Most despised feature on modern bikes

[damp wool]

imo, it's not the actual features of modern bikes which are worthy of annoyance but the marketing, which makes people think that they have to have the latest thing to ride along a gravel path, making cycling a status symbol for those who can afford the latest gear. I'm as much of a bike snob as the next mtber but i probably had the most fun on a bike costing less than £200 before i knew what a supposedly crap bike it was.

 

[GrahamJohnWallace]

:roll:

Ho hum... yet another modern bashing thread.

The question posed is the "most despised feature on modern bikes"?

If asked for the most despised feature on old bikes? A long and equally negative list of responses could be given.

I ride both modern and 20 year old mountain bikes. Which are best? This depends on the trail conditions and the tasks the machines are set.

The performance gains of modern machines can also have downsides.
For instance, full-suspension machines can't easily be hopped over large logs, they can nose dive under heavy braking and tend to be bad at performing hill-starts on steep inclines.

Riding a variety of both old and new designs helps the rider appreciate the strengths of each design approach. I personally ride old bikes (Clelands), not because they are retro, but because there are some activities and trail condittions they are very well suited for.

Meanwhile, I fully appreciate the rich diversity of other designs, both old, and new.

 

[heathy]

The colour (black......urm, black........bit of black.......)

6" travel

Disc brakes

Riser bars

Short stems

9 speed

And where is your modern avalanch then :roll:

 

[Agency_Scum]

The abandonment of the craft of a good steel double diamond. There's nothing so elegant as a slender steel frame, nothing so sublime as a frame that's heavier than a modern aluminium one but " rides " lighter. We nearly lost that altogether when alu became all the rage.

 

[hondamatic]

imo, it's not the actual features of modern bikes which are worthy of annoyance but the marketing, which makes people think that they have to have the latest thing to ride along a gravel path, making cycling a status symbol for those who can afford the latest gear. I'm as much of a bike snob as the next mtber but i probably had the most fun on a bike costing less than £200 before i knew what a supposedly crap bike it was.

This was prevalent in the mid-'90s too, and likely before. People clamored for Race Face, Kooka, Ti bikes, goofy Spinergy wheels, Judy SL's vs Judy XC's...

Anyways, I love modern bikes too, but I'll go with... grips that are too fat. I like soft squishy grips like Oury's, but the lock-on version is HUGE! Same with a few other brands of lock-on grips. You don't need to double the handlebar's diameter.

Close second: freeride or dh bikes with 26" front wheels and 24" rear wheels. Looks ridiculous and questionable benefit!

 

[MAXTHEROTTI]

The colour (black......urm, black........bit of black.......)

6" travel

Disc brakes

Riser bars

Short stems

9 speed

And where is your modern avalanch then :roll:

the bars were flat and the forks were only 5 inch travel lolol
rob