
Just another person, who doesn't like this new standard. I think there are enough good arguments being forwarded, above, as to why Giant's decision is bothersome.
For me, as I was reading this article, I immediately thought: the clincher is that Giant is stating the increased weight is "a wash." In my opinion, the problem with the 1.5 standard was that it was squarely aimed at the freeriding market: 1.5 came about so that people, who were using dual-crowns, could now use a single-crown without the steering limitations of a dual-crown, and possibly there was some weight loss compared to using a dual-crown setup. What this means is that the 1.5 standard was always going to be beefy in execution. 1.5 headsets and stems are boat-anchors. 1.5 forks are monsters.
If Giant really wanted to do us all a favor, they would have done better by reviving the 1.5 standard for the all-mountain category, with weight-appropriate headsets and stems that aren't such boat-anchors. Then we would have seen tangible results in stiffness with a slight weight gain. After using a 20mm front axle, I'll never go back to a 9mm qr. After using 31.8mm handlebars and stem, I'll never go back to 25.4mm. Do the bigger axle and handlebar and stem weigh more? Certainly, and I can also tangibly feel the benefit. This new 1.25 from Giant? Something tells me that they don't want to release the actual measurements, because if they did that 30% might actually end up being less than the hypothetical 6mm....
Is it tangible? Is it real-world?
Apr 21, 2011 at 17:03