Is RBT a luddite haven?

Tuschinski said:

Skimming through all those posts ever so often I get the feeling we
have a very vocal share of luddites. A few examples:

1. Steel is unsurpassed
2. Campagnolo record is unsurpassed
3. Quality control is worse than ever
4. Stupid light
5. Sensible wheels

All culminating in: It used to be better.

Well... it's a myth^^ It used to be a LOT worse and innovation is a
good thing!

IMO, pre ca. 1985, it used to be alot worse. Then, there was a period
of genuine innovation (1985-199?) and things got alot better. Then, the
level of true innovation plateaued and things just got silly (from the
perspective of the recreational/hobbyist cyclist). And that, IMO, is
where we are today: the era of silliness/of change for the sake of
change. And, sadly, the era of cheaply made, short-lived and
non-serviceable, disposable products

IMO, YMMV, etc., etc., etc.

Quoted message said:

Of course... stupid light is wrong and handmade wheels are for many
reasons the best choice. But this is sometimes transposed into a
general luddite feeling (see the rant against Velonews/cannondale).

I have seen stupid innovation, fads that went away. But I also remember
rusting frames, panic-brakes, flat tires, non-indexed shifting. In
general bikes, especially the lower end, have improved tremendously.

I also remeber the time of Campagnolo record. Fantastic stuff for sure,
but also conservative to the extreme.

When Shimano introduced Index shifting and SLR braking pro-teams balked
at it. The raleigh-panasonic (The pro team of Peter Post) head mechanic
called index-shifting something for girls, something a real racer would
be ashamed of. That attitude was widespread and was apparent in
Campagnolo. For years they struggled with catching up with Shimano (the
introduction of Campa Slant Parralelogram derailers helped a lot!) .

Nowadays Shimano and Campa have a comparable functionality. No pro
would want to go without brifters, no pro would want to go back to
panic-brakes. The innovation hasn't been for sissies after all^^

So the next time a seemingly stupid idea is launched, remember that
these ideas are wich make life better. Sure, most of them might be
silly and it is good that we are critical about them. But I for one am
grateful that companies are at least trying^^

"Tuschinski" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Skimming through all those posts ever so often I get the feeling we
have a very vocal share of luddites. A few examples:

1. Steel is unsurpassed
2. Campagnolo record is unsurpassed
3. Quality control is worse than ever
4. Stupid light
5. Sensible wheels

All culminating in: It used to be better.

Well... it's a myth^^ It used to be a LOT worse and innovation is a
good thing!

Of course... stupid light is wrong and handmade wheels are for many
reasons the best choice. But this is sometimes transposed into a
general luddite feeling (see the rant against Velonews/cannondale).

I have seen stupid innovation, fads that went away. But I also remember
rusting frames, panic-brakes, flat tires, non-indexed shifting. In
general bikes, especially the lower end, have improved tremendously.

I also remeber the time of Campagnolo record. Fantastic stuff for sure,
but also conservative to the extreme.

When Shimano introduced Index shifting and SLR braking pro-teams balked
at it. The raleigh-panasonic (The pro team of Peter Post) head mechanic
called index-shifting something for girls, something a real racer would
be ashamed of. That attitude was widespread and was apparent in
Campagnolo. For years they struggled with catching up with Shimano (the
introduction of Campa Slant Parralelogram derailers helped a lot!) .

Nowadays Shimano and Campa have a comparable functionality. No pro
would want to go without brifters, no pro would want to go back to
panic-brakes. The innovation hasn't been for sissies after all^^

So the next time a seemingly stupid idea is launched, remember that
these ideas are wich make life better. Sure, most of them might be
silly and it is good that we are critical about them. But I for one am
grateful that companies are at least trying^^

Good call.

I've been into cycling for 20 years. The improvement in quality in those
years is incredible. Compare a £300 UK (or $350 US) mountain bike with
something twice that price in 1986. The new bike is probably lighter, has a
greater number of more reliable, better-shifting gears - remember having to
ease-off completely to change down on a hill? It has front suspension that
works. The brakes can be operated easily with 1 or 2 fingers. The frame is
stiff and won't corrode if you look at it harshly. The wheels stay round
and the back axle isn't likely to snap. The BB is sealed so you won't be
stripping and repacking it every 6 months (You do know how to do that, don't
you?).

