Was just reading Escape Collective's article about security researchers hacking a Shimano Di2 drivetrain (tl;dr it's possible but highly unlikely in any real-world scenario) and this quote about wireless drivetrains jumped out at me:
"Wireless shifting has also made aspects like installation simple and easy to do. In fact, that’s the primary reason we have it, said Wakeham. He pointed out that riders aren’t the main customer for big component brands like SRAM and, especially, Shimano; bike brands like Specialized and Trek are. For the rider, 'wireless isn’t innovation for the user except in aesthetics,' he said, because shifting is slower than full-wired systems and of course the system is less secure. But wireless shifting solves a bothersome problem for bike brands: assembly. As Wakeham put it, 'it means complex internal wire routing can be avoided in factories.'" (https://escapecollective.com/heres-the-real-lesson-from-that-wireless-shifting-hack/)
Don't think I've heard this specific explanation before. Is it plausible that shaving down assembly time/cost is really a major driver for the proliferation of wireless drivetrains?
Was just reading Escape Collective's article about security researchers hacking a Shimano Di2 drivetrain (tl;dr it's possible but highly unlikely in any real-world scenario) and this...
Was just reading Escape Collective's article about security researchers hacking a Shimano Di2 drivetrain (tl;dr it's possible but highly unlikely in any real-world scenario) and this quote about wireless drivetrains jumped out at me:
"Wireless shifting has also made aspects like installation simple and easy to do. In fact, that’s the primary reason we have it, said Wakeham. He pointed out that riders aren’t the main customer for big component brands like SRAM and, especially, Shimano; bike brands like Specialized and Trek are. For the rider, 'wireless isn’t innovation for the user except in aesthetics,' he said, because shifting is slower than full-wired systems and of course the system is less secure. But wireless shifting solves a bothersome problem for bike brands: assembly. As Wakeham put it, 'it means complex internal wire routing can be avoided in factories.'" (https://escapecollective.com/heres-the-real-lesson-from-that-wireless-shifting-hack/)
Don't think I've heard this specific explanation before. Is it plausible that shaving down assembly time/cost is really a major driver for the proliferation of wireless drivetrains?
Yes.
It's hard to see as currently they're more expensive, but the price will come down in real terms each generation whereas labour cost in general, stays constant or increases in real terms.
Its why straight pull hubs exist, its why a lot of things in the automotive world are the way they are, so robots can do the assembly.
Would I say its on the only reason, no definitely not. A big driver in the performance bike world is aerodynamics for road bikes, and because of the UCI weight limit has been hit for over a decade now, road bikes essentially have weight to spare they can use on things like no cables etc. Because they developed it for road bikes, they'll pass it onto mountain and commuter bikes next.
Was just reading Escape Collective's article about security researchers hacking a Shimano Di2 drivetrain (tl;dr it's possible but highly unlikely in any real-world scenario) and this...
Was just reading Escape Collective's article about security researchers hacking a Shimano Di2 drivetrain (tl;dr it's possible but highly unlikely in any real-world scenario) and this quote about wireless drivetrains jumped out at me:
"Wireless shifting has also made aspects like installation simple and easy to do. In fact, that’s the primary reason we have it, said Wakeham. He pointed out that riders aren’t the main customer for big component brands like SRAM and, especially, Shimano; bike brands like Specialized and Trek are. For the rider, 'wireless isn’t innovation for the user except in aesthetics,' he said, because shifting is slower than full-wired systems and of course the system is less secure. But wireless shifting solves a bothersome problem for bike brands: assembly. As Wakeham put it, 'it means complex internal wire routing can be avoided in factories.'" (https://escapecollective.com/heres-the-real-lesson-from-that-wireless-shifting-hack/)
Don't think I've heard this specific explanation before. Is it plausible that shaving down assembly time/cost is really a major driver for the proliferation of wireless drivetrains?
