It seems there is room in between.
As many tire, rim, frame, and fork manufacturers have seemed to have found out in the last year, there is much room in between. Between the existing chainstays and seatstays of existing 29er frames? Perhaps. What I see however, is the room in between existing tire sizes. Pacenti showed the world there was room in between mtb wheel sizes. Many balked. Surely those who did regret balking as they look back. Many of those likely did not want to miss out on the next wave which we are seeing now, the 27.5+ craze that is occurring. It is interesting to say the least. For those of us who were interested in the Krampus and the 29+ platform that was unveiled in 2012, we saw, as we did with the introduction of 29ers and fatbikes, that there was room outside of what we had been familiar with. It seems that the industry intends to show that there is still plenty of room in between what we have been familiar with. Although I agree to some extent, I feel that it is not necessarily giving us much different, or even any appreciably better experiences. By delving into the areas in between what cyclists have been familiar with, it merely blurs the lines between those bicycle types/platforms/intended applications and removes the distinction that was previously assigned to the different bicycle types we have grown to love. It is very possible that the reason why most bicycle frame and part manufacturers make decisions to delve into the spaces in between is because there is little risk and it can be marketed as more versatile. It could be compared to making a bunch of different variations on the spork. People are familiar with spoons and they are familar with forks. While both are better at performing the specific, intended application they were designed for, it’s easy to pretend that you can now do away with your spoon and fork and just have many different varieties of sporks going forward. Many of the different types of bicycles that have come about recently are seemingly spork-like. Yes, in the backcountry, if you can only bring one utensil, you can get by with carrying just a spork. It will not be as useful at tasks where someone would normally prefer either a fork or a spoon, but it will get you by for a short time. I love many of these spork-like bikes, because I love the backcountry or just long rides where I desire to roll over many different types of terrain and bring a bike that isn’t going to be too specifically applicable for any one of them, but will allow me to be somewhat comfortable on all of them. The “Jack of all trades, master of none” dilemma. It’s good to have these bikes, but here is my issue with them: The aim at the in between market provides a false sense of ingenuity and stifles true research and development in areas we have not yet explored for cycling. I applaud Surly and others that have released new platforms outside of the familiar which other manufacturers balk at. “Yes, others may try to utilize that platform 3 to 5 years later, or design something in between what was available previously and your new platform, but that is similar innovation to designing another type of spork instead of creatively designing a new utensil that will change the way we look at what we have always done.”
4 Comments