In this article, we use so-called affiliate links. With every purchase through these links, we receive a commission from the merchant. All relevant referral links are marked with . Learn more.
The days when bikes were purely about getting around are long gone. Over the years, mountain bikes have evolved into high-tech sports equipment and more and more sophisticated technologies have been introduced to make bikes even more powerful. Hydraulic disc brakes. Sensitive suspension. Precise gear changes. Suspension adjustments from the handlebars and remotely lowerable telescopic stabilisers. But with every additional function, more components are added to the bike, which wear out, require maintenance and sometimes create a chaotic appearance. This is most evident on the handlebars: In addition to brake lines and shift cables, the cables for the suspension adjustment or dropper post often cross the rider's field of vision. Up to six cables run from the handlebars to the corresponding components, some of which are routed along the frame via cable ties. The purest tangle of cables. Manufacturers are increasingly focussing on system integration in order to bring order back to the tangle of components. Press-fit bottom brackets, cables routed in the frame, handlebar-stem units: Bikes are increasingly merging into form-fit units and look as if they have been cast from a single mould. This is attractive and makes for a tidy look.
The high-end forge Bold ultimately took the topic of system integration to a new level. In 2015, the Swiss company presented a fully in which the shock disappears completely into the frame. The use of Sram's electronic wireless shifting system makes the shift cables obsolete, with the remaining cables routed via the handlebar/stem unit through the headset directly into the frame. Other manufacturers are also harmonising the form and function of the frame, chassis and add-on parts so that they function as a unit. This is an exciting development that makes new technical solutions possible, but also tends to make mountain bikes more expensive. In most cases, the maintenance effort increases due to the complex technology. Amateur mechanics can be overwhelmed just by changing the Bowden cables or replacing a bearing. Without the help of a workshop or the purchase of expensive special tools, often nothing works. Spontaneous repairs? Often impossible.
Together with our experts from the BIKE test lab and the industry, we clarify the advantages of the major trend towards system integration and the disadvantages bikers have to contend with.
Expert opinions
System integration is on the rise and brings with it many advantages. However, the disadvantages in terms of user-friendliness cannot be dismissed out of hand. We asked experts and readers for their opinions in an online survey (750 readers took part in our online survey on system integration).
47,1 % - Almost half of the survey participants reject system integration. The focus is on screwdriver friendliness.
16,8 % - Not even 20 per cent of participants are in favour of merging bikes and components. The trend among manufacturers is moving in the same direction.
36,1 % are of two minds. System integration has advantages and disadvantages. The trick is to utilise the advantages and avoid the disadvantages.
Interview with Murray Washburn, Global Product Marketing Cannondale:
BIKE: Cannondale was a pioneer in terms of system integration. How did the idea of seeing the bike as a unit come about?
Murray Washburn: In the early nineties, the technology in mountain bikes was simple. But we were motivated to change that and rethink mountain bike technology.
So that's how the futuristic V4000 came about?
Indirectly, yes. We knew we had to think further than everyone else to take mountain biking to the next level. To realise this, we cooperated with Alex Pong from Magic Motorcycles. The first fruit of this
co-operation was the CODA-Magic crank. It was made of aluminium and hollow on the inside. This made it significantly lighter than conventional cranks and still stable. In combination with larger bearings and an aluminium axle instead of a conventional steel axle, this saved a lot of weight. The V4000 was our first step towards system integration.
The prototype is usually followed by the production bike. However, the V4000 was never available to buy. Why?
It was never intended for series production. Milling and joining the huge aluminium components took months.
Machine work used. For just one bike. One bike would probably have cost 70,000 or 80,000 dollars. The V4000 was only intended to show what was technically possible and where the mountain bike could go. The oversized bearings, for example, were more stable and lighter than the small bottom brackets with steel cranks. Today, cranks are only made of aluminium or even carbon.
The founder of Cannondale announced at the time that the V4000 would go into series production.
Joe Montgomery, the founder of Cannondale, was so enthusiastic about the V4000 that he included it in the catalogue in 1994. When editors approached him about it, he said that the bike would go into production, otherwise he would eat his hat. A year later, he did just that. He ate a small piece of his hat.
He was true to his word. The solid frame and the spokes look heavy. How much does the bike weigh?
Unfortunately I don't know, but both the rims and the frame are hollow. Like the aluminium cranks from Magic Motorcycle. This idea runs through the entire bike. It makes it light, but also extremely expensive.
