Where are MTBs going?

[Jwrags]

I have been reading with interest all of the different bike threads with all of their different thread drift. It seems as if the long time standard 26" has been surpassed, first by the 29" and now the compromise 27.5". Fat tires, fatter tires, 3 x 7, 3 x 9, 1 x 11, and 1 x 12. For all you riders out there who are all more serious than me, what do you think will become the new "standard"? What do you think will be the best buys on "old" technology. Looking forward to informed opinions, or at least opinionated opinions .

 

[Monique]

And how long will it take to shake out, if ever?

 

[Superbman]

Manufacturing processes and reaching targeted markets have both become so much more precise and efficient that, just as in other area (like skis), I think that sustaining multiple standards will be the norm. 26er is dead for serious bikes, though you'll see products for 26er for another decade, especially in the DH markets as used bikes dominate that market. But we'll see multiple wheel sizes and Rim sizes as the norm for years to come. Purpose built machines have never been better at their specific purposes due to this variation of standards, no one want to give that up and there is a market for a lot of tastes.

The gearing revolution is interesting, my complaint is that they put an awful lot of R & D in getting rid of the wrong derailleur-I mean, how often was it your front derailleur that caused you any trouble??? I hope that the rear mech goes the way of the front mech, but still leaves us with at least 9 good gears out back.

Suspension is awesome right now, and getting awesomer.

Stronger, better, stiffer thru-axle interfaces on wider hubs is a real Boon to riding.

Tires are the biggest story of the last decade, I say this every time I ride (including last night when I got blasted by a 30 minute cascade of rain on a technical ride): they've never been better. Tire size will be all over the place, and why not??? It's the easiest thing to vary and makes the biggest difference of any component (as it is the only part that actually touches the trail…when everything is going according to plan, of course!).

If I were going to bet against any size standard it would be 29+-which is too bad, as it's a great option: way better than 27+ for hard tails, way more fun that a fat bike on actual trails. But, only trek (of the big companies) makes a true 29+ bike (which I have ridden-Stache 9-and it's great!), and almost everyone else is on the 27+ bandwagon (including trek) or the beefed up standard 29er (which is also a good trend) so I think 29+ is the next wheel size to become 'small, semi-custom shop and odd ball bike makers only.'

 

[Bill Talbot]

I have been reading with interest all of the different bike threads with all of their different thread drift. It seems as if the long time standard 26" has been surpassed, first by the 29" and now the compromise 27.5". Fat tires, fatter tires, 3 x 7, 3 x 9, 1 x 11, and 1 x 12. For all you riders out there who are all more serious than me, what do you think will become the new "standard"? What do you think will be the best buys on "old" technology. Looking forward to informed opinions, or at least opinionated opinions .

They won't ever do a 'standard' because then they won't have something new to sell you....

 

[scott43]

All I can guarantee is that the price and complexity will continue to climb! Seems like I have to have 6 mountain bikes these days, one for uphill, one for downhill, one for enduro, one for freeride, one for tootling, a single speed... Marketing is wonderful..

 

[Erik Timmerman]

I think one thing we can expect to see id more electronics moving into our bikes. Both is shifting, and also in suspension. It could make our bikes perform better, and be cheaper than what we have now (but it probably won't be cheaper).

 

[Erik Timmerman]

26er is dead for serious bikes, though you'll see products for 26er for another decade, especially in the DH markets as used bikes dominate that market.

Trying to source 26" DH stuff now for my daughter's bike. It's already harder and more limited than you would expect.

 

[Ron]

I have been reading with interest all of the different bike threads with all of their different thread drift. It seems as if the long time standard 26" has been surpassed, first by the 29" and now the compromise 27.5". Fat tires, fatter tires, 3 x 7, 3 x 9, 1 x 11, and 1 x 12. For all you riders out there who are all more serious than me, what do you think will become the new "standard"? What do you think will be the best buys on "old" technology. Looking forward to informed opinions, or at least opinionated opinions .

Great post. IMHO, Where we're going is more like skis, where we use the best type, size of ski for the terrain and need. We now have XC (cross country), trail, enduro and DH bikes. basically, it comes down to where and what you are riding on. Like to climb, like to ride fast, do a lot of rowdy descents, lots of flowy? Each of these bikes offers a different class of performance much like skis.