Definitely sounds possible. Looking at specialized and santa cruz doing away with cable routing for a derailleur on some bikes leads to not only less assemble time and cost but less manufacturing cost by cutting out tube in tube routing. Makes the frame a bit cheaper to make but the bikes arnt any cheaper. Probably increases profit margin a little bit as well.
Nothing about a dedicated cc frame or the new stumpy says “hey we’re trying to save a couple dollars on manufacturing”.
It’s an aesthetic choice on a very expensive model. Personally I think it would be especially cool if you run external rear brake (my preference practically too) leaving no need for internal routing or a stupid headset. Clean head tube, cleaner bars, easier setup and maintenance. I don’t think charging a battery is a big ask in today’s world.
I hear 2025 is a shimano release year. So hopefully electronic deore by 2026. But we will see I suppose. Until something cheaper comes out I’ll just use zip ties partly out of spite.
Doing away with cable ports will also make the frame inherently stronger, as you will have less holes, and therefore lighter as they do not need to reinforce those places. Marginally, yes. I also think this is why many are using headset routed cables.
I know I'm late to the Scott Gambler shock heat discussion, and I know our resident experts have said shock heat isn't a big factor on...
I know I'm late to the Scott Gambler shock heat discussion, and I know our resident experts have said shock heat isn't a big factor on performance, but... what if they put the shock inside and then decide to put part of the shock outside
I can hear whinings about proprietary shocks already...
Nothing about a dedicated cc frame or the new stumpy says “hey we’re trying to save a couple dollars on manufacturing”.It’s an aesthetic choice on a...
Nothing about a dedicated cc frame or the new stumpy says “hey we’re trying to save a couple dollars on manufacturing”.
It’s an aesthetic choice on a very expensive model. Personally I think it would be especially cool if you run external rear brake (my preference practically too) leaving no need for internal routing or a stupid headset. Clean head tube, cleaner bars, easier setup and maintenance. I don’t think charging a battery is a big ask in today’s world.
I hear 2025 is a shimano release year. So hopefully electronic deore by 2026. But we will see I suppose. Until something cheaper comes out I’ll just use zip ties partly out of spite.
I watched the loam wolf review of the bronson. They had a guy from santa cruz there. He said a big part of them ditching the internal routing was to save some weight and set the cc frame apart from the c. I think he said it saved around 300g
Nothing about a dedicated cc frame or the new stumpy says “hey we’re trying to save a couple dollars on manufacturing”.It’s an aesthetic choice on a...
Nothing about a dedicated cc frame or the new stumpy says “hey we’re trying to save a couple dollars on manufacturing”.
It’s an aesthetic choice on a very expensive model. Personally I think it would be especially cool if you run external rear brake (my preference practically too) leaving no need for internal routing or a stupid headset. Clean head tube, cleaner bars, easier setup and maintenance. I don’t think charging a battery is a big ask in today’s world.
I hear 2025 is a shimano release year. So hopefully electronic deore by 2026. But we will see I suppose. Until something cheaper comes out I’ll just use zip ties partly out of spite.
I watched the loam wolf review of the bronson. They had a guy from santa cruz there. He said a big part of them ditching the...
I watched the loam wolf review of the bronson. They had a guy from santa cruz there. He said a big part of them ditching the internal routing was to save some weight and set the cc frame apart from the c. I think he said it saved around 300g
he said 100. which is quickly reg gained right where it matters, at your rear axle with those bricks, hem, sorry, transmission deralieurs
he said 100. which is quickly reg gained right where it matters, at your rear axle with those bricks, hem, sorry, transmission deralieurs
are the downvotes based on? cause i'm talking facts here, oh let's remember the 28gr for a udh, so at the axle, Gx vs GX t-type you have ( cassette + deralieur ) 738gr vs 936gr, so 200gr of extra unsprung weight, on a total of 219gr more for t- type, now on XO is 370gr, so the huge (100gr) weight saving on the frame are not only gone but gone right at your rear axle, nice
are the downvotes based on? cause i'm talking facts here, oh let's remember the 28gr for a udh, so at the axle, Gx vs GX t-type...
are the downvotes based on? cause i'm talking facts here, oh let's remember the 28gr for a udh, so at the axle, Gx vs GX t-type you have ( cassette + deralieur ) 738gr vs 936gr, so 200gr of extra unsprung weight, on a total of 219gr more for t- type, now on XO is 370gr, so the huge (100gr) weight saving on the frame are not only gone but gone right at your rear axle, nice
I know I'm late to the Scott Gambler shock heat discussion, and I know our resident experts have said shock heat isn't a big factor on...