I think there are luddites lurking round here, and also a few people who
begrudge people having shinier toys than perhaps they warrant. I am not
going to win any races, but I love bikes. I do a fair mileage and I do TTs.
I just ENJOY using the new kit. Anything that gets people riding bikes is
a good thing.

Innovation is good. If it doesn't work, you don't have to buy it. When it
does, make the most of it.

Skippy
E&OE

Tuschinski said:

Skimming through all those posts ever so often I get the feeling we
have a very vocal share of luddites. A few examples:

1. Steel is unsurpassed
2. Campagnolo record is unsurpassed
3. Quality control is worse than ever
4. Stupid light
5. Sensible wheels

All culminating in: It used to be better.

Well... it's a myth^^ It used to be a LOT worse and innovation is a
good thing!

Of course... stupid light is wrong and handmade wheels are for many
reasons the best choice. But this is sometimes transposed into a
general luddite feeling (see the rant against Velonews/cannondale).

I have seen stupid innovation, fads that went away. But I also remember
rusting frames, panic-brakes, flat tires, non-indexed shifting. In
general bikes, especially the lower end, have improved tremendously.

I also remeber the time of Campagnolo record. Fantastic stuff for sure,
but also conservative to the extreme.

When Shimano introduced Index shifting and SLR braking pro-teams balked
at it. The raleigh-panasonic (The pro team of Peter Post) head mechanic
called index-shifting something for girls, something a real racer would
be ashamed of. That attitude was widespread and was apparent in
Campagnolo. For years they struggled with catching up with Shimano (the
introduction of Campa Slant Parralelogram derailers helped a lot!) .

Nowadays Shimano and Campa have a comparable functionality. No pro
would want to go without brifters, no pro would want to go back to
panic-brakes. The innovation hasn't been for sissies after all^^

So the next time a seemingly stupid idea is launched, remember that
these ideas are wich make life better. Sure, most of them might be
silly and it is good that we are critical about them. But I for one am
grateful that companies are at least trying^^

Okie-dokie-mention an 'innovation' that you have seen in the last
decade, since 1996, that made cycling better-next, since 1990...

Quoted message said:

Okie-dokie-mention an 'innovation' that you have seen in the last
decade, since 1996, that made cycling better-next, since 1990...

Actually that aint half as hard as you think, as long as you accept
some evolution:

1. Low price good quality Alu frames
2. Centaur, Veloce from Campa
3. General low price "commuter" bikes
4. Tire quality
5. Disc Brakes
6. Bike computers (especially HRM and Power measurement)
7. Home trainers (a lot quieter, lot of progresss there)

I can also feel difference between Dura Ace 8speed and Chorus 04 10
speed. Better shifting and better braking. And then I wont even mention
Chorus before 98 wich was quite frankly PANTS in the shifting
departements.

I fully admit a lot is evolution, but bikes have undeniably improved
and are still improving.

Now you give me something wich has worsened besides the current
boutique wheels fad.

Quoted message said:

IMO, pre ca. 1985, it used to be alot worse. Then, there was a period
of genuine innovation (1985-199?) and things got alot better. Then, the
level of true innovation plateaued and things just got silly (from the
perspective of the recreational/hobbyist cyclist). And that, IMO, is
where we are today: the era of silliness/of change for the sake of
change. And, sadly, the era of cheaply made, short-lived and
non-serviceable, disposable products

IMO, YMMV, etc., etc., etc.

Besides boutique wheels and everyones pet peeve Shimano brifters (and
most people never break those) I dont see much my LBS cant fix (he can
even fix boutique wheels, but it will cost ya)

But especially in the lower price range I still see progress. For 600
Euro I can get a good bike and it sure is better than those 10 years
ago.

I completely forget the trickle down of suspension and it's constant
improvement.

Tuschinski said:

Skimming through all those posts ever so often I get the feeling we
have a very vocal share of luddites. A few examples:

1. Steel is unsurpassed

For those who are not racing or pretending to, in most cases it is.

Quoted message said:

2. Campagnolo record is unsurpassed
3. Quality control is worse than ever
4. Stupid light
5. Sensible wheels

All culminating in: It used to be better.

We are still looking for a decent replacement for the MA-2. There is no
doubt that box sections give a greater strength to weight ratio, and
that Mavic is producing some pretty lousy product these days, as are
many of the boutique wheel makers.

Quoted message said:

Well... it's a myth^^ It used to be a LOT worse and innovation is a
good thing!

Good innovation is a good thing. Bad innovation is a bad thing.

