Canyon - the handlebar gimmicks company

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by EB

Aside from being the handlebar gimmick company, canyon is also the handlebar recall company, perhaps coincidentally also involving the Aeroad.

I wonder what kind of stress risers are possible with this device.

It does seem a rather clever solution to a problem that didn’t need to exist. The fully integrated trend put me off road bikes entirely. Yes, just my opinion, man.

The Canyon handlebar recall involved the section of the handlebar where the shift/brake levers clamp on (the tube walls were too thin), and was not related at all to the feature of swapping handlebar ends. The handlebar end swapping feature has been out for more than 3 years at this point, and there appear to be no particular issue with this feature.

As far as whether this fixes a problem, it very much does: The problem being, "Customers like the look of a clean one-piece handlebar/stem with no cable exposed, so how do we make a system like this that can be sold through our customer direct system, in order to increase our sales volume and profits." Whether the customer wants this, or whether the customer really needs this, are two totally different questions.

Originally Posted by prototoast

"fully integrated" never referred to a single piece bar/stem. It refers to the cable routing through the bars and stem. You can achieve this with either a one piece or multi-piece cockpit.

Like marciero says above, the meaning of "integrated" is relative and fluid, and can mean different things in different places and time. For example, when Shimano combined the shift and brake levers into one unit they called it "Shimano Total Integration" (STI), even though the shift cables looped out of the levers through open space.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Like marciero says above, the meaning of "integrated" is relative and fluid, and can mean different things in different places and time. For example, when Shimano combined the shift and brake levers into one unit they called it "Shimano Total Integration" (STI), even though the shift cables looped out of the levers through open space.

"Integrated" has been used in many contexts, but "fully integrated" is only used in reference to cable routing.

[marciero]

.dupe

[vertr]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Like marciero says above, the meaning of "integrated" is relative and fluid, and can mean different things in different places and time. For example, when Shimano combined the shift and brake levers into one unit they called it "Shimano Total Integration" (STI), even though the shift cables looped out of the levers through open space.

And when those came out the same types of characters as those in the thread came out to complain about how that integration was ruining road bikes! Time is a flat circle, or whatever.

[benb]

Originally Posted by vertr

And when those came out the same types of characters as those in the thread came out to complain about how that integration was ruining road bikes! Time is a flat circle, or whatever.

Every time something gets changed there are some aspects that are better and others that are worse. The marketing copy only talks about the improved aspects.

I find it semi-ironic they trained us all to crave more cogs on the cassette for tighter spacing, but then they convinced us all we needed massive range on the cassette so now a lot of us have no tighter spacing than we had back in the 9-speed era, but meanwhile now we have higher costs for the consumables and have to change out everything more frequently.

Those earlier STIs that had the shift cables floating out in the air in front put less strain on the cables and had nice light shift action and low friction because the cables didn't turn inside the shifter the same way. And you could do your shift cable maintenance quickly without unwrapping the bar.

[vertr]

Originally Posted by benb

Every time something gets changed there are some aspects that are better and others that are worse. The marketing copy only talks about the improved aspects.

I'm all for this type of attitude. I'm pointing out those who who are prone to label these things (and the company) as gimmicks without considering the tradeoffs in a good-faith manner.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by benb

I find it semi-ironic they trained us all to crave more cogs on the cassette for tighter spacing, but then they convinced us all we needed massive range on the cassette so now a lot of us have no tighter spacing than we had back in the 9-speed era, but meanwhile now we have higher costs for the consumables and have to change out everything more frequently.

Who is "they" and how were you trained? Sram offers their 12 speed cassettes in 10-26, 10-28, 10-30, 10-33, 10-36, 10-44, 10-50, and 10-52. I don't have sales data, but I would suspect that 10-26 sells the worst of all of them. People can choose whatever they want, and their revealed preference suggests most prefer more range to tighter spacing.

Also, Sram 12 speed drivetrains are significantly more durable than any 8/9/10 speed drivetrain, so even at the higher costs of cassettes, I suspect most riders are getting more miles per inflation-adjusted dollar than they would have 20+ years ago.

[Hilltopwalters]

Canyon, the Scourge of the LBS.

