
Last edited:

wafter

I like steel bikes and I cannot lie..
Location
Oxford
Another post said the rider. He is correct, because IMO there are too many luddite cyclist wed to the 1890 DF so called safety bike. They wont admit there are other types of frames and number of wheels that better serve many cyclist. Time does march on.

Increasingly obvous troll becomes increasingly obvious...
 

Gwylan

Veteran
Location
All at sea⛵
And make the fairings of a translucent material you can see through to spot potholes. Full fairing would boost most riders average speeds by at least 6-10 mph rendering e-bikes obsolete.

Pot hole radar.

As equipped cyclists pass by the system information is gathered and processed.

Successive cyclists receive warnings if the road state informed by cycle speed and location.
The information is real time and evolves through time.

Also the presence of a cyclist will be included in systems like Waze to alert motorists.
 
Pot hole radar.
Especially a type of radar that tells you whether or not a puddle is really a pothole filled with water
and how deep a puddle really is
 

Alex321

Veteran
Location
South Wales
Another post said the rider. He is correct, because IMO there are too many luddite cyclist wed to the 1890 DF so called safety bike. They wont admit there are other types of frames and number of wheels that better serve many cyclist. Time does march on.

What an ugly-minded post.

The post suggesting the rider was NOTHING to do with your nasty suggestion.
 
What an ugly-minded post.

The post suggesting the rider was NOTHING to do with your nasty suggestion.

What is ugly is the clique that think only a UCI DF bike is the only kind of bike or cycling there is. I consider little Susie on her sidewalk bike with training wheels a cyclist.

Here in the US, more and more of cross country cyclist are going to trikes. When you ride all day, day after day, comfort becomes paramount. And a trike has 3 wheels to carry the load, and doesnt fall over.
 
Last edited:

Punkawallah

Über Member
What is ugly is the clique that think only a UCI DF bike is the only kind of bike or cycling there is. I consider little Susie on her sidewalk bike with training wheels a cyclist.

Here in the US, more and more of cross country cyclist are going to trikes. When you ride all day, day after day, comfort becomes paramount. And a trike has 3 wheels to carry the load, and doesnt fall over.

I did not know that. Are your tracks wide enough, or is the bike narrow enough?
 
Top Bottom