Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Fri Dec 09, 2016 11:10 am

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 211 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 22  Next

Coolwall Jan 2011 - Shimano MTB groupsets
Cool 62%  62%  [ 98 ]
Uncool 38%  38%  [ 61 ]
Total votes : 159
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:26 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 11:40 am
Posts: 1691
Location: Exeter
dbmtb wrote:
al wrote:
So a third of the members on here are trying to be cool?


Yes. And I count myself as one of the 33.3 per cent.

Running bikes with as little Shimano as possible, or even with no Shimano kit whatsoever, has kept me busy for years, ever since I got the Dave Yates in 93 in fact. Out of 7 MTBs, one has a complete M735 groupset and another has nearly complete M950. Three have no Shimano except for chain and cassette and one other component. The remaining two are running Shimano transmissions but nothing else. As for the road/Cross/track bikes - All Shimano-free, except for one of my cyclo-cross bikes and the POS sat on my home trainer.

But all it boils down to at the end of the day is the feeling that my bikes are more individual than most and not that they actually work better or ride better.

Which is geeky, because it is thinking too hard about kit rather than riding the s..t out of it. And therefore only cool to other geeks.


So having tried lots of kit - do you think Shimano MTB groupsets are (all) uncool?

Sounds like you have a lot of Shimano, there though if that's the case


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:29 pm 
Feature Bike
Feature Bike
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:13 pm
Posts: 1143
Location: York-ish UK
hydorah wrote:


Although how and why does Shimano suck? I've yet to read a sensible explanation of what's (universally) uncool about Shimano

.....

Certainly I do not think you can say 'it sucks' while freely buying and using it how could you explain that?

Those who are saying uncool should try explaining themselves! Lets have a debate!


I think your difficulty lies with your definition of cool. A thing can be "Good, useful, well thought-out, nicely marketed, sturdy, dependable, value for money" and not cool. Also, to say it ain't cool doesn't mean you hate it or 'it sucks'.

It helps to think about some things that are unequivocally cool: they have a certain je ne sais quoi, oh so very special characteristic that marks them out.

Robert Shaw is cool; Richard Dreyfuss is not. Roy Scheider is like Shimano. A bit cool in places, and yep he's the winner but cool? Nah.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:34 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 11:19 pm
Posts: 7006
Location: Odense, Denmark
hydorah wrote:
So having tried lots of kit - do you think Shimano MTB groupsets are (all) uncool?

Sounds like you have a lot of Shimano, there though if that's the case


Shimano marketing is uncool. Shimano standardisation is uncool. Shimano's dogmatic "let's redesign EVERYTHING because we might have done it wrong last time" approach is a PITA.

But if only for Hyperglide and Cassette hubs, I voted them cool.

Scroll back to my earlier post about other stuff they made that I think is sheer brilliance and therefore cool, and my other post about the contradiction that is "cool on retrobike".

About half the stuff voted "cool" so far, I voted "uncool" (wasn't allowed to vote "poncy") and got it equally "wrong" the other way round.


Last edited by dbmtb on Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:38 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 11:40 am
Posts: 1691
Location: Exeter
doctor-bond wrote:
hydorah wrote:


Although how and why does Shimano suck? I've yet to read a sensible explanation of what's (universally) uncool about Shimano

.....

Certainly I do not think you can say 'it sucks' while freely buying and using it how could you explain that?

Those who are saying uncool should try explaining themselves! Lets have a debate!


I think your difficulty lies with your definition of cool. A thing can be " and not cool. Also, to say it ain't cool doesn't mean you hate it or 'it sucks'.

It helps to think about some things that are unequivocally cool: they have a certain je ne sais quoi, oh so very special characteristic that marks them out.

Robert Shaw is cool; Richard Dreyfuss is not. Roy Scheider is like Shimano. A bit cool in places, and yep he's the winner but cool? Nah.


I have no idea about those people, but I'll discuss the other points!

"Good, useful, well thought-out, sturdy, dependable, value for money" Makes that object desirable in my opinion

"Nicely marketed" doesn't do it for me

If an object is desired (as opposed to simply needed) it is of course 'cool'

You forgot about "good looking" too. I mentioned that...

For me that aesthetic is essential, in the best shimano stuff, form tends to follow function

I particularly like that

So sorry for not being mega detailed in my use of words! Hopefully my motivation behind saying 'cool' is a little clearer

I just want to read the same detail from those with contrary opinion


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:39 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:47 pm
Posts: 1899
Location: Somerset
I get bored of Shimano bashing. Their stuff generally works and without them we wouldn't have had the innovation the whole industry experienced through the 90's. Competition pushes things forward - admittedly not all their groups are lust-worthy, but Deore DX was the stuff of dreams as a teenager and I'd still tather run XTR than Sram.