Quoted message said:

When Shimano introduced Index shifting and SLR braking pro-teams balked
at it. The raleigh-panasonic (The pro team of Peter Post) head mechanic
called index-shifting something for girls, something a real racer would
be ashamed of. That attitude was widespread and was apparent in
Campagnolo. Fo r years they struggled with catching up with Shimano (the
introduction of Campa Slant Parralelogram derailers helped a lot!) .

Nowadays Shimano and Campa have a comparable functionality. No pro
would want to go without brifters, no pro would want to go back to
panic-brakes. The innovation hasn't been for sissies after all^^

That no pro would want to go without them doesn't mean they aren't for
sissies. Yes, they give a real advantage in racing. Yes, they require
no skill, so much so that a sissy could use them. Not that the old kind
required any real skill for normal riding, but yes, for the racer,
skill did make a difference. Now it doesn't. That means it really is
for sissies after all.

To keep things simple, I'll append my reply from the other thread here
below. We can keep everything in this one from now on.

Quoted message said:

From the other thread:

#########################################################

Tuschinski said:

Quoted message said:

I guess no one does quality control anymore.
It is all to easy to blame it on the customer when it comes to

warranties.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It seems it is a [censored] shoot when it comes to finding good parts

anymore too.

Quoted message said:

I say that's a RBT myth. Bikes and parts are better than before,
especially at the lower end.

Hmm. Better for what? And before when?

Quoted message said:

1. I remember bikes wich rusted away under people.

It takes a lot of work to rust away a steel bicycle- I used one rain

and snow year round for four years with only a once a year tune up
in
the shop and oil on the chain, and it never rusted away out from
under
me. On the other hand, people believe that aluminum doesn't corrode,

because it rusts grey/black, not brown. Many small manufacturers and

their customers who believed this, and so made and bought unpainted
aluminum frames, soon learned better. And now we also have
carbon-fiber
reinforced resin frames, which, as you have described, do not slowly

rust away under people, but instead sometimes just break apart
without
warning under people! Yes indeed, what an improvement!

Quoted message said:

2. Brakes wich did absolutely nothing (Weinmann butter brakes🙂

I'm sorry but you didn't have yours adjusted properly. I used these
for
years and years, would still be using them now if I had room for the

hanger on my headset stack, and they worked great. They were Rene
Herse's favourites, and for good reason. More important is the pad
material, and Weinmann had the best, much like today's Kool Stop
Salmon, while on the other hand Shimano's "modern" pads have been
notoriously lousy for years.

Quoted message said:

3. I haven't had a flat tire in ages and all people I speak about

that

Quoted message said:

agree: tires have improved immensely.

They may all agree but, depending on what date they refer to, they
are
all wrong. Instead, road conditions have improved immensely. The big

improvement in durability (not so much puncture resistance) was
high-carbon rubber, and that came in about a quarter of a century
ago.
Yes, it's true, if you are referring to the Schwalbe Marathon Plus,
Greentyres, or the Vittoria Randonneur, these definitely are more
puncture resistant than anything preceeding them, but I don't think
you
or any of your friends are riding them. Kevlar belts are an
energy-sucking joke.

Quoted message said:

4. Shifters you needed to tighten with a wrench because they went

loose

Quoted message said:

(auto shifting baby)

There has been no significant improvement in shifting since the
Suntour
V. How could there have been, since everything is still using that
same
basic design? And nobody ever tightened their downtube shifters with
a
wrench. I am using Suntour Superbe DT shifters, much like Campagnolo

Record, and used many others before them, all with no problems.

Quoted message said:

5. Remember racers crashing into obstacles as they looked down at

their

Quoted message said:

cogs to see if it was al right? Indexing changed all that.

You've got to be kidding. Well, surely indexing makes life easier
for
the racer, but for the ordinary rider who just wants something light

and reliable, they are just a toy. A heavy, expensive, ugly-looking,

less aerodynamic, and less reliable toy.

Quoted message said:

6. Cables wich were stretchy and unsmooth?

Cables cannot stretch. I believe this is in the FAQ. High-quality
teflon coated stainless steel cables have been available since the
early 1970s. How far back are you looking?
@

Tuschinski wrote:
<snip logic and sensibility>

Quoted message said:

ooh! ooh! burn the heretic!!! can i be first to burn the heretic???

Tuschinski said:

Now you give me something wich has worsened besides the current
boutique wheels fad.

