The six BIGGEST irritants of MODERN bicycle design

Which areas of bike design could do with... a little bit of tidying up Michelle Arthurs-Brennan shares her thoughts…

- Michelle Arthurs-Brennan

Trying to prevent technological advancement in any industry is a bit like swimming against a tide of schooling salmon. The UCI sticks its oar in sometimes, but good engineering always finds a way around.

If we didn’t allow technology to advance, we’d all be riding around on the boneshaker bikes of 1869 – and we’d probably think the rattling experience was as good as it gets.

However, some advancements take time to reach refinement. Case in point, the first SRM power meter launched in the 1980s required a Yellow Pages-sized instruction manual to just get going; early power meter pedals worked best if you sang a lullaby at the ideal pitch while tightening to optimum torque. But now? Anyone can fit a pair of power pedals to any bike and have accurate readings in seconds – albeit still at significant outlay.

Other advancements go full circle: Cannondale’s HeadShok system of 1992 featured on early mountain bikes; it was phased out when ‘real’ suspension arrived – but that elastomer/mechanical damper combo offering 50mm of travel looks really similar to some of the solutions we’re now seeing on gravel bikes. No prizes for guessing what’s next – lightweight air-sprung forks, anyone?

En route to refinement, some advancements pose greater headaches for mechanics, engineers, bike testers like myself, and consumers. So which ‘progressive’ technologies do we all want to get in the sea with (with the salmon), and which do we want to hurry up and improve ASAP?

1 Proprietary seatposts