Can skateboard equipment get any better than it is now?

[shpongle]

i feel like we have hit a plateau as far as gear and design. there really isnt going to be much difference from now to 3-5 years or more. if there is something groundbreaking in skateboard design and equipment i wonder what would it be?

[smoothbrain]

I wouldn't have agreed with this post before there was always something missing to me but since the release of Big Mamas I don't see skateboarding ever progressing past this point.

It's all downhill from here.

[american.worm]

i dont think so. even the technologies within skating go through phases, a lot of skateboarding is just rotating fads. cup sole, vulc, small wheels/ big wheels, skinny boards, shaped boards. what a skateboard is has essentially been established, most of what changes throughout the years is inconsequential tweaks for style and expression. thank god those alloy decks never caught on.

[theloniousmonk]

Honestly, anyone who has skated mag lights will tell you how well they grind. In my utopia there are more options for magnesium trucks

[Peepeeboy69]

shoe with perfect boardfeel but never hurt foot in

deck that skates like a normal wood deck except is always crispy and never razortail

[IpathCats]

I don't think people are looking for any more functionality at this point. Just consistency and durability. If they can make things that preform the same as what we currently have, while feeling the same and lasting longer, im sure that would be welcomed. I'm no engineer though, no idea if that can be done right now.

[TwisT]

I;m sure it can, I just think skaters are uninterested for the most part.

[Loki700]

Any major change won't really be marketable.  If it doesn't skate close to what people have right now, it's not going to sell well.

That's why trucks largely haven't changed much since Bennett's in 1973; they're pretty much just wider.  Decks haven't dramatically either, with concave and a double kick being the only real changes, and they didn't interfere with what you could already do really.  Bearings and wheels don't really have a need to develop.

The only real changes I can see are maybe a change in deck material, again as long as it skates close enough to wood, and maybe a change in truck material, but that's pretty tapped out too.

Shoes will keep coming up with gimmicks but short of some new material I don't see those really changing much outside of that either.

Skateboards just aren't that complex of a mechanism, and people really don't want them to change much.  Just look at bikes.  I would argue that they're more complex, and that market has been pretty stagnant since the 90's, with mainly changes in materials being the "innovation".

I actually think the last real "innovation" in skating was, and will be for some time, if not forever, non-abrasive grip.  I haven't tried it so I don't know if it's any good though.  Could just be a gimmick, and I'm not willing to spend the money to find out.

[Frank and Fred]

I wish there was a way of re-purposing/ recycling old wheels.  (I know Satori tried at one point...)

[fakie varial flip]

Seems like there's lots of technological progress to be made regarding shoes, clothes, boards, trucks, etc.

I think the main problem is that not much of that progress will happen while skateboarding exists as, effectively, a marketing ploy to sell gear that fits fashion trends and is non-functional. Forgive me if I sound like I've been reading the liner notes of Crass albums too much, but it feels like the hypercapitalist focus on 'fashion', 'cool', and general brand loyalty/willingly buying into cool guy marketing tactics will prevent any real technological advancement. I'm sure it's not that hard to make shoes, for instance, fit a real human foot rather than being an elaborate foot binding ritual - but here we are, and I'm stuck skating vans old skools, a shoe from the 70s (80s?) with slight alterations, since it's the most functional shoe I can find (even though I think crocketts or copa nationales look cooler).

[Mulldrifter]

urethane, mostly bushings and pivot cups can be upgraded but it doesnt bring a lot of money so it's not worth the research for developpers but there is a lot to be done and improved actually in this area in my mind.

[fakie varial flip]

Skateboards just aren't that complex of a mechanism, and people really don't want them to change much.  Just look at bikes.  I would argue that they're more complex, and that market has been pretty stagnant since the 90's, with mainly changes in materials being the "innovation".

I think this is a good point, especially since most of the technological difference between the new trend, gravel bikes, and 90s stiff mtb (what's the term for no shocks? not hardtail I don't think) is pretty much just geometry and frame material. Though I suppose most of this difference is supported by the real technological upgrade, which was the disc brake, which allowed different geometries and tire sizes, gearing, etc

[artskool]

Skate hardgoods simplicity is one of the best things about it. You can pretty much get the best skateboard in the world for $140. If and when some magic innovation comes up that gives a huge performance advantage people will call it cheating anyway.