That fad is rather a major item. But some others things that have
gotten worse:

1. The noise level. My ancient Maillard freewheel is completely silent
and I like it that way. Riders with modern equipment can be heard
buzzing half a league away. I can't imagine how noisy and irritating it
must be to actually ride those things. Jobst has described here how
this excess noise results from naive engineering.

2. Those click-shifters you love so much result in rather a large
number of misadjusted shifts that can't be corrected. It's amazing how
many people there are riding these high-priced technological marvels
with chains skipping and rubbing and no way to fix them while riding.
Ooops, time to head back to the shop. Maybe you keep yours in perfect
adjustment but I can assure you that the masses on the bike paths do
not.

3. My friend bought one of those modern commuter bikes you so love. She
has a suspension fork for which she has absolutely no need, but which
adds weight and decreases reliability and makes pedalling less
efficient. She can't attach fenders either. The thing, despite its
aluminum frame and lack of fenders, weighs over 30 lbs, because it is a
faux mountain bike, and that is typical for the genre.

4. Tell me about those modern pseudo-racing bicycles which can barely
clear a 23mm tire and no fenders, with carbon chainstays that don't
remain attached to the frame (see the May issue of Cycling Plus,
describing the rash of failures with these in the pro peleton last
year), that can't have the bars within four inches of the saddle
height, and require duck shoes to operate.

5. Those brakes you so love have to remain adjusted within a millimetre
or two of the rim. My old style long reach Dia-Compe sidepulls, like
the Weinman's before them, can easily track a wavy rim, don't rub when
riding out of the saddle, and are much more tolerant of pad wear.

6. Don't you love today's handlebars, half the thickness they used to
be, or worse, made of carbon? So much easier to commit suicide!

There are plenty more, but this should be enough. Don't even talk to me
about tires.
ä

Tuschinski said:

Quoted message said:

IMO, pre ca. 1985, it used to be alot worse. Then, there was a period
of genuine innovation (1985-199?) and things got alot better. Then, the
level of true innovation plateaued and things just got silly (from the
perspective of the recreational/hobbyist cyclist). And that, IMO, is
where we are today: the era of silliness/of change for the sake of
change. And, sadly, the era of cheaply made, short-lived and
non-serviceable, disposable products

IMO, YMMV, etc., etc., etc.

Besides boutique wheels and everyones pet peeve Shimano brifters (and
most people never break those) I dont see much my LBS cant fix (he can
even fix boutique wheels, but it will cost ya)

But especially in the lower price range I still see progress. For 600
Euro I can get a good bike and it sure is better than those 10 years
ago.

Staying in the realm of road bikes, in what important ways is today's
"600 Euro bike" better than a similarly priced bike of 10 years ago?

Quoted message said:

Tuschinski said:

Skimming through all those posts ever so often I get the feeling we
have a very vocal share of luddites. A few examples:

1. Steel is unsurpassed
2. Campagnolo record is unsurpassed
3. Quality control is worse than ever
4. Stupid light
5. Sensible wheels

All culminating in: It used to be better.

Well... it's a myth^^ It used to be a LOT worse and innovation is a
good thing!

IMO, pre ca. 1985, it used to be alot worse. Then, there was a period
of genuine innovation (1985-199?) and things got alot better. Then, the
level of true innovation plateaued and things just got silly (from the
perspective of the recreational/hobbyist cyclist).

I completely agree. For a recreational roadie, the late 80s were
wonderful. Lots of sensible mass market bikes with standard reach
brakes, relaxed frame angles, and super reliable downtube shifting that
could be either indexed or friction. I don't think we've improved any
upon that particular style of do-everything bike. Those bikes shifted
quietly, rode smoothly and weighed an average of 24 pounds or so--and
we liked it dammit. :-P

The improvements are found in the racing and mtb end of things. Disc
brakes and reliable 16 pound road bikes are pretty amazing things. Even
commuters have benefitted from the modern era of internal Nexus and
Sram hubs.

For my type of sporty solo riding, I'd be just as happy with slot
cleats and friction shifting today as I was in the 80s. I'd concede a
hyperglide cluster and chain, as we can't take it too far. :-)

41 wrote:

(snipped "sissy" references, etc.)

Quoted message said:

Well, surely indexing makes life easier for the racer, but for the ordinary rider who just wants >something light and reliable, they are just a toy. A heavy, expensive, ugly-looking,
less aerodynamic, and less reliable toy.

