Would site owners ever consider reform the categories?

Raging_Bulls

Sbike Fan
Moderator
Gold Trader
Feedback
View
We could always make a section for 1817 bikes (assuming the Draisine is the first bicycle), 1818 bikes, 1819 bikes, etc etc until we get to 2021.
Would that solve the problem, or should we work with months too?

:p
 

grey-beard

Orange 🍊 Fan
What about a tan walls only, or brake type? Bar width, upto 550, 551 to 600, 601 to 650 you get the idea. Personally I'm absolutely 680+
 

rwm1962

Orange 🍊 Fan
Feedback
View
It's easy for the retro Show & Shine at the GT Malverns to change the cut off date but if it was ever to happen on the forum imagine the work involved finding & moving existing threads of bikes post '97 up to the new cut-off. I'd imagine the die is pretty much cast. There's a 98> section & it's own BotM is having a trail relaunch so all good in my book.
 

ishaw

Gold Trader
GT Fan
Feedback
View
I think the problem is not with the pre/post 97 cut off, but what lies within them. Perhaps there does need to be. Further sub-categories within some areas to allow for ease of finding stuff, especially as the search isn't that great.

It's stuff I've done before professionally on websites, coming up with the hierarchy and taxonomy of pages so that they are relevant and make it easy and logical to find content.

The post 97 bucket will get ever bigger, and while I'm not a fan, no mobility scooter, I mean e-bike section.

Pinkbike changes their structure not that long ago and in my view, didn't think it through and it is harder to find things than it used to be. Example, for sale section used to have rigid fork section, now gone so posts selling these forks could be in any number of places.

Anyway, rambling over. I think with a tweak here and there the top level hierarchy down could be improved to cater for things better, as many forum members probably have both modern and retro. There is more discussion that ever in the post 97 section in my view.
 

Magpiegifts

Gold Trader
Kona Fan
Feedback
View
It's easy for the retro Show & Shine at the GT Malverns to change the cut off date but if it was ever to happen on the forum imagine the work involved finding & moving existing threads of bikes post '97 up to the new cut-off. I'd imagine the die is pretty much cast. There's a 98> section & it's own BotM is having a trail relaunch so all good in my book.
I must of missed that, a trial run of the 98+ BOTM. Is that correct?
 

Tsundere

Retro Guru
The point is that the bike is a solved technology, the best materials, geometries and systems for all the various applications have been figured out, but up until the late 90's there was still plenty of actual innovation and experimentation going on, lessons were still being learned, especially within the realm of the then quite new and exciting 'mountain biking'.

Once they started to perfect the various elements and as bike designs became more refined and specialized the industry's focus switched to making things more cheaply and, more noticeably, with shorter life spans. As recreational cycling reached its zenith and as the global economy opened up to China with its cheaper steel, aluminium and carbon and super low cost mass production something important was lost forever, the age of mad genii competing and cooperating with one another as they collectively pushed the envelope of what was possible was over, the multinational corporations now held sway. God tier brands were being swallowed up, reduced to the status of a sticker on an otherwise unremarkable cookie cutter bicycle built by slaves with the cheapest possible materials churned out by the thousands.

Many of the mtb components from the mid 1980's to the mid 1990's were significantly over built, as were the frames, that's why they are still going strong today, it's why people prize them, even mid range bikes from that era are revered, especially when compared with similarly priced equivalents of today with their perfectly executed built in obsolescence, now even frames are being reduced to the status of a consumable.

1998 was the beginning of the end when viewed in those terms, of course many great bikes came out since then and continue to be built today, and innovations occasionally crop up, just nowhere near on the same level, pre 1998 was a golden age in the same way the age of steam was a golden age for trains, just as the internal combustion engine will be similarly viewed for cars in the not too distant future.
 
Last edited:

brocklanders023

Retrobike Rider
Gold Trader
Feedback
View
You make a good point there mate, by 98 the big corps were hoovering up any decent brand and others were starting to struggle (GT, Saracen?). We used to get really attached to certain brands in a way people don't seem to these days. It does still happen, especially with some of the smaller steel HT brands but the mega-corps run alongside.

One of the reasons I've been buying Orange bikes since the early 90's is because I liked the fact the original owners were still in charge. Since they sold out a few years ago (albeit to a family member) I don't feel the same pull to the new stuff.
 

rwm1962

Orange 🍊 Fan
Feedback
View
I must of missed that, a trial run of the 98+ BOTM. Is that correct?
 

hookooekoo

Retro Guru
Before deciding whether to reform the categories, I think it's necessary to determine whether mountain biking is a mature sport.

If it's a mature sport, then we're unlikely to see any ground-breaking new innovations, and it becomes much easier to reform the existing categories.

If it's not a mature sport, then there's a risk that a new, ground-breaking innovation could upend the newly reformed categories, and create the need for even more categories.

So, what do people think? Is mountain biking now a mature sport? Are we likely to see significant new innovations in the next 10 years?

Maybe it would be helpful to create a list of significant innovations in the history of mountain biking, assign an approximate date to each innovation, then put them in chronological order. Once that is done, it should be clearer where the cut offs are. For example:

Cantilevers -> V-brakes -> Disc brakes

Fully rigid -> Hard tail -> Full suspension

100% human powered -> E-bike

Freewheel -> Freehub/Cassette

Triple chainring -> Dinner plate cassette

One dominant tyre size (26") -> Three tyre sizes

5 speed -> 6 speed -> 7 speed -> 8 speed -> 9+ speed

Non-indexed Thumb Shifter -> Indexed Thumb shifters -> Button/Trigger shifters

Steep frame angles - Slack frame angles

Can anyone be bothered to create a complete chronology of the above, and then rank them in terms of the importance of the change? I know a lot of the changes, but I certainly can't remember the dates when all of this started appearing in shops. The dates are all just a blur to me.
 
Top