27.5's are not a compromise, they fill a specific need and use; they climb and roll over stuff close to a 29 but corner and handle more like a 6'r. The 29'rs are evolving quickly and this years (an 2017's) represent a new class of 9'rs with slacker heads, shorter stems and modified Geo (yes, longer TT's, shorter CS's with longer wheel bases and lower BB"s although if you use the laws of physics, lower BB's aren't necessarily better) . The pro reviews of these new 9'rs are claiming much improved handling and descending ability but still supreme at climbing. 27.5's ( AKA 650b) are also getting better and represent many of the geo changes @Josh Matta was talking about 3 years ago. Again, longer TT's, shorter stems, shorter CS's and longer Wheelbases.

We've discussed gearing and although simple is better, I am not sold yet on the 1-bys gearing yet but many are. I still need my 24... But that's another issue

Fat tires are called "Plus" (tire width of 2.7-3.50 ) and I have not ridden any yet but I know my 26mm internal rims make my 2.35 tires down right plump and I love the result. Going to plus does add weight; I would guess 2 pounds if not more. For those who climb a lot, this is an issue but the gains in roll resistance and deflection may outweigh the weight (pun intended). Heres more info http://www.gearinstitute.com/gear-n...lus-size-mountain-bikes-are-changing-the-game

Wheels: wheels are evolving as well. Getting wider for greater stability, less deflection, stiffer and shedding weight. Carbon wheelsets are now within the budget of many and aluminum wheels are much improved too. Getting damn close to the performance of Carbon (but not all carbon used in frames or wheels is the same! )

Boost hubs: the current 142 rear and 100 on the front is going to 148 and 110. Why? Well, read this or you can just say they want to sell you something. I think the boost on 9'rs will have the biggest impact but the boost on a 27.5 will allow shorter CS's (although longer CS's climb better) http://enduro-mtb.com/en/tech-talk-whats-the-boost-standard-all-about/

So best value? Value is relative.

 

[crgildart]

They won't ever do a 'standard' because then they won't have something new to sell you....

You mean like how boot lug and binding width keeps changing with the evolution of ski widths? I think eventually it will as FIS starts allowing wider dimensions. But, for now the vendors don't want the huge switching costs in spite of the new business that latest greatest (?) thing will certainly bring..

 

[Philpug]

You mean like how boot lug and binding width keeps changing with the evolution of ski widths? I think eventually it will as FIS starts allowing wider dimensions. But, for now the vendors don't want the huge switching costs in spite of the new business that latest greatest (?) thing will certainly bring..

We do have three boot lugs now, DIN, WTR and Tech, so there is some evolution there.

 

[Monique]

IMHO, Where we're going is more like skis, where we use the best type, size of ski for the terrain and need.

Yeah, but you can buy a state of the art pair of skis, bindings included, for under $1k new - or maybe just over $1k depending on brand. You can buy a state of the art new mountain bike for what, $5k minimum? It's not even the same world. And I say this as someone who brings two bikes to Trestle (Winter Park) to ride the lift-serviced. But when I buy a pair of skis over my husband's grumbling, it's just grumbling. When I talk about my new bike - which I've been talking about for two years now - his eyes widen in alarm. It's not quite divorce-level, but it moves the needle.

 

[Monique]

BTW, I'm an Ellsworth (yes, I've heard it all, but they fit me like a glove) fangirl, and I just noticed the Dare is available again - full downhill bike. Pretty sure they got rid of it for several years. I noticed because I have the old 26er model, so I've kind of paid attention.

And I think I need to give up my dreams of the new Yeti as my next trail bike - something 5" and slacker geometry than my 4" Truth. I checked out one of these last year just after I busted my face, and the standover clearance on a small was non-existent. Salesguy told me not to worry about it, but I know what it's like to come to a sudden stop and slide forward onto the top tube. Yikes. I remember having issues with standover on a Yeti back when I got my Truth, so maybe it's just a Yeti thing, but I worry that the bigger wheel sizes imply taller top tubes.