Reality check. Fail.

Luddite litmus test... acid attack, sour taste. Pass. --D-y

41 said:

Tuschinski said:

Now you give me something wich has worsened besides the current
boutique wheels fad.

That fad is rather a major item. But some others things that have
gotten worse:

1. The noise level. My ancient Maillard freewheel is completely silent
and I like it that way. Riders with modern equipment can be heard
buzzing half a league away. I can't imagine how noisy and irritating it
must be to actually ride those things. Jobst has described here how
this excess noise results from naive engineering.

You refer to Boutique? Campa and Shimano aren't that loud imho. Now I
do not have a Maillard wheel lying around anymore, but I do race for 25
years now and I can't say i'm bothered, nor that I hear my Campa hubs.
But I concede: ymmv and this is obviously in the eye of the beholder.

Quoted message said:

2. Those click-shifters you love so much result in rather a large
number of misadjusted shifts that can't be corrected. It's amazing how
many people there are riding these high-priced technological marvels
with chains skipping and rubbing and no way to fix them while riding.
Ooops, time to head back to the shop. Maybe you keep yours in perfect
adjustment but I can assure you that the masses on the bike paths do
not.

I'm sorry that you live somewhere where the LBS can't adjust them as it
should be. The trouble with indexing is a lot less than friction.
Again: how many pros ran into obstacles because they check the cogs
between their legs? How many low cost friction shifter went loose
during use, so you had auto shifting?

Indexing isn't a bad thing... I don't think you will find people who
deny that^^

Quoted message said:

3. My friend bought one of those modern commuter bikes you so love. She
has a suspension fork for which she has absolutely no need, but which
adds weight and decreases reliability and makes pedalling less
efficient. She can't attach fenders either. The thing, despite its
aluminum frame and lack of fenders, weighs over 30 lbs, because it is a
faux mountain bike, and that is typical for the genre.

Sorry she doesn't have a good LBS who sells good bikes. If you dont go
over a lot of cobble or other semi rough terrain suspension is
unneccesary... but a sensible LBS would have told her. The bike might
be fine, but it is used for the wrong purpose.

Quoted message said:

4. Tell me about those modern pseudo-racing bicycles which can barely
clear a 23mm tire and no fenders, with carbon chainstays that don't
remain attached to the frame (see the May issue of Cycling Plus,
describing the rash of failures with these in the pro peleton last
year), that can't have the bars within four inches of the saddle
height, and require duck shoes to operate.

Ahhh yes, the infamous bad glued rear-stays. Really bad for sure, but I
rank them with a slew of bad steel frames if you dont mind. Not every
steel frame was build with all the love and care. I wrecked more Steel
frames than Alu's and I had rather wellknown brands (Rih, Concorde
Gazelle, Batavus: Columbus Aelle, Reynolds 501 and 531)

And if the bike doesnt fit then you shouldn't buy it. if you dont want
to use duck shoes get other pedals. Toe-clips werent that much fun
either: you needed to loosen them with one hand and if upside down they
good snag the ground.

Quoted message said:

5. Those brakes you so love have to remain adjusted within a millimetre
or two of the rim. My old style long reach Dia-Compe sidepulls, like
the Weinman's before them, can easily track a wavy rim, don't rub when
riding out of the saddle, and are much more tolerant of pad wear.

There I was thinking that I could open a shimano brake with a small
handle near the calipher, opening it up milimeter by milimeter. And
sorry for liking a real brake instead of Weinmanns. If you laud
Weinmanns I seriously wonder if you ever REALLY used them in a speedy
descent or god forbid a course. Denying that current sidepulls are
better is imho trolling.

Quoted message said:

6. Don't you love today's handlebars, half the thickness they used to
be, or worse, made of carbon? So much easier to commit suicide!

Todays handlebars have gone thicker: oversized. And breaking bars is
hardly limited to the last years. I agree that CF ain't my material for
choice, but I remember some Cinelli Alu bars wich had a scaringly
tendency to give way.

Quoted message said:

There are plenty more, but this should be enough. Don't even talk to me
about tires.

YMMV. I never have a flat on my road bike and that includes
rain+cobblestones.

Your post has some formatting problems 🙁

1. Remember the time road racers standing next to the road, waving
their broken rims? I remember that time and quite frankly, I havent
seen a broken rim in quite awhile... not in my peloton and not on the
pro peloton(yes, I saw a lot of boutique wheels fail at the spokes,
different issue). So allthough I am sure the the Ma2 is missed by many,
current rims aren't the kamikaze devcies you make them out to be.