[Fhk]

I think it's all been downhill since 95 

[fakie varial flip]

I think it's all been downhill since 95 

Wow, hard agree on that one

[mj23]

Things COULD be improved in theory, but in practice there is not a ton of demand from the consumers. Since most skaters view the products as essentially disposable there's a real limit to how much people want to spend on a "better" product.

But surfing and snowboarding make for interesting comparisons here. In surfing, there are a lot of new technologies getting released, but they have only mild popularity with "core" surf consumers for the time being. Most surfers are pretty content with traditional poly construction, or with epoxy/eps if they're feeling frisky. It's possible that one of the newer technologies will take off eventually, but as of now those new materials (like Lib Tech's boards for example) are always compared back to the 'gold standard' of traditional PU or Epoxy.

Surfing and skating have something in common: our ideas about 'good' performance have co-evolved with the equipment. A board that "feels good" is one that does the maneuvers we have learned to appreciate in a context that has been historically determined (in part) by the available equipment. This created a self-reinforcing cycle. Change can happen but it will either happen slowly, or it will require a radical new set of maneuvers to necessitate/popularize the new gear. For example, 70s pool skating co-evolved with urethan wheels, and 90s technical skating co-evolved with smaller wheels and more concave.

I wouldn't be surprised if people skating mega ramps eventually start to have gear that is more well-suited to the extreme conditions of that kind of skating... heck, maybe they already do. I know that downhill skateboarding, where people go like 50+ mph, has its own ecosystem of higher-end gear, where there is a bit more emphasis put on the progression of equipment. But for the average kid rolling around a skatepark, does it matter? Maybe not as much.

Snowboarding is on the opposite end of the spectrum. I don't think anyone gets too hung up on the "classic" way of building a snowboard. New designs and materials are brought to the market every year. Now most snowboarders don't rush out to buy the hottest model every season, but they have over time adopted the new camber profiles and composite constructions as more or less the norm. Maybe part of it is a way for manufacturers to justify the high cost of the product. Maybe part of it is the fact that for most consumers, a board is going to last more than one season. But I upgraded from an early-2000s full camber freestyle board to a modern hybrid camber GNU with serrated edges to grip in ice and it was like, wow, damn, this board is literally just easier to ride for an average rider like myself.

Anyway, the TL;DR is "yes things COULD get better but they probably won't"

[dr.prestige]

Recently I've been thinking about how when you're tightening your trucks you're changing the geometry of the truck, because as you compress the bushings towards the base plate you're in turn pushing the hangar towards the base plate as well. It would be cool if we could figure out a truck where its geometry stays the same regardless of how tight you want it, although I imagine it may be difficult to do that without adding more parts to a truck and thus make it heavier, more complicated and less cool.

[Sacha]

I feel like twin nose/tail boards might become the norm. It’s hard for me to imagine why a beginner shouldn’t skate a symmetrical deck, except for a sort of circular argument that you’ll have more choice of decks later if you learn on a regular popsicle.

[mj23]

I feel like twin nose/tail boards might become the norm. It’s hard for me to imagine why a beginner shouldn’t skate a symmetrical deck, except for a sort of circular argument that you’ll have more choice of decks later if you learn on a regular popsicle.

i actually think more beginners should start on directional boards with a well-defined nose and tail. it would encourage them to actually choose a stance, and learn to turn. too many kids step on a popsicle and instantly start trying to fling ridiculous flip tricks, and they all look like shit. and then they spend years tick-tacking around on super tight trucks because its easier to fling flip tricks when your weight is distributed all unevenly if the trucks don't move. the fundamentals of skateboarding begin with actually riding the skateboard, not with popping and flipping.

just my two cents

[Loki700]

Recently I've been thinking about how when you're tightening your trucks you're changing the geometry of the truck, because as you compress the bushings towards the base plate you're in turn pushing the hangar towards the base plate as well. It would be cool if we could figure out a truck where its geometry stays the same regardless of how tight you want it, although I imagine it may be difficult to do that without adding more parts to a truck and thus make it heavier, more complicated and less cool.

