Ahead of his time: Stephen Hodge shows off some new/old tech, Roubaix 95. Photo: Sirotti
Ok all you roadies, listen up. You’re not gonna like what I’m about to tell you, but it’s the truth. And sometimes, the truth hurts. You ready?
Road cycling owes a lot to mountain biking.
“You what?!” I hear you screaming at the monitor in disgust. “Road cycling has been around for more than a hundred years, and the mountain bike for about thirty!” Well, nice theory, but bikes were ridden on dirt long before their tyres ever saw a sealed surface. But this isn’t about the chicken or the egg, it’s about the way technology crosses over from one discipline to another, and how similar, yet different aspects of the same sport inter-breed, cross pollinate and spawn innovations that better the machines we ride and the kit we wear. And I hate to be the one to break it to you, but that sleek road machine you’re riding now probably wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for our dirtbag cousins.
It all took off in the early 90s; the mountain bike was undergoing its own metamorphosis, rapidly dropping the ‘klunker’ heritage and becoming lighter, stiffer and racier. The geometry was changing from slack and raked-out head angles to more sharply handling, longer and lower front ends. A little like road bikes, granted. The first big change up front though was the oversized headset and steerer tube combo, dubbed the Avenger by Tioga, the first company to bring it to market. The steerer increased from 1 inch diameter to 1 1/8″, giving the front of the bike more precise steering and a more solid feel over rough terrain. Soon, Dia Compe came up with the AHeadset, doing away with the threaded steerer and headset in favour of a threadless system held together by a stem clamped over the smooth steerer tube. There’s not a road (or mountain) bike to be seen with a threaded front end these days.
Having a bigger steerer attached to rigid fork blades made some difference to the mountain bike, but even more was needed up front to tame the terrain and reduce the pounding that riders’ arms would take on proper off-road trails. While some weird and wonderful contraptions briefly held court (like the Girvin Flexstem, as terrifying as it was), the obvious solution was to borrow technology from the motocross crowd, and the first suspension fork for bicycles was born. The Rock Shox RS1 was as rare as hen’s teeth, but when one was spotted in the wild the geek-out factor went through the roof, and any rider lucky enough to have one bolted to the front of their bike would be accosted for twenty minutes and bombarded with questions about “how it works”. In the space of a year, there were three or four different iterations of suspension forks on the market, most of them completely unaffordable to the Regular Joes that rode in the dirt.
Looking back at the suspension tech of those days now, the word ‘archaic’ springs (pardon the pun) to mind. The modern mountain bike is an engineering marvel, and I’m as amped on new technology now as I was in the early 90s. The sport has continued to push the boundaries and is constantly evolving. And road cycling has benefitted greatly. We’ve all seen the Rock Shox Ruby forks that appeared on the bikes of Paris-Roubaix for a few glorious years, even taking a couple of wins in the Queen of The Classics. The MTB forks of the day were mostly heavy, elastomer sprung and undamped, giving the effect of a pogo stick on the front of the bike. To try and put one on the front of a road bike was preposterous at best, a blasphemous disaster at worst. Then there were the failed attempts at rear suspension which disappeared as quickly as they came. But riders and teams were willing to try anything to tame the brutal cobbles of the Hell of the North, and if you didn’t have a Ruby fork then you were behind the 8-ball straight away. The fact that the bike would bounce around under pedalling load on the smooth roads was outweighed by the comfort and control on the cobbles.
But roadies being roadies, the extra weight and inefficiency soon rendered the Ruby detrimental to the performance of the bikes… but that comfort was welcome. How to get some shock absorption and keep the weight low? Carbon fibre forks were conceived, giving a smooth ride up front on the stiff yet light aluminium frames that were taking over the peloton at the time (another innovation gleaned from the mountain bike). If it worked up front, then why not at the rear too? Carbon seatstays were bonded onto the back ends of just about every bike that came out in the mid 90s. If it worked for the fork and stays, then why not the whole frame? The carbon bikes so ubiquitous today were spawned from the need for a smoother ride, without the weight and complexity of suspension. Thanks, mountain biking.
