Bikes in a Box

[briztoon]

Ok, I'll try and combine a couple of related questions in this thread.

Could some one please explain to me what a bike in a box is exactly. I have a fair idea, but just want it confirmed.

What brands/frames/companies do the experienced members here like?

The way I see it, some of todays lower end "decent" commercial brand bikes were once at the cutting edge of the sport. But 4 or 5 years later when they have been superceded (often by 3 or 4 generations and even by a newer model), they are looked down upon by some in the community.

Why?

 

[Parera]

Complete bikes, in other words. Yes, I've bought them and they can be OK. And for most of the average cycling population, they are OK. Bikeinabox is attractive because the components are "cheap" when they come with the bike. Especially when you go down to the same LBS and look at prices for the same type of crap (Bontrager and Specialized, for example) available at full MSRP.

The reason why and others badmouth them is it forces a lot of components on a user they will universally end up hating for poor fit/quality. Take a typical Specialized, you will end up ditching the seatpost, saddle, stem, bars, wheels (Roval is the worst crap I swear) and their awful MTB forks.

The whole situation can be avoided if the LBS just sells framesets (which seem rare these days from the bigger companies; not ever bike in their lineup is available as a frameset) and then you select each component that goes onto the bike. All the parts will be to your liking and anatomy, and you can pick & choose the stuff that is worth having. For example, mixing a Shimano group of 105/Ultegra and even Dura Ace to maximize your performance to dollar ratio.

The thing in my experience that discouraged me from employing this school of thought earlier was simple economics; even with ebay prices, doing a custom build on a frameset always costs more for the same group level. However, that few hundred dollars extra up front makes sense considering you're going to spend $500-1000 on bars, wheels, stems, saddles, etc within a year of purchasing bikeinabox.

It really comes down to use, if you just like to ride and don't really care about the stuff that makes a bike go (even though as evidenced in the Love It/Hate It thread, small things do enhance the experience) don't worry about it. However, for those of us that do, complete bikes simply aren't pragmatic in the grand scheme of cycling.

 

[ambrose]

just going to stand up for specialized here. Granted i've only had top end bikes of theirs, but i think some of their accesories are the best you can buy. For instance i'm riding a different brand, with a different saddle sponsor but i still choose to use a specialized saddle. Similarly i think my bar and stem combo was great on my specialized. i will concede that the roval wheels are a hunk of junk, but then i think most wheelsets on the market aren't much good.

 

[Parera]

just going to stand up for specialized here. Granted i've only had top end bikes of theirs, but i think some of their accesories are the best you can buy. For instance i'm riding a different brand, with a different saddle sponsor but i still choose to use a specialized saddle. Similarly i think my bar and stem combo was great on my specialized. i will concede that the roval wheels are a hunk of junk, but then i think most wheelsets on the market aren't much good.

Their frames are good. My Roubaix is a trooper, just terrible warranty service; I have an obvious crack in the top tube of my frame and they will do absolutely nothing about it. Nothing but problems with their seatpost design, saddles with soft shells/flimsy rails, ill-fitting stems with those dumb shims, flexy bars. I;m not dealing with the S-Works stuff, could be great, but given their quality and service on the lower end, I remain skeptical. To each his own, though.

 

[DirtyWorks]

The way I see it, some of todays lower end "decent" commercial brand bikes were once at the cutting edge of the sport. But 4 or 5 years later when they have been superceded (often by 3 or 4 generations and even by a newer model), they are looked down upon by some in the community.

Why?

Every bike brand story is a bit different. If one were to reduce all of them down, the business failed.

Someone has grand ideas of running a successful full-line bike business with premium pricing and maybe it works for a while, or like SRAM, they have deep pockets to keep the business running at a loss for a while. At some point they run out of money and the brand goes up for sale.

One buyer strategy is acquire the 'premium' brand then use it on low-cost product into big box retailers. These are pretty rare. Schwinn was probably the last big one in the U.S. The OEM product looks like a deal to the uninitiated bike consumer of which there are many because they are vaguely familiar with the brand. For smaller acquisitions, people buy a bike brand to grow their sales revenue.

Both the big/small cases don't really work out because they end up selling the same product every other OEM stickering bike business is selling. It might work for a few years then fails due to sameness.

 

[DirtyWorks]

The reason why and others badmouth them is it forces a lot of components on a user they will universally end up hating for poor fit/quality. Take a typical Specialized, you will end up ditching the seatpost, saddle, stem, bars, wheels (Roval is the worst crap I swear) and their awful MTB forks.

You describe a very rare consumer. Most riders give up well before the cheap components become an issue. Some combination of the sport being hard no matter what and riding racing style bikes for no good reason is enough to drive most away from the sport.