I actually did a bit of math on that for the difference to the geometry stepping on your board makes.  Long story short, the change is so small you’re likely to never notice it, and as such it’s not worth devising geometry that is less susceptible.

There is potential for better geometry I’m sure, but if it skates too differently from what we’re all used to it’s not likely to catch on.  That’s the rub, a technology can be superior but it can lose out if it’s not enough of an improvement to displace the popularity of the incumbent solution.

[Hypnotoad]

Expand Quote

Skateboards just aren't that complex of a mechanism, and people really don't want them to change much.  Just look at bikes.  I would argue that they're more complex, and that market has been pretty stagnant since the 90's, with mainly changes in materials being the "innovation".

[close]

I think this is a good point, especially since most of the technological difference between the new trend, gravel bikes, and 90s stiff mtb (what's the term for no shocks? not hardtail I don't think) is pretty much just geometry and frame material. Though I suppose most of this difference is supported by the real technological upgrade, which was the disc brake, which allowed different geometries and tire sizes, gearing, etc

The term for no suspension is “rigid”

I’m not trying to be a dick, but after I quit a job I hated and eventually went back to school, I spent 2014-2019 as a bike mechanic/sales guy at a pretty high end shop.

A modern gravel bike is insanely different from a 90’s mountain or road bike.  A few of the big differences include, carbon fiber and/or hydro formed aluminum frames, tapered steer tubes, integrated headsets, through axles instead of dropouts, tubeless tires, single ring drivetrains with wide range cassettes, hydraulic disc brakes(you mentioned these), clutch derailleurs, and electronic shifting if you like tech stuff and have money to burn. 

The only thing that hasn’t changed is the general shape of the frame, and that’s only because the UCI said it couldn’t.  Since racing drives development, the silhouette of a road style bike hasn’t changed much since the 90’s, but pretty much everything else has.

That’s just for gravel/road style bikes.  A modern mountain bike is essentially from a different planet than one from even like 2006.

I just don’t think it’s a great comparison because pretty much the entire bike industry is driven by companies saying “here’s the new shit, it’s amazing and your old shit is garbage now.”

When I lived in that world, I was using employee discounts and flipping a $7k retail mountain bike every season, which I found stressful even without much risk of losing money.

Now I have a 3-season old mountain bike that I like and try not to let my brain get poisoned by keeping up with what’s new.

I think the beauty of skating is that it’s affordable and accessible.  You can have a tub of old parts and cobble setups together to fuck around with.

You can do the same thing with bikes I guess, but it’s a much, much bigger pain in the ass and nothing ever fucking works like you want it to.

[fakie varial flip]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Skateboards just aren't that complex of a mechanism, and people really don't want them to change much.  Just look at bikes.  I would argue that they're more complex, and that market has been pretty stagnant since the 90's, with mainly changes in materials being the "innovation".

[close]

I think this is a good point, especially since most of the technological difference between the new trend, gravel bikes, and 90s stiff mtb (what's the term for no shocks? not hardtail I don't think) is pretty much just geometry and frame material. Though I suppose most of this difference is supported by the real technological upgrade, which was the disc brake, which allowed different geometries and tire sizes, gearing, etc

[close]

The term for no suspension is “rigid”

I’m not trying to be a dick, but after I quit a job I hated and eventually went back to school, I spent 2014-2019 as a bike mechanic/sales guy at a pretty high end shop.

A modern gravel bike is insanely different from a 90’s mountain or road bike.  A few of the big differences include, carbon fiber and/or hydro formed aluminum frames, tapered steer tubes, integrated headsets, through axles instead of dropouts, tubeless tires, single ring drivetrains with wide range cassettes, hydraulic disc brakes(you mentioned these), clutch derailleurs, and electronic shifting if you like tech stuff and have money to burn. 

