J
John Morgan
Guest
(WAS: Time to build some new wheels - opinions sought)
>> The bottom bracket argument isn't much of anything, since
>> bottom brackets only cost around $30 anyway.
>
> It's not about merely the BB. So, let's say tomorrow, I
> bust my XT crank arm. *Right now*, I can probably find an
> XT Octalink crankarm or crankset to replace it. In three
> years? In five years? I'll bet that ISIS will still be
> going strong then. Not only do they have a new crankset
> standard, but they have been carrying 3 *other* BB types:
> V2 Octalink, V1 Octalink, and square taper. I'm going to
> pick up 4 extra Octalink BBs (two for each bike) and when
> they are done, the cranks will be replaced with some non-
> Shimano stuff.
>
> BTW, did you see the new Saint gruppo, and how the RD is
> attached? Different standard...
>
>> Usually you decide what kind of cranks you want and then
>> buy the bottom bracket to match...
>
> Yup, I have Octalink XTs on right now - both bikes. They
> are nice, and were relatively inexpensive for their
> quality. In three years, how many new Octalink XT
> cranksets do you think I might be able to buy?
>
>> by using the new external bearing setup, they save you
>> the trouble of buying a bottom bracket separately.
>
> As you say, a $30 BB is not an issue. As I was shopping
> for hubs the other day, I asked my not-so-LBS about XT ISO
> disk hubs. One of his catalogs doesn't even have the M756s
> any more. Hmmmm. How long before they stop production on
> Octalink BBs? (Thus rendering my expensive XT cranksets
> useless upon BB failure.)
>
> Shimano is doing it's best to make the old gear obsolete,
> such that if you break one thing some time in the future,
> you'll be obligated to buy a whole bunch of stuff to
> replace perfectly fucntional, but now-obsolete, ancillary
> gear. I very much object to throwing away (giving away,
> selling for some miniscule price) perfectly usable bike
> gear. Standard ISO hubs, conventionally-return-sprung RDs,
> ISIS BB/cranksets, separate brake and shifter controls. I
> hope bike consumers also see what I see, so that they
> might choose their poison with open eyes, whether that be
> poison dished out by the Big S, or some other poison.
Jonesy, I think you're looking at this problem from the
wrong angle. Technology always advances, leaving older
products obsolete. This is true in any industry, and
shouldn't be viewed so negatively. If every generation of
gear was compatible with the previous, there would be very
little improvement.
You gave the perfect example of this. You enjoy the benefits
Octalink has over standard square taper. If I apply your
sweeping judgment, Shimano should have stuck with square
taper because it is compatible with cranks that have been
made for decades. The splined bottom bracket is a superior
technology that is not compatible with anything previously
made, but at some point we must let go of our obsolete
cranks and accept the new standard. To do so bitterly would
be a shame indeed.
That being said, I need you to explain further why the
advancement of technology upsets you. You state the case
that replacement of one part may require you to replace
many other parts that are still functional. Again, I submit
to you that this is currently a reality and it always has
been. (Oh, you want to upgrade your fork? You'll need a
threadless headset and side-pull brakes! But my headset and
center-pull brakes work fine! Sorry, they aren't
compatible.) Obsolete parts can still be found long after
they are replaced by newer technology, but they just aren't
readily available in your latest mail order catalogs. Just
ask some of the retros on this group who still use threaded
headsets and thumb shifters.
What you're experiencing with Shimano's new lineup isn't
new. Every new generation of parts has had some kind of
backlash with people who do not want to change over. What
happens to these people? Either they find a way to keep
fixing their old gear, or they upgrade and realize what
they've been missing.
And finally, I must say that unless you're really lucky,
you will be changing out parts on your bike for new ones
long before they become obsolete. You may even find
yourself wanting that hot new item for your bike before
your old stuff wears out. If you're like me, chances are
you'll buy an entirely new bike before anything on it
becomes hard to find.
John M
>> The bottom bracket argument isn't much of anything, since
>> bottom brackets only cost around $30 anyway.
>
> It's not about merely the BB. So, let's say tomorrow, I
> bust my XT crank arm. *Right now*, I can probably find an
> XT Octalink crankarm or crankset to replace it. In three
> years? In five years? I'll bet that ISIS will still be
> going strong then. Not only do they have a new crankset
> standard, but they have been carrying 3 *other* BB types:
> V2 Octalink, V1 Octalink, and square taper. I'm going to
> pick up 4 extra Octalink BBs (two for each bike) and when
> they are done, the cranks will be replaced with some non-
> Shimano stuff.
>
> BTW, did you see the new Saint gruppo, and how the RD is
> attached? Different standard...
>
>> Usually you decide what kind of cranks you want and then
>> buy the bottom bracket to match...
>
> Yup, I have Octalink XTs on right now - both bikes. They
> are nice, and were relatively inexpensive for their
> quality. In three years, how many new Octalink XT
> cranksets do you think I might be able to buy?
>
>> by using the new external bearing setup, they save you
>> the trouble of buying a bottom bracket separately.
>
> As you say, a $30 BB is not an issue. As I was shopping
> for hubs the other day, I asked my not-so-LBS about XT ISO
> disk hubs. One of his catalogs doesn't even have the M756s
> any more. Hmmmm. How long before they stop production on
> Octalink BBs? (Thus rendering my expensive XT cranksets
> useless upon BB failure.)
>
> Shimano is doing it's best to make the old gear obsolete,
> such that if you break one thing some time in the future,
> you'll be obligated to buy a whole bunch of stuff to
> replace perfectly fucntional, but now-obsolete, ancillary
> gear. I very much object to throwing away (giving away,
> selling for some miniscule price) perfectly usable bike
> gear. Standard ISO hubs, conventionally-return-sprung RDs,
> ISIS BB/cranksets, separate brake and shifter controls. I
> hope bike consumers also see what I see, so that they
> might choose their poison with open eyes, whether that be
> poison dished out by the Big S, or some other poison.
Jonesy, I think you're looking at this problem from the
wrong angle. Technology always advances, leaving older
products obsolete. This is true in any industry, and
shouldn't be viewed so negatively. If every generation of
gear was compatible with the previous, there would be very
little improvement.
You gave the perfect example of this. You enjoy the benefits
Octalink has over standard square taper. If I apply your
sweeping judgment, Shimano should have stuck with square
taper because it is compatible with cranks that have been
made for decades. The splined bottom bracket is a superior
technology that is not compatible with anything previously
made, but at some point we must let go of our obsolete
cranks and accept the new standard. To do so bitterly would
be a shame indeed.
That being said, I need you to explain further why the
advancement of technology upsets you. You state the case
that replacement of one part may require you to replace
many other parts that are still functional. Again, I submit
to you that this is currently a reality and it always has
been. (Oh, you want to upgrade your fork? You'll need a
threadless headset and side-pull brakes! But my headset and
center-pull brakes work fine! Sorry, they aren't
compatible.) Obsolete parts can still be found long after
they are replaced by newer technology, but they just aren't
readily available in your latest mail order catalogs. Just
ask some of the retros on this group who still use threaded
headsets and thumb shifters.
What you're experiencing with Shimano's new lineup isn't
new. Every new generation of parts has had some kind of
backlash with people who do not want to change over. What
happens to these people? Either they find a way to keep
fixing their old gear, or they upgrade and realize what
they've been missing.
And finally, I must say that unless you're really lucky,
you will be changing out parts on your bike for new ones
long before they become obsolete. You may even find
yourself wanting that hot new item for your bike before
your old stuff wears out. If you're like me, chances are
you'll buy an entirely new bike before anything on it
becomes hard to find.
John M