2004 Kona Cindercone - Drivetrain/Groupset upgrade ?

Hi guys, as the thread title really.

The original is now a little tired after 12 years

What groupsets would people recommend nowadays ? I'm a little out of the loop as of late, would like Shimano really (though not set in stone), looking to replace the works really bb cass/rear+front mech shifters crankset.

Just wanting something fairly high quality and obviously that would fit an 04 kona

thanks in advance

Are newer groupsets compatible with older frames ? Say Sram x9 for instance ?

Apologies for the thick questions but all my other builds I have kept inkeeping with the era of the frame.

Disc brakes have come on a lot, the Shimano Deore ones are brilliant and stunning value - and will be way better than your cable discs.

Frankly most of what's changed in the drivetrain is marketing! A couple of extra cogs (yawn) thinner chains (less life more wear). There is little that's truly new, groupsets aren't microporcessors or chips, despite what Shimano may say. Modern outboard bottom brackets seem generally to last no longer than good old square taper, and generally much less...so that's progress too. :facepalm:

Buy a new set of good quality gear cables and outers, give it all a clean and you'd be amazed.

If you still have cash burning a hole in your pocket, upgrade the wheels to lighter and consider swapping the fork.

Re:

Actually, outboard bottom brackets have some real advantages over square taper. They are much stiffer and transfer more power than square taper thanks to the larger, hollow axle. It's not all about how long you can make crusty old gear last.
I run my mtbs single chainring, so modern narrow-wide chainrings help there, as do 11-36 cassettes and clutch style rear derailleurs.

Transfer more power?
Right. You think that there is significant torque wind-up of a square taper axle that's 10mm diameter? It would only happen on the left crank anyway. The only power loss would be hysteresis, as most of it would be springiness and returned at the end of the pedal stroke.

On my square taper UN72 / Middleburn RS7 set I cannot feel ANY difference between stamping left or right cranks. Can you?

It's marketing puff, designed to crease obsolescence...just like Octalink, which turned out to be a total disaster.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that a larger hollow shaft should be better from an engineering point of view, along with bigger bearings. However the industry seems to have made repeated hashes of it...BB30 appears to be flawed (look how many used BB30 chainsets are for sale on ebay), and the rash of non-standard solutions seems to take things no further. Siting the bearings outside the BB shell where muck can splash seems bonkers, and the pathetic life backs it up. Several pals' road bikes are eating bearings every 1500 miles with outboard systems which seem extremely tetchy on shell facing and component alignment.

Madmax1993":2utkisix said:

It's not all about how long you can make crusty old gear last.

Click to expand...

On this forum it is!

As evidence that it's complete marketing puff it's interesting to see that the UK Olympic track team still use square taper BBs...despite designing everything else to accumulate marginal gains and riders capable of lifting 500kg with their legs.

Re:

I'm sorry, but a fatter, hollow axle will flex and twist less than a significantly thinner square taper will. I agree that bb30 is craps, but hollowtech II is the way forward, using threaded cups with a hollow axle. Personally, working on them day in, day out in a professional capacity, hollowtech II is the easiest set up to work on, and generally the most reliable too.

As I said, a larger diameter tube is the right idea and indeed will bend less. If for no other reason there should be a weight saving to be had by a large thin-walled shaft. It's just that they have made such a hash of the actual execution.

We get told that this stiffness is a significant issue, however there is pretty scant evidence that the bending is actually a problem. Bending in itself does not give power loss as the energy is largely returned (elastic deformation) although there is some hysteresis loss. I did the stress calculation and it looks like a square taper axle twists by 0.2 degrees if you put all your weight on one pedal.

Re:

I disagree with the sweeping generalisation that every attempt has been a failure. I've used hollowtech II and the race face evolve equivalent, which is HTII compatible, and they have both performed superbly, with no compromise on reliability. Bb30 and PF30 do sacrifice reliability, and I don't like press fit cups in a BB. At the end of the day it's a personal preference, but your initial point was that nothing new is worth upgrading too, and my opinion differs. I was simply saying that I have got on well with a 1x setup with HTII cranks, a narrow wide chainring and an 11-36 cassette. It gives a nice decluttered look at the chainset, saves a little weight and gives me enough choice of gears for my riding style. I think the OP might also benefit if he's looking to overhaul the bike. I do also think that upgrading from the factory wheels, some new rubber and a new fork would be a huge improvement. I love my retro bikes (otherwise why would I be on the forum) but rejecting all modernity out if hand isn't the way to go.

hamster":241r1p0y said:

Disc brakes have come on a lot, the Shimano Deore ones are brilliant and stunning value - and will be way better than your cable discs.

If you still have cash burning a hole in your pocket, upgrade the wheels to lighter and consider swapping the fork.

Click to expand...

Should have probably mentioned I've already upgraded the brakes to Shimano Deore M615 and swapped the forks to Project 2.

Is a hollowtech II bb gonna fit my old Kona ?