[Likes2ridefar]

Originally Posted by benb

Every time something gets changed there are some aspects that are better and others that are worse. The marketing copy only talks about the improved aspects.

I find it semi-ironic they trained us all to crave more cogs on the cassette for tighter spacing, but then they convinced us all we needed massive range on the cassette so now a lot of us have no tighter spacing than we had back in the 9-speed era, but meanwhile now we have higher costs for the consumables and have to change out everything more frequently.

Those earlier STIs that had the shift cables floating out in the air in front put less strain on the cables and had nice light shift action and low friction because the cables didn't turn inside the shifter the same way. And you could do your shift cable maintenance quickly without unwrapping the bar.

I use what works for me through experimentation, which might be 8, 9, 1 or 24 gear options, etc. No one has convinced or trained me. My modern 1x axs bike is an amazing machine and past similar bikes don’t hold a candle to its versatility, performance, and ease of operation. The costs while up front were significant have been less of a hit in the long run with close to zero time and maintenance required to keep the bike in optimal shape. The consumables are proving to last significantly longer than previous generation parts.

[EB]

In my experience with 1x 12 speed SRAM, the chains actually outlast the chainrings, which is novel.

[marciero]

Originally Posted by prototoast

"fully integrated" never referred to a single piece bar/stem. It refers to the cable routing through the bars and stem. You can achieve this with either a one piece or multi-piece cockpit.

The first one piece bars were "integrated".
But now, "fully integrated" simply means internally routed, and nothing more? That would be an odd usage of the word "fully", which would typically describe the integration. So now "fully integrated" might mean internally routed and non integrated, in the previous sense of the word.

You might be correct about usage- but I would submit that these few companies calling their multi piece internal routed setups fully integrated are just borrowing from previous terminology for marketing purposes, and that usage may continue to evolve.

[Baron Blubba]

Originally Posted by Alistair

As somebody who ALWAYS needs a shorter stem than spec'ed by the manufacturer, I totally agree. And was dismayed to see many big brands take the trend over to their mountain bikes (and not just XC race bikes, but general trail bikes as well). Spending $6000+ on a bike only to require a $400+ spend on a new bar/stem combo really stinks (when previously it would have been a $100 on a new stem).

And I hate selling bikes with one piece cockpits, especially fully integrated ones. It sucks to have to tell the customer who is spending $10k+ that they need to drop an additional thousand in order to get the stem and bar width they want.
However, I have recently had some inquiries involving custom Enve bike builds, and the prospective buyers are always interested in the integrated one piece Enve bar/stem...and I try to talk them out of it. The lack of possible adjustments to the roll of the bar makes it a no-go for me, aside from having to purchase a whole new bar and stem if the rider wants to alter one of the measurements.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by marciero

The first one piece bars were "integrated".
But now, "fully integrated" simply means internally routed, and nothing more? That would be an odd usage of the word "fully", which, as an adjective, would typically describe the integration. So now "fully integrated" might mean internally routed and non integrated, in the previous sense of the word.

You might be correct about usage- but I would submit that these few companies calling their multi piece internal routed setups fully integrated are just borrowing from previous terminology for marketing purposes, and that usage may continue to evolve.

It is possible to run fully integrated cable routing with an integrated bar/stem, but it's also possible to run fully integrated cable routing with a separate bar and stem.

There's also semi-integrated cable routing, which the cables run through the headset but outside the stem. This can also be run with an integrated bar/stem or a separate bar and stem.

"Integrated" on its own has many uses, but when paired with "fully" it implies the context of the integration is the cable routing.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by Baron Blubba

And I hate selling bikes with one piece cockpits, especially fully integrated ones. It sucks to have to tell the customer who is spending $10k+ that they need to drop an additional thousand in order to get the stem and bar width they want.

I remember buying my first new road bike many years ago, spending $1,000 (which was a lot for me at the time), and being similarly dejected that I needed to drop an additional $100 to get the stem and bar size that I wanted.

[Likes2ridefar]

Originally Posted by prototoast

I remember buying my first new road bike many years ago, spending $1,000 (which was a lot for me at the time), and being similarly dejected that I needed to drop an additional $100 to get the stem and bar size that I wanted.

It’s why I almost have never purchased a complete bike. 3 (soon 4) out of maybe 50.