I know I'm late to the Scott Gambler shock heat discussion, and I know our resident experts have said shock heat isn't a big factor on performance, but... what if they put the shock inside and then decide to put part of the shock outside
I can see them being attracted to this solution because it seems like one of the few ways left to up the ante: run the hose connecting the shock and reservoir through a port in the downtube.
are the downvotes based on? cause i'm talking facts here, oh let's remember the 28gr for a udh, so at the axle, Gx vs GX t-type...
are the downvotes based on? cause i'm talking facts here, oh let's remember the 28gr for a udh, so at the axle, Gx vs GX t-type you have ( cassette + deralieur ) 738gr vs 936gr, so 200gr of extra unsprung weight, on a total of 219gr more for t- type, now on XO is 370gr, so the huge (100gr) weight saving on the frame are not only gone but gone right at your rear axle, nice
I prefer climbing with an 11 speed, even when I travel to CO to ride bigger stuff than what we have locally, as it prevents me from dropping in to a too low gear.
Especially with the MX rear tire being smaller and providing some gearing advantage. Also, the extra ground clearance of the shorter derailleur combined with the MX rear wheel is appreciated.
The weight savings off of the rear wheel (cassette & derailleur) is a solid 300 grams (2/3#s) which I'm convinced is enough that I can tell a difference in suspension performance, but maybe it's just in my head.
Sure, looks better too! Also, it's an all steel cassette which is great for longevity.
All in with Eewing cranks I'm sitting at less than 1400 grams for my entire drivetrain.
Can’t copy text from the insta post from mobile, but “Suspension Tech International”, apparently a high end suspension tuning shop for moto and MTB in NZ, seems to be making their own shock now. Enduro coil.
Can’t copy text from the insta post from mobile, but “Suspension Tech International”, apparently a high end suspension tuning shop for moto and MTB in NZ, seems to be making their own shock now. Enduro coil.
There was article about it quite some time ago on pinkbike I think, it's been long time coming.
Can’t copy text from the insta post from mobile, but “Suspension Tech International”, apparently a high end suspension tuning shop for moto and MTB in NZ, seems to be making their own shock now. Enduro coil.
Was just reading Escape Collective's article about security researchers hacking a Shimano Di2 drivetrain (tl;dr it's possible but highly unlikely in any real-world scenario) and this...
Was just reading Escape Collective's article about security researchers hacking a Shimano Di2 drivetrain (tl;dr it's possible but highly unlikely in any real-world scenario) and this quote about wireless drivetrains jumped out at me:
"Wireless shifting has also made aspects like installation simple and easy to do. In fact, that’s the primary reason we have it, said Wakeham. He pointed out that riders aren’t the main customer for big component brands like SRAM and, especially, Shimano; bike brands like Specialized and Trek are. For the rider, 'wireless isn’t innovation for the user except in aesthetics,' he said, because shifting is slower than full-wired systems and of course the system is less secure. But wireless shifting solves a bothersome problem for bike brands: assembly. As Wakeham put it, 'it means complex internal wire routing can be avoided in factories.'" (https://escapecollective.com/heres-the-real-lesson-from-that-wireless-shifting-hack/)
Don't think I've heard this specific explanation before. Is it plausible that shaving down assembly time/cost is really a major driver for the proliferation of wireless drivetrains?
Time and consistency for sure would be big motivators. I've been saying for a decade that remote lockouts need to be wireless - there are big benefits there for everyoen doing it that way!
re: temperatures...i've touched the shock bolt head on the outside of the frame on jonny's bike 5 minutes after a run at mtn creek (which isn't super long) and it was too hot to keep a finger on. does that matter for shock internals? no idea.
