Bike companies get a lot of crap. Mostly, they get it from their own customers, who complain about things like increasingly expensive products and ever-changing component standards. With regard to the latter, the go-to example is generally the bottom bracket, which in recent years went from a relatively simple threaded affair to a creaky bulbous press-fit nightmare.
I鈥檓 guilty of giving the bike industry crap myself. As something of聽a traditionalist who prefers weird stuff like steel frames and mountain bikes without suspension, every time another bike company discontinues a rim-brake model or eliminates a mechanical transmission I die a little bit inside. I also tend to recoil from the marketing approach of bigger brands, whose media embargoes, splashy product launches, and extraordinary performance claims鈥30 percent stiffer! Sixty percent more aero! Seventy five percent more bike-tastic!鈥攁re often the antithesis of what I find compelling about cycling.
And now the bike industry is giving itself crap, too. Recently some major players including Simon Mottram of Rapha, Mike Sinyard of Specialized, and Peter Woods of Dorel signed onto a 鈥.鈥 In it, they pledged to 鈥渃reate products that will last longer,鈥 and to 鈥渨ork with customers on maintenance and lifetime extension,鈥 among other things. This was ironic, it would seem, when for so long we鈥檝e been told that when it comes to performance, the envelope must always be pushed (Specialized鈥檚 motto is 鈥淚nnovate Or Die鈥) and that adding one additional cog is reason enough to upgrade your drivetrain, if not your entire bike.
As someone who prizes longevity over innovation in my cycling equipment,聽I should have felt vindicated by this pledge. Here it was, my moment! Instead I felt鈥ad for them. Sure, they may compel you to covet their carbon wonderbikes, but in the realm of corporate greed and international villainy, bike companies don鈥檛 even register. For example, according to ,鈥 they generate about as much greenhouse gas as 65,000 passenger cars鈥搘hich sounds like a lot, until you consider that Americans alone buy over 40,000 cars per day, according to Statista. In other words, if we stopped buying cars for two days we鈥檇 more than offset Trek鈥檚 annual emissions. (Okay, fine, if we stopped buying cars for two days we鈥檇 just make up for it on day three, but don鈥檛 overthink it.) More importantly, these companies make bikes鈥攐r in the case of companies like Rapha, stuff to wear while you鈥檙e riding bikes. They鈥檙e not making awful stuff that kills us like opioids or chemical weapons or microwaveable gluten-free burritos. They鈥檙e making bikes and sundries, arguably the most noble products in the world!
Also, my own preference for classical equipment notwithstanding, they happen to be doing a really good job. Whatever your cycling needs, there鈥檚 a company out there that鈥檚 ready to meet them. Not too long ago, your choices from the big bike companies mostly boiled down to, 鈥渞oad or mountain?” If you wanted something else, you got it custom, or maybe through some distributor that got weird parts from Europe. Now, these same companies offer complete bikes that range from purpose-built race machines to capable commuters to cargo bikes. Mongoose, most commonly associated with department stores, will even sell you . And sure, it鈥檚 easy, if not irresistible, to ridicule and decry the idea of 鈥攗ntil you consider the same company will happily sell you with many of the same features at only a sixth of the price.
But what about the pledge to 鈥渃reate products that will last longer?鈥 The drive to innovate has certainly resulted in plenty of orphaned components and broken frames over the years, though overall the bike industry has done a fantastic job in that regard. There aren鈥檛 too many cars from 1990 on the road, but it鈥檚 not even remotely noteworthy to see people pedaling around on 30-year-old bicycles. Even in the age of carbon fiber,聽it鈥檚 not unreasonable to think this will continue to be the case. Moreover, the profound simplicity and durability of even the most 鈥渁dvanced鈥 bicycles鈥攁nd the passion so many of us have for them鈥攎eans there are lots of smaller companies and distributors out there making the parts we need to keep our older bikes on the road. I鈥檝e been riding lately and I can鈥檛 think of a part on it I couldn鈥檛 replace relatively easily and cheaply. The same will likely hold true for plenty of the bicycles being produced today.
Of course, what really takes many bikes and components out of service isn鈥檛 obsolescence or failure鈥搃t鈥檚 boredom. You鈥檒l likely start feeling New Bike Itch long before whatever you鈥檙e riding today becomes unusable. So should the bike industry commit to no longer coming up with cool new stuff we all want? Certainly not, because if it operated on that basis we鈥檇 all be riding penny-farthings. Quick release axles, derailleur drivetrains, aluminum rims鈥ll of these things started out as cutting-edge performance innovations but ended up making bikes better for just about everybody. So it鈥檚 up to us cyclists to not buy new stuff and to ride our current equipment into the ground, though this solution ignores two important truths: 1) It鈥檚 human nature to want stuff; 2) Many of us are riding our stuff into the ground anyway. Plus, people dispensing with bikes with plenty of life left is arguably a good thing, because it creates more inventory for those of us who are savvy enough to look to the used market.
So keep up the great work, bike industry. I shouldn鈥檛 have to tell you this, but you鈥檙e not destroying the planet. You may not be perfect, but you鈥檙e definitely not the problem, either. I and millions of others owe a lifetime of riding to you, oversized bottom brackets and all.