The only thing that hasn’t changed is the general shape of the frame, and that’s only because the UCI said it couldn’t.  Since racing drives development, the silhouette of a road style bike hasn’t changed much since the 90’s, but pretty much everything else has.

That’s just for gravel/road style bikes.  A modern mountain bike is essentially from a different planet than one from even like 2006.

I just don’t think it’s a great comparison because pretty much the entire bike industry is driven by companies saying “here’s the new shit, it’s amazing and your old shit is garbage now.”

When I lived in that world, I was using employee discounts and flipping a $7k retail mountain bike every season, which I found stressful even without much risk of losing money.

Now I have a 3-season old mountain bike that I like and try not to let my brain get poisoned by keeping up with what’s new.

I think the beauty of skating is that it’s affordable and accessible.  You can have a tub of old parts and cobble setups together to fuck around with.

You can do the same thing with bikes I guess, but it’s a much, much bigger pain in the ass and nothing ever fucking works like you want it to.

I imagine it wouldn't surprise you at all then if I told you my bike is a cyclocross bike with gravelkings that I pretend is a gravel bike - however, it does ride nearly identical to a friend's actual gravel bike.

I was definitely not thinking about modern mountain bikes though, that's fair. My exposure to mountain bikes ended probably before 2006 🤣

[Hypnotoad]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Skateboards just aren't that complex of a mechanism, and people really don't want them to change much.  Just look at bikes.  I would argue that they're more complex, and that market has been pretty stagnant since the 90's, with mainly changes in materials being the "innovation".

[close]

I think this is a good point, especially since most of the technological difference between the new trend, gravel bikes, and 90s stiff mtb (what's the term for no shocks? not hardtail I don't think) is pretty much just geometry and frame material. Though I suppose most of this difference is supported by the real technological upgrade, which was the disc brake, which allowed different geometries and tire sizes, gearing, etc

[close]

The term for no suspension is “rigid”

I’m not trying to be a dick, but after I quit a job I hated and eventually went back to school, I spent 2014-2019 as a bike mechanic/sales guy at a pretty high end shop.

A modern gravel bike is insanely different from a 90’s mountain or road bike.  A few of the big differences include, carbon fiber and/or hydro formed aluminum frames, tapered steer tubes, integrated headsets, through axles instead of dropouts, tubeless tires, single ring drivetrains with wide range cassettes, hydraulic disc brakes(you mentioned these), clutch derailleurs, and electronic shifting if you like tech stuff and have money to burn. 

The only thing that hasn’t changed is the general shape of the frame, and that’s only because the UCI said it couldn’t.  Since racing drives development, the silhouette of a road style bike hasn’t changed much since the 90’s, but pretty much everything else has.

That’s just for gravel/road style bikes.  A modern mountain bike is essentially from a different planet than one from even like 2006.

I just don’t think it’s a great comparison because pretty much the entire bike industry is driven by companies saying “here’s the new shit, it’s amazing and your old shit is garbage now.”

When I lived in that world, I was using employee discounts and flipping a $7k retail mountain bike every season, which I found stressful even without much risk of losing money.

Now I have a 3-season old mountain bike that I like and try not to let my brain get poisoned by keeping up with what’s new.

I think the beauty of skating is that it’s affordable and accessible.  You can have a tub of old parts and cobble setups together to fuck around with.

You can do the same thing with bikes I guess, but it’s a much, much bigger pain in the ass and nothing ever fucking works like you want it to.

[close]

I imagine it wouldn't surprise you at all then if I told you my bike is a cyclocross bike with gravelkings that I pretend is a gravel bike - however, it does ride nearly identical to a friend's actual gravel bike.

I was definitely not thinking about modern mountain bikes though, that's fair. My exposure to mountain bikes ended probably before 2006 🤣

This is the important part.  A lot of the innovation in biking makes bikes better on paper, but often not in a way that’s necessarily perceptible to human riders of said bikes (mountain bikes are legitimately a zillion times better than they used to be, but let’s not get into that because it will screw up my analogy).