 

[Ron]

Yeah, but you can buy a state of the art pair of skis, bindings included, for under $1k new - or maybe just over $1k depending on brand. You can buy a state of the art new mountain bike for what, $5k minimum? It's not even the same world. And I say this as someone who brings two bikes to Trestle (Winter Park) to ride the lift-serviced. But when I buy a pair of skis over my husband's grumbling, it's just grumbling. When I talk about my new bike - which I've been talking about for two years now - his eyes widen in alarm. It's not quite divorce-level, but it moves the needle.

I am really not sure of your point. I can buy a state of the art pair of running shoes for $130.00. Certainly, you aren't comparing the cost of a bike to a pair of skis?

 

[scott43]

I personally wonder how big the market is for bikes that are now commonly creeping over $3k. It seems to be healthy but I don't know the numbers anymore. I just get on and ride these days. But I don't know how long you can milk people with new bikes every year or two.

 

[Ron]

I personally wonder how big the market is for bikes that are now commonly creeping over $3k. It seems to be healthy but I don't know the numbers anymore. I just get on and ride these days. But I don't know how long you can milk people with new bikes every year or two.

good point. It seems up here that there is a good mix of bikes from all different price points. It does seem that I see more bikes in the $3Kish range on the trails now. there's no shortage to the $6-$8K bikes in the shops though. Someone is buying them for sure. Curious, do a lot of riders buy every year or 2? I would think that most keep bikes longer? I have mine now for the 3rd season and plan to keep it for 2 more. Any shop owners here to comment?? My next bike will be a frame and then i'll build it.

 

[Ron]

along the same lines, why dont more shops offer custom build programs? I would think they are more profitable?

 

[scott43]

along the same lines, why dont more shops offer custom build programs? I would think they are more profitable?

Most people won't pay. Budget is generally always an issue and buying built is a lot cheaper. Used to be mark-up was 40% on a whole bike and 100% on parts and gruppos. So there was a huge incentive to buy complete bikes. For the shop, yeah, building up is more profitable for sure. But..how many of those peeps can you count on?

Interestingly, if you want to do the work yourself, you can get good deals ordering online. But even still, how many people are doing that?

 

[Ron]

Most people won't pay. Budget is generally always an issue and buying built is a lot cheaper. Used to be mark-up was 40% on a whole bike and 100% on parts and gruppos. So there was a huge incentive to buy complete bikes. For the shop, yeah, building up is more profitable for sure. But..how many of those peeps can you count on?

Interestingly, if you want to do the work yourself, you can get good deals ordering online. But even still, how many people are doing that?

Thanks for the info. While I agree in general, a shop could offer package build-outs at competitive prices. So many lines sell bikes with components and parts that need to be replaced straight-away. A couple of lines like Santa Cruz, Ibis and Yeti are finally selling bikes spec'd in line with the price point. Without a doubt though, I would rather spend a little more up front and get a bike spec'd to what I like than buy something I dont like or has parts that I already have. For instance, I have an Enve bar I really like and will take to my next bike and will most likely have the I9 Pillars rebiuld with boost hubs.

 

[Bill Talbot]

good point. It seems up here that there is a good mix of bikes from all different price points. It does seem that I see more bikes in the $3Kish range on the trails now. there's no shortage to the $6-$8K bikes in the shops though. Someone is buying them for sure. Curious, do a lot of riders buy every year or 2? I would think that most keep bikes longer? I have mine now for the 3rd season and plan to keep it for 2 more. Any shop owners here to comment?? My next bike will be a frame and then i'll build it.

I'm a life long cyclist but I will NEVER pay even 2k for a bike. In that price point I can get a really nice 10 year old moto and really rip around the trails properly!

 

[crgildart]

I'm a life long cyclist but I will NEVER pay even 2k for a bike. In that price point I can get a really nice 10 year old moto and really rip around the trails properly!

I agree.. paying $3K for the privilege to peddle something seems counter intuitive. That's like paying as much or more for a season pass to hike to only terrain as you would for lift served terrain. I pay more money so I get to ride more and walk/climb/peddle less.. And, I get that a $3K bike will noticeably be less work than a $500 bike to get from point a to b, but it's still way more work than I'm willing to shell out that kind of money to buy..