Cool.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:42 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 11:19 pm
Posts: 7006
Location: Odense, Denmark
BarneyRubble wrote:
I'd still tather run XTR than Sram.


I'd rather run X0 than M970. See- we're all different.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:03 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 11:40 am
Posts: 1691
Location: Exeter
dbmtb wrote:
hydorah wrote:
So having tried lots of kit - do you think Shimano MTB groupsets are (all) uncool?

Sounds like you have a lot of Shimano, there though if that's the case


Shimano marketing is uncool. Shimano standardisation is uncool. Shimano's dogmatic "let's redesign EVERYTHING because we might have done it wrong last time" approach is a PITA.

But if only for Hyperglide and Cassette hubs, I voted them cool.

Scroll back to my earlier post about other stuff they made that I think is sheer brilliance and therefore cool, and my other post about the contradiction that is "cool on retrobike".

About half the stuff voted "cool" so far, I voted "uncool" (wasn't allowed to vote "poncy") and got it equally "wrong" the other way round.


Shame, I don't think you've got it 'wrong' you voted cool yet you seem to be the only person who can form a coherent stance which is contra 'Shimano is cool'

Personally? standardisation is great, you don't need 73,000 specialist tools

You can interchange parts - and if you don't like shimano, standardisation really helps for obtaining parts from boutique makers that will fit

- Redeigns? Hmmm not so sure... hollow axles are worthy... They seem quite good at maintaining backward compatibility TBH

HG was compatible with UG. Hollow axle BBs can be fitted onto old square axle BB bikes if you are so minded...

Anyway changing the subject slightly:

By use of the word 'poncy'... I guess you maybe voted uncool for Campag on an MTB?

If you did that's not wrong either, different to me, but not wrong

I didn't take up the debate there 'cos people who said of Campag 'it didn't work as well as Shimano and cost more' had an argument with a sound technical basis!

Enough people praised the Campag's beauty and Italian-ness(?)

All I would have been able to say is if you used Campag and Shimano you could have an awesome drivetrain, not a very strong argument in that it included use of Shimano!

Of course I also saw the same semantic debate about what 'cool' is *grin* never mind, I guess we each have our own definition of 'cool' dependent on our own values

If we have an opinion we want to share, we should at least be able to justify it


Last edited by hydorah on Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:11 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:13 pm
Posts: 8184
Location: Tredavoe, Cornwall
I have never dedicated so much time to Shimano in my life. :roll:


I have never said Shimano Groupsets don't work and are bad value etc...
Infact there is nothing that comes close to Shimano's value and functionality.

I don't use Shimano because I want to be one of the cool kids. :shock:

No sorry! I'm 43 and don't give a flying s**t what people think of me. My views have formed over time and have served me well so far.

Do I think Shimano is cool?

I've given up caring!!

al. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:44 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:43 pm
Posts: 12370
Location: At the pinnacle of fuckwittery
Not cool


There's a lot of (financial) love for M900 at the moment, but for me personally, back on 1990 as a 14yr old, I didn't aspire to own Shimano (even tho my bike came equipped with such). And really now, I feel the same.

Don't get me wrong, it works better than a lot of other stuff, but cool it is not. It's like having a Ford Mondeo or VW Golf - good at what they do, but nothing that sets your bloody pants on fire, with desire....

To make it cool, surely you would like to part with many wonderful things, for money, or make some sacrifices to own it, and as far as Shimano the brand goes, this isn't really the case is it??

just a tuppence worth from someone who's not an Oracle.. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:45 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 11:19 pm
Posts: 7006
Location: Odense, Denmark
hydorah wrote:
By use of the word 'poncy'... I guess you maybe voted uncool for Campag on an MTB?


Yup. And Ringle,Klein,Day-glo and kooka.

You misunderstood what I meant about Shimano standardisation. (fair dos - I didn't make it very clear). I meant the opposite - as in Shimano making its own weird standard which then becomes obsolete and impossible to get parts for - and some of their chainring BCDs have been plain obtuse. And UG/HG. You can't put HG cogs on UG hubs. Rapid-rise. Assymtrical chains. Refusal to adapt ahead standard as someone else invented it. Shall I go on?

Al - there's more than a little self-ridicule in the "counting myself in as one of the 33.3%" statement. Sorry you didn't spot it.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 211 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 22  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group