I first wrote this post over 10 years ago on the old overthebar website back in January 2016. With the rise of 32”, UDH, gravel bikes and changes to recent trends, it seemed like a good time to refresh this and share again.
We probably all have that friend. You know, the one when 29er’s came out that had a hissy fit about the bike industry just doing it to make us spend money. The same voices joined by new ones are saying the same about 32” wheeled bikes. Normally they also bang on about how their trusty 26” bike or steel road bike was better in every way. They probably had the same strop when fat bikes, carbon, 650b, 29+, 27″, 27+ or new (insert any brand you like) Bottom Bracket (BB) or headset standard came out.
Some bikes that wouldn’t exist if the bike industry didn’t want our hard earned cash:
However, I do agree with them, and I think they are right; the bike industry does want our money. However what’s wrong with that? I love my 29+ Trek Stache, really want another gravel bike (flat bar this time, isn’t that a hybrid?) and have a myriad of different BB and headset standards on my bike collection.
It’s this innovation, experimentation and creation of new (or recycled) bikes, parts and lifestyles that makes cycling one of the most exciting, complicated and engaging pastimes. If the bike industry had said “right we have created the best bike so that’s it, we don’t need to change anything its perfect” we’d still be stuck with the penny farthing or some other contraption before the safety bicycle was invented. There would be no road or mountain bikes, cyclocross, gravel, downhill, BMX, tri bikes (well maybe they do have something to answer for…), dual slalom or race bikes let alone fat bikes or 32ers. And more importantly, they would not have invented a MTB tandem you can smash round on while a 10 year old plays bike polo on the back.
Sure some things haven’t worked out and you do wonder how they ever managed to get past the R&D stage and actually end up in production. Anyone who has ever had an ISIS BB or BB90 will agree with that one. We must also acknowledge the frustration of trying to find the correct headset bearing for your bike.
However even some of these flawed components have a certain charm and their faults actually help us develop an emotional attachment to them. For example I absolutely love the look of some SRAM chainsets despite their DUB BB’s (there is a bottom bracket theme here…) being as long lasting as a slice of bread. In this time, sustainability is important, but we can buy things that will last, are not faddy, Joe from Starling Cycles recently explained this much better than me:
Even when the industry tries to invent a new category of riding, I dig it. Yeah sure gravel is pretty much just mountain biking and most people were doing this long before it got its special title. However this has spawned races, organised rides, dedicated places to ride, new bikes and cool outfits and very importantly jobs. Tell me what is wrong with that?
So if you still don’t like it and want to stop being tempted with the next cool and shiny thing, go hide in the mountains or throw your phone in a lake. It’s going to happen so you may as well accept it and strap on your bum bag and cool lycra as you swing a leg over your trusty steed.
So here is my letter:
Dear the bike industry,
Keep doing what you are doing. You rock and I can’t wait to ride a 32” fat bike with a 2” headset and 231.5mm spaced wheels.
I love you,
Physeters
And I’ll leave you with my new silly single speed full suspension bike that I happily paid for!:
I kinda agree but also kinda disagree.
There’s long been talk of wheels proportional to the rider- some brands are good and stick to this and Joe of Starling really makes the effort to accommodate the full range of Mountainbike wheel sizes. But also say watching 5’4″ Evie Richards on a 32 makes me think there’s a danger of it being pushed a little too hard.
When Ted James took on my building my bike we had a long conversation about what I ride, where I ride and the reality of what I need. One of the first points he made is that at 5’8 he would recommend committing to 27.5″ for the rear at least. My original idea had been to have something that could clear a decent sized 29″, but it seems that actually includes a lot of compromises and will always lean towards the standard the industry favours (29). I’ve ridden a lot of 29ers, but only the most recent hardtails felt proportional and I’ve still had tyre scrub when descending. Full sus isn’t so bad, but I think I’d still go 27.5″. Need to have a proper experiment with Mullets to make my mind up on those.
Gary Fisher didn’t invent the 29er (something even he usually admits) but he did certainly help make it a reality. For all his flaws (many of which he’s open about) he’s always wanted to push innovation. Equally it’s really exciting to belt drive and even gearbox tech come into it’s own.
But for me one of the most exiting brands of the last few years is Stooge- modern concesions where it matters like discs, but also demonstrating just how much you can do on a fully rigid bike. On a smaller scale, Medusa Cycles were one of the highlights for me of Bespoked, in particular a bike with plus sized tyres, a sweet spot in design between a Jones and a Stooge.
Innovation in cycling is great, but the tendencies of the biggest companies to try and play mind games with the consumer is not. I’d love to see the biggest brands shrink a little and the smaller brands be given space to do their thing.
Lots of very good points I absolutely agree with!