2. Ok, you use friction shifting, I'll be a sissy and prefer indexing
and brifters. Do you think more people prefer the "check between your
legs" routine over the "CLICK" shifting? I'm afraid 99% of the people
is a sissy.

3. Frame rust isn't that important, but paniers, screws etc. did rust
(especially on cheaper bikes, hence my point...).

4.Ahh yes, Suntour superbe pro was good stuff. It was high end pro
material (used by the pro's of Superconfex) But lower end stuff sucked
big time. Same goes for record... but that isn't the issue, now is it?

Slant paralelogram=suntour (as you probably know). It actually enabled
indexing (Campa tried to index old fashioned derailers and struggled)

5. See #2 I rather be an idiot who likes brifters.

6. High Quality teflon cables are around for a long time. But nowadays
they are common.

I'm sure you checked and found out that cables don't stretch (no
sarcasm intended, I haven't looked into it, so concede by default), but
I feel a BIG difference in "stretchiness" between cables.

Generally you tend to look at high end stuff: Superbe Pro, Record etc
and then say: It worked great! I never denied that, but I look at the
low and mid range. And there it wasn;t pretty at all.

Quoted message said:

Staying in the realm of road bikes, in what important ways is today's
"600 Euro bike" better than a similarly priced bike of 10 years ago?

I can only give a few examples:

Racing bike: I saw Cannondale caad4 frames (Cipolini used one) coupled
with Sora for 6-700 Euros. there are other examples.
Mountain Bike: The current crop of suspension forks is a lot better.
(Yes, 6-700 range)
The trickle down of Deore
I recently see a lot of Hub-Dynamos on commuterbikes
Led lights

Evolution, not revolution🙂

41 said:

some others things that have
gotten worse:

1. The noise level. My ancient Maillard freewheel is completely silent
and I like it that way.

Maybe, but the Maillard freewheels I used were terrible. Lame
shifting. When I switched to twisted cogs (hyperglide I think) it was
a revelation. And don't get me started on the broken axles with
top-line Campagnolo hubs. Freehubs are so much better.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Okie-dokie-mention an 'innovation' that you have seen in the last
decade, since 1996, that made cycling better-next, since 1990...

Rohloff Speedhub. Admittedly not for everyone, but
it's a real advance for those of us who like what it offers.

Tom Ace

Tuschinski said:

Quoted message said:

Staying in the realm of road bikes, in what important ways is today's
"600 Euro bike" better than a similarly priced bike of 10 years ago?

I can only give a few examples:

Racing bike: I saw Cannondale caad4 frames (Cipolini used one) coupled
with Sora for 6-700 Euros. there are other examples.

Is anyone going to go racing using Sora?? OTOH, the steep angles, short
chainstays and tight clearances on that CAAD4 frame are hardly a
benefit to the non-racer, eh?

Quoted message said:

Mountain Bike: The current crop of suspension forks is a lot better.
(Yes, 6-700 range)

I was asking about road bikes.

Quoted message said:

The trickle down of Deore

I have a full Deore LX bike from 1991. MSRP was $530 (I paid less,
new).

Quoted message said:

I recently see a lot of Hub-Dynamos on commuterbikes
Led lights

Agreed on both of those.

Quoted message said:

Evolution, not revolution🙂

Yes, but "evolution" seems to have de-volved into marketing driven
silliness/nonsense.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But especially in the lower price range I still see progress. For 600
Euro I can get a good bike and it sure is better than those 10 years
ago.

Staying in the realm of road bikes, in what important ways is today's
"600 Euro bike" better than a similarly priced bike of 10 years ago?

with frames it's consistency. mid-range lugged steel frames the frames
could vary a lot in a batch. and often they weren't built to spec.
chainline, brake reach, angles etc. could be off.

also there was the tendency to make racing frames "twitchy",
("criterium geometry"😉, with steep angles. some designers had weird
ideas about how to improve their frames (eg. short chainstays = better
climbing, short wheelbase = better cornering). a lot of the bikes
handled terribly.

now most mass-produced bikes lean towards stability -- and are more
like what euro racers had been racing on all along.

if you look at the r.b.tech archives shimmying and speed wobbles were a
big deal, now hardly anyone talks about that.