I know im a day late and this thead moves fast, but i was at an extremely busy shop that sold a brand that used this same combo of battery and motor. We sent literally dozens of complete bikes back let alone individual components because these were utterly dogshit. I pray thats been sorted for Kona a couple years later but i can never recommend a shimano ebike with a non shimano battery.
Have we reached a plateau in geometry now? Updates that are called huge = changes that are actually 1/2degree or 3-4mm different.Given how bad the 2nd...
Have we reached a plateau in geometry now? Updates that are called huge = changes that are actually 1/2degree or 3-4mm different. Given how bad the 2nd hand market is right now who is going to take the hit upgrading their bike for very marginal differences. If you were in the market for a 150mm trail bike would take a V4 Bronson/Previous gen Stuntjumper for 30-40% off or pay full whack for a current one?
Geometry updates have run its course. Name of the game unfortunately seems to be „integration“, which is why we see some companies go all in on...
Geometry updates have run its course. Name of the game unfortunately seems to be „integration“, which is why we see some companies go all in on trying to make their bikes look cleaner by routing through the headset or foregoing some cables at all, to the detriment of the customer.
They still need a reason for people to buy new models so it’s either visual upgrades or stuff like in frame storage. The latter is nice, but i wish they would instead focus on making bikes easier to work on rather than harder and making them more reliable.
What is there really to improve on bike frames now besides maybe rear suspension performance (and even that is pretty dialed) and them not breaking?
It seems there's a divergence in philosophy for how to sell bikes now that we are at or near peak geometry. For brands like spesh and santa cruz it seems to be integration but for others like Rocky, Norco, and to a lesser extent Trek, it seems to be "optimizing" (or at least trying to create headlines) with new or different suspension designs. I guess you can slot Spesh here too with their OEM fox shock.
Saw a 2025 catalog this weekend that peaked my interest.
It looks like Bosch might have a new generation CX level battery coming out. Size 800 maH, and has a much lighter weight for its size. Granted the bike that it comes with has a major design change to the frame, but they’re claiming a whopping 10 pounds lighter weight over the 2024 model…
Have we reached a plateau in geometry now? Updates that are called huge = changes that are actually 1/2degree or 3-4mm different.Given how bad the 2nd...
Have we reached a plateau in geometry now? Updates that are called huge = changes that are actually 1/2degree or 3-4mm different. Given how bad the 2nd hand market is right now who is going to take the hit upgrading their bike for very marginal differences. If you were in the market for a 150mm trail bike would take a V4 Bronson/Previous gen Stuntjumper for 30-40% off or pay full whack for a current one?
Geometry updates have run its course. Name of the game unfortunately seems to be „integration“, which is why we see some companies go all in on...
Geometry updates have run its course. Name of the game unfortunately seems to be „integration“, which is why we see some companies go all in on trying to make their bikes look cleaner by routing through the headset or foregoing some cables at all, to the detriment of the customer.
They still need a reason for people to buy new models so it’s either visual upgrades or stuff like in frame storage. The latter is nice, but i wish they would instead focus on making bikes easier to work on rather than harder and making them more reliable.
What is there really to improve on bike frames now besides maybe rear suspension performance (and even that is pretty dialed) and them not breaking?
It seems there's a divergence in philosophy for how to sell bikes now that we are at or near peak geometry. For brands like spesh and...
It seems there's a divergence in philosophy for how to sell bikes now that we are at or near peak geometry. For brands like spesh and santa cruz it seems to be integration but for others like Rocky, Norco, and to a lesser extent Trek, it seems to be "optimizing" (or at least trying to create headlines) with new or different suspension designs. I guess you can slot Spesh here too with their OEM fox shock.