If skating were like biking, there would be $300 carbon fiber decks, and competing companies would have different bolt patterns for trucks that they claimed made the deck more torsionally stiff.

When you bought a new deck, your $400 Thunders with titanium base plates and CNC’d hangers wouldn’t fit, so you’d have to sell them at a loss.

There would be 12 bearing sizes and the shop would have to order the replacement that you needed.

It’s really special that pretty much all skate gear works together: one bolt pattern and one bearing size.  That’s it.

If Yuto and Shane can do what they do on the same complete I can buy for $160, then nothing really needs to change, and that’s a good thing.

[foureyedjim]

Nothing to contribute here other than I loved reading the last few exchanges in this thread.  Great read.

[Mean salto]

Has equipment really improved much in the last ten years?
 I remember from 2005-2010 everytime I'd skate with friends at least one person (often more) would explode a bearing, break a kingpin, break a truck (either skating or when trying to replace a kingpin) or flatspot wheels beyond being able to ride them again.
Boards breaking were also pretty common and we all rode over 8.5s. but I feel like after 2010 (maybe 2012-13) something changed and this basically stopped happening.

[rocklobster]

I've ridden a bunch of techy boards - marginally better than a regular 7-ply maple but not worth a 20% premium (VX vs regular Santa Cruz deck). Loads of brands like NHS, DSM and Powell are doing birch / birch-maple hybrid boards for price point boards, I wonder what's the extent to which you could mix both materials to get a deck that feels close enough to 100% maple, get us closer to $45 hybrid boards that you only lose 5-10% of board performance but at a lower price point. Maybe compensate for less maple with a sheet of carbon fiber? Could be more R&D effort than it's actually worth.

I wonder if metal 3D printing could become more of a prevalent - imagine being able to get a truck that combines all your favorite parts of different trucks into 1, at the desired WB, height and weight. I'm sure there's lots more that goes into truck design than just hollowing out kingpins and axles, making the axles longer. The has to be R&D done to balancing them for different truck sizes and proportions which is why different size trucks from the same brand shift WB out different (i.e. a 147 shifts WB out less than a 151).

Truck quality has improved loads in the past 20 years, I've met older guys who feel nostalgic about old Gullwings or Trackers and find their trucks suck by modern standards. I'm happy that snapped kingpins, shitty turns and axle slips are a thing of the past.

[devourthehours]

I wish there was a way of re-purposing/ recycling old wheels.  (I know Satori tried at one point...)

This. If skateboarding is looking to innovate, it should be on the waste side. It'd be awesome if there was a way to make a more sustainable cycle for skate gear. I'd love to see more sustainable packaging, decks, trucks, wheels, and shoes.

[Pushing 4D]

Shoes that hold up longer than 2-3 months would be tight.  Bushings. 

That said, Formula Fours might be peak performance.

[Xen]

Expand Quote

I wish there was a way of re-purposing/ recycling old wheels.  (I know Satori tried at one point...)

[close]

This. If skateboarding is looking to innovate, it should be on the waste side. It'd be awesome if there was a way to make a more sustainable cycle for skate gear. I'd love to see more sustainable packaging, decks, trucks, wheels, and shoes.

For real...decks outpaced timber use for hardwood floors a few years back, that's insane...

Trucks could be melted down for something for sure, but that's up to us to properly recycle the gear rather than throwing it in the trash.

Where are wheels down even smaller? Just where does all that stray urethane go onto to road, rain sweeps it away into the drains and off to the ocean to feed the fishies more micro plastics whoop whoop!

Deck-wise until there is another material that is as strong as maple and cheaper to produce we're stuck; bamboo hybrids, bonite, VX/FLight/P2/Carbon fibre/flight, etc., all work but not as effectively and usually not cost-effective for the bonus they give...which is a longer lasting pop and better strength..but unless you are a constant board breaked, I don't see the point (and I'm a fan of VX/P2 because they are stiff, but an R7 can do that as well).

 

[j....soy.....]

I remember chapman did the board inserts, Schmitt had the bumper board.  I think they could make decks more durable and potentially pop better.....resins and hybrids im sure could improve....