Now, check out Hodgey’s helmet in the lead photo. Look kinda familiar? Well, helmets pretty much came from mountain biking, and the early examples looked just like that; round, few vents, not pointy at the back. And what do we have now? Round, sparsely vented, not-too-pointy ‘aero’ road helmets, that we are all crying about being ugly and unnecessary. But how cool does Hodgey look? Badass! It’s only a matter of time before we’re all wearing them, and possibly with visors. (In the 1999 P-R, several riders wore helmets with visors, including 3rd placegetter Tom Steels and Frank Vandenbroucke.) Okay, maybe I’ve gone too far there, but I saw a guy riding in an Air Attack the other day, and by Merckx did I think he Looked Pro! These helmets will be the norm sooner rather than later; after all, don’t we take our cues from the Pros?
There have been numerous advances that have come from mountain biking and are now seen as standard on road bikes; removable face plates on stems, wider profile rims, lightweight saddles, tapered head tubes, integrated headsets, external cup/press-fit bottom brackets, oversize bar diameters (and let’s not forget road disc brakes. You can’t fight it!). Black socks. Tall socks. If it wasn’t for the mountain bike and the innovators working in that industry, we might still be riding lugged steel frames with downtube shifters. Which would be ok with me, as long as I can still have my off-road wonderbike.
[dmalbum path=”/velominati.com/content/Photo Galleries/brettok@velominati.com/mtb tech/”/]
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
@G'rilla, @brett
I've got threaded external cups on my Veloforma CCX, thank Merckx. I do have BB30 on my Veloforma Strada iR, but that bike rarely sees the rain - also thank Merckx.
I don't know if its the BB or the crankset, but there was a noticeable different in stiffness and ease of pedaling when I went from Campa BB30 conversion kit to the Rotor 3D+ with BB30. They wear out quickly, but bearing are easily replaced.
No way would I ever run one on a bike that ever sees dirt or even a lot of rain.
@RVester, @brett
@RVester has a point - LeMond was riding carbon TVT's in 1986 and even some in 1985. Kelly was on carbon-kevlar Vituseseses around the same time. They were moving to that material because carbon has no intrinsic characteristic other than that the fibers are strong in torsion but weak on compression. What it gives the builder in addition to being lightweight is the opportunity to tune the tubes 100% to their desired ride.
That might not be true for the mass-market cookie cutter frames, but that is a consequence of the ubiquitous carbon frame - not the cause of it. It infiltrated from the top levels down in the road market.
@frank
Never did I think I'd see the connection between disc brakes, Ecstasy, and manlove. Wow!
Two pads a season. Hmm, I'm on alloy wheels but I haven't replaced road pads in a long time, almost hoping some would wear out so I could put new pads on. I guess it's because I have a few road bikes, but I get a lot of life out of both stock Campa pads and Kool Stops.
@antihero
Why the fuck did I get pulled into that? I've got no dog in that fight. I'm a tubular man myself.
Great article @Bretto. One thing missing, or perhaps it's the subject for another article, is how MTB can help with your bike handling skillz on the road.
My first MTB was a Cannonwhale with the "Pepperoni" fork. Stiff as railroad track. What it taught me though was that speed is your friend. Skip over the rocks, don't hit them. Faster is safer. Learn how to relax while getting bounced around. I gave that bike to my parents, and anytime I visit them, I still take it out for a spin on the single track that's all over central Oregon.
While this photo is not my old Cannondale, it's almost exactly the same.
@Bob
For a second I thought you were talking about Softride. I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet in the 'come and gone' of road suspension concepts.
@scaler911 Good point. Always attributed my long lost psychlo-cross riding on trails to finding small openings in the pack and hopping over bikes and bodies on the course -- road racing.
@antihero
But you're OK with raining chainsets?
As you all probably know disc brakes offer some positives like better modulation, all weather performance, zero wear and overheating on carbon rims and some negatives like weight, aero. Weight may come down of course in the future. I ride disk brakes on the road and have to say I like it.
@scaler911 A few of our mtb friends ride single-speed hardtails all the time, and one of them runs rigid carbon forks on his. Personally, my aging joints and beat-up spine like my full-squish ride. And disc brakes! They're like...sex...
@frank Your vehemence is amusing.
Seriously, I don't need, or even want, discs on a road bike. They are a lot of trouble for braking power I've never needed on the road. But who knows what the future holds? Societal collapse and wide-spread cannibalism? Cold fusion and nano-disc brakes?
@PeakInTwoYears
They were shitty Scottish roads. They're not much better now from what I can see on return visits. I think the rationale for 19mm was narrower = better aerodynamics. Forget, speed, comfort or ease of getting on/off. Narrow was best! I think I rode them at 120 psi . . . and tubulars at 140! We've come long way, baby . . . .