We have definitely NOT reached a plateau let alone a peak. Look at the smaller core brands: there is a new progressive geo in town. The big brands are watering down their bikes super hard to try to not make waves/keep market share/not offend anyone. I don’t know what it will take to make the big brands budge but I do know that at some point they will.
I think maybe what we’re experiencing is a Power Nap after a decade of intense progression and change. Consumers are not really demanding big changes from the big brands so they have time to work on weird stuff (genie shock, etc) We’re at a good resting place for now, but we will all get itchy soon enough…
We have definitely NOT reached a plateau let alone a peak. Look at the smaller core brands: there is a new progressive geo in town. The...
We have definitely NOT reached a plateau let alone a peak. Look at the smaller core brands: there is a new progressive geo in town. The big brands are watering down their bikes super hard to try to not make waves/keep market share/not offend anyone. I don’t know what it will take to make the big brands budge but I do know that at some point they will.
I think maybe what we’re experiencing is a Power Nap after a decade of intense progression and change. Consumers are not really demanding big changes from the big brands so they have time to work on weird stuff (genie shock, etc) We’re at a good resting place for now, but we will all get itchy soon enough…
What is the new progressive geo that small brands are doing?
There’s a lot of interesting stuff small brands make but geo genuinely seems to have found a relative figured out equilibrium.
Was just reading Escape Collective's article about security researchers hacking a Shimano Di2 drivetrain (tl;dr it's possible but highly unlikely in any real-world scenario) and this quote about wireless drivetrains jumped out at me:
"Wireless shifting has also made aspects like installation simple and easy to do. In fact, that’s the primary reason we have it, said Wakeham. He pointed out that riders aren’t the main customer for big component brands like SRAM and, especially, Shimano; bike brands like Specialized and Trek are. For the rider, 'wireless isn’t innovation for the user except in aesthetics,' he said, because shifting is slower than full-wired systems and of course the system is less secure. But wireless shifting solves a bothersome problem for bike brands: assembly. As Wakeham put it, 'it means complex internal wire routing can be avoided in factories.'" (https://escapecollective.com/heres-the-real-lesson-from-that-wireless-shifting-hack/)
Don't think I've heard this specific explanation before. Is it plausible that shaving down assembly time/cost is really a major driver for the proliferation of wireless drivetrains?
Yes.
It's hard to see as currently they're more expensive, but the price will come down in real terms each generation whereas labour cost in general, stays constant or increases in real terms.
Its why straight pull hubs exist, its why a lot of things in the automotive world are the way they are, so robots can do the assembly.
Would I say its on the only reason, no definitely not. A big driver in the performance bike world is aerodynamics for road bikes, and because of the UCI weight limit has been hit for over a decade now, road bikes essentially have weight to spare they can use on things like no cables etc. Because they developed it for road bikes, they'll pass it onto mountain and commuter bikes next.
Definitely sounds possible. Looking at specialized and santa cruz doing away with cable routing for a derailleur on some bikes leads to not only less assemble time and cost but less manufacturing cost by cutting out tube in tube routing. Makes the frame a bit cheaper to make but the bikes arnt any cheaper. Probably increases profit margin a little bit as well.
Nothing about a dedicated cc frame or the new stumpy says “hey we’re trying to save a couple dollars on manufacturing”.
It’s an aesthetic choice on a very expensive model. Personally I think it would be especially cool if you run external rear brake (my preference practically too) leaving no need for internal routing or a stupid headset. Clean head tube, cleaner bars, easier setup and maintenance. I don’t think charging a battery is a big ask in today’s world.
I hear 2025 is a shimano release year. So hopefully electronic deore by 2026. But we will see I suppose. Until something cheaper comes out I’ll just use zip ties partly out of spite.
Doing away with cable ports will also make the frame inherently stronger, as you will have less holes, and therefore lighter as they do not need to reinforce those places. Marginally, yes. I also think this is why many are using headset routed cables.
I can hear whinings about proprietary shocks already...
