This article is all over the place and is ultimately the author attempting to validate his opinion, he is just saying "old is better because I like old better than new." Nothing wrong with an old frame but a great deal of the hardware has undeniably improved and much of that new hardware will not mount on an old frame. The real problem with the modern bike market is people following fads and counting grams but they are also the sort of people who keep bike co-ops in operation so I can not really call it a problem, if they want to strip their brand new bike of their 105 or Tiagra groupset and donate it to the co-op than I am all for that, Tiagra and 105 are great and take far better to abuse and neglect than the fancier options. The FSA Mega-Exo crank is another one that people love to donate brand new, they complain about the the BB being expensive and there being no alternatives for its odd spindle size but the only external BBs which I have found that hold up as well are twice the price. The offerings from Wheels Mfg are the only ones which I can call comparable, twice the price up front but the bearings are replaceable and cheap so costs balance out after a decade, but they do not take as well to salty winter streets as the FSA does.
back
3 comments
I outfitted a 1982 steel bike frame with 2016 brand new components. No issues then other than bending the rear to take a 130mm axle rather than 126mm. Are 68mm english-threaded bottom brackets and cranks becoming unobtainium in new groups?
68mm is still common but there are plenty of old frames which used oddball BBs. 68mm will probably be around for a good while yet, there is a push for something else, only time will tell if something sticks but I don't see 68mm going away anytime soon. The old brakes are starting to thin out and the selection of side pulls and the like are not what they once were, which could become an issue but we still have some good options there. Derailers are generally not a huge deal even if you have a frame that wants something weird.
Then we have the various headsets, some of those can be troublesome.
Single piece cranks and BBs are just about dead, as are cottered. We still have some options there but the quality is getting terrible and I suspect the only reason they are still made is because the machines still work but once they die that will be the end.
They’re somewhat less common indeed. A lot of manufacturers now like some proprietary variation of various pressfit standards.
You can still find bsa frames. Surly, as an example.
I don't know if I agree with the author on all their points, but your description of the article doesn't match what I read.
The author compares the estimated CO2 emissions in the manufacturing of several types of frames to consider their environmental impact, and points out other changes that can make it harder to repair bikes (such as by using custom components which the manufacturer could stop making replacement parts for with no notice).
We read the same thing. Problem he does far more that just the C02 emissions, he goes on and on throwing out false information that supports his old is good view.
> This article is all over the place…
…and a mishmash of studies.
Shared bikes get bike lanes computed into their carbon cost but private bikes don’t?
That’s just the most egregious example I saw but there are plenty more. Scratch that, using public transportation is more sustainable than riding a bicycle for the exact same trip, how does that math work out?
How many carbon units does it take to pedal around a heavier bike 30,000 kms?
And I’m a pretty big pro-bicycle transportation person.