I watched the loam wolf review of the bronson. They had a guy from santa cruz there. He said a big part of them ditching the internal routing was to save some weight and set the cc frame apart from the c. I think he said it saved around 300g
he said 100. which is quickly reg gained right where it matters, at your rear axle with those bricks, hem, sorry, transmission deralieurs
can't be too long
We can finally buy a $15k Pivot......rejoice!
are the downvotes based on? cause i'm talking facts here, oh let's remember the 28gr for a udh, so at the axle, Gx vs GX t-type you have ( cassette + deralieur ) 738gr vs 936gr, so 200gr of extra unsprung weight, on a total of 219gr more for t- type, now on XO is 370gr, so the huge (100gr) weight saving on the frame are not only gone but gone right at your rear axle, nice
Attitude.
I can see them being attracted to this solution because it seems like one of the few ways left to up the ante: run the hose connecting the shock and reservoir through a port in the downtube.
Not so much tough crowd I guess 🤷
Bottom line, you can sell more bikes if you make them more different. Print that on a shirt and sell em! :-)
I prefer climbing with an 11 speed, even when I travel to CO to ride bigger stuff than what we have locally, as it prevents me from dropping in to a too low gear.
Especially with the MX rear tire being smaller and providing some gearing advantage. Also, the extra ground clearance of the shorter derailleur combined with the MX rear wheel is appreciated.
The weight savings off of the rear wheel (cassette & derailleur) is a solid 300 grams (2/3#s) which I'm convinced is enough that I can tell a difference in suspension performance, but maybe it's just in my head.
Sure, looks better too! Also, it's an all steel cassette which is great for longevity.
All in with Eewing cranks I'm sitting at less than 1400 grams for my entire drivetrain.
https://www.instagram.com/p/C-65j11zThT/?igsh=d2tlazlpOXJlYjU=
Can’t copy text from the insta post from mobile, but “Suspension Tech International”, apparently a high end suspension tuning shop for moto and MTB in NZ, seems to be making their own shock now. Enduro coil.
There was article about it quite some time ago on pinkbike I think, it's been long time coming.
Paste instagram in with the youtube button
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/factory-tour-suspension-tech-internationa…
That was just one of the prototypes
Time and consistency for sure would be big motivators. I've been saying for a decade that remote lockouts need to be wireless - there are big benefits there for everyoen doing it that way!
I know im a day late and this thead moves fast, but i was at an extremely busy shop that sold a brand that used this same combo of battery and motor. We sent literally dozens of complete bikes back let alone individual components because these were utterly dogshit. I pray thats been sorted for Kona a couple years later but i can never recommend a shimano ebike with a non shimano battery.
It seems there's a divergence in philosophy for how to sell bikes now that we are at or near peak geometry. For brands like spesh and santa cruz it seems to be integration but for others like Rocky, Norco, and to a lesser extent Trek, it seems to be "optimizing" (or at least trying to create headlines) with new or different suspension designs. I guess you can slot Spesh here too with their OEM fox shock.
Saw a 2025 catalog this weekend that peaked my interest.
It looks like Bosch might have a new generation CX level battery coming out. Size 800 maH, and has a much lighter weight for its size. Granted the bike that it comes with has a major design change to the frame, but they’re claiming a whopping 10 pounds lighter weight over the 2024 model…
Looks like a new Spindrift drops tomorrow.
We have definitely NOT reached a plateau let alone a peak. Look at the smaller core brands: there is a new progressive geo in town. The big brands are watering down their bikes super hard to try to not make waves/keep market share/not offend anyone. I don’t know what it will take to make the big brands budge but I do know that at some point they will.
I think maybe what we’re experiencing is a Power Nap after a decade of intense progression and change. Consumers are not really demanding big changes from the big brands so they have time to work on weird stuff (genie shock, etc) We’re at a good resting place for now, but we will all get itchy soon enough…
One of the upcoming things also seems to be optimisations around compliance, stiffness, adapting it to different styles, etc.
What is the new progressive geo that small brands are doing?
There’s a lot of interesting stuff small brands make but geo genuinely seems to have found a relative figured out equilibrium.