jmnikricket said:you're either a 250 lb monster
I don't consider myself a monster
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
jmnikricket said:you're either a 250 lb monster
jmnikricket said:Wow a lot of you seem to be borderline delusional. You underestimate materials costs, R&D costs, and believe it or not the people making these bikes actually have salaries; sorry if they don't want to work for peanuts.
Production costs for quality carbon fiber are sky high. High modulus carbon fiber (I know most of you think this is just a marketing term, but it actually means something) has to be processed at over 3000 degrees C; you think that's free? High strength carbon fiber can be processed at closer to 2000 degrees C, and the crap you see on ebay probably lower. Not all carbon fiber is created equal, and there is currently a huge worldwide shortage of quality carbon fiber, causing the price to increase even more. The pinarello prince uses a structural aerospace grade carbon fiber. When was the last time you looked at the price tag on the space shuttle? An F1 car? A racing yacht? That's the kind of quality we're talking about here.
Many carbon fiber bikes are made by hand-laying and hand-wrapping individual plies. Imagine taking a bunch of sheets of paper and wrapping them into a bike frame shape. Tell me you wouldn't want to get paid much more for that than tig-welding a steel frame.
Carbon fiber is also a unique material in that its properties are anisotropic. That means that the strength, stiffness, etc change depending on the orientation. This allows for infinitely more possibilities during R&D when compared with steel or aluminum. More possibilities means more thought has to go into it which means more time and money. Of course you can buy cheap carbon fiber frames where the lay up, weave, direction, etc are all very standard and little to no extra thought was put into it. But then you miss out on a lot of the benefits of using carbon fiber in the first place. Maybe you've seen phrases like lateral stiffness and vertical compliance. Again many of you probably pass them off as marketing gimmicks.
To those saying that mountain bikes are much cheaper because they are directed toward "true" riders. Imagine an engineer and tasked with creating a road frame at 850g. Now imagine the same engineer is asked to create a mountain frame that comes in at around 2000g. Sure it's beefier, but with more than twice the material, it better be. And if a section is weak, just throw on some more carbon fiber, and let the frame be 2100g. No one will care.
By the way, if you're still one of those people claiming carbon fiber will break the first time you crash it, you're either a 250 lb monster or you're living in the late 80s.
I could go on for days...
My philosophy on expensive bike parts has always been that I don't want to have my gear holding me back. The only limiting factor I want is my own conditioning. I never want to use the phrase "if I had his bike I could..." So it all comes down to this: is the real world benefit worth the extra money to you? But seriously ragging on someone's gear because it's more than you want to spend is so '90s hipster that it's pathetic. Let them enjoy the sport.
Ovidius said:Anyone who things otherwise is really lost to nostalgia or misses the point because they cannot afford a $10k Road bike.![]()
Argon Man said:It's all simple business people! The cycling industry although it has been around for 100's of years is relatively very young in a business sense and like all boon industries is going through the price discovery model. This means that as long as there is strong consumer demand the prices experiment how high they can go and how much can be drawn from your wallet. Don't be conned, if demand drops so do the prices.
ylipkov said:It always amazes me, what bad rap we get from non-BMW owners. Is it envy, perhaps?
ylipkov said:Pointless argument.
ylipkov said:Pointless argument.
danjo007 said:brag about owning a 10K bike. lame! bet your just an average rider too...
gree0232 said:Do prices drop when demand drops? Well, that would be true if pure supply and demand were at the heart of the issue. It isn't. Most bike manufacturers set their prices and have agreements with the retailers that they will not advertise their parts or frames below minimums set by the manufacturer. In effect, the manufacturer protects its profits by selling to the retailers, and then the retailers are stuck with the demand side risk of not being able to move enough $6500 Colnago EPS or $5500 Pinarello Prince's instead of $3500 Ridley Deans, all Pro-Tour level bikes.
As the prices rise, it is a fairly safe bet that consumers are going to want hard data, not just superfluous marketing, to back up their investment.
Mr.DNA said:Theory: Some BMW owners get their jollies by thinking they are being admired or envied.
gree0232 said:Lest we push the Ferrari model too far, understand that Pinarello bikes are not cutomizable to people, which bikes produced by IF and Parlee are, and that customization can bring a bike total upward of $20K. The truth is that Colnago, Pinarello, Canyon, Trek, Specialized, Time, Look, Giant, Ridley, BH, Focus, and De Rosa use the exact same techniques to build their products. The $3,000 difference between the resulting products is an effect of marketing and marketing alone.
Indeed, if I could get a Lamborghini for $100,000, why would I pay $200,000 for a Ferrari? Paying 'more' for a quality is a given, paying as much for 15 pounds of shaped carbon as you would for at least a 1,000 pounds of shaped steel and an internal cumbustion engine there is an obvious dissasociation between the price of the former product and the reality of what it is.
gree0232 said:Well, there is one problem with affording Pinarello Ferrari status. There is a lot more difference between a Ferrari (with a massive engine alone) and a Ford escort then there is between a Pinarello and its competitors. Are you telling me that a Pinarello Prince is twice as good as a Canyon? Is it 40% better than a Ridely Dean? Is Campy 1/3 better than SRAM?
There is an obvious performance and handling boost that goes along with driving and racing a Ferrari and driving and racing a Ford escort. The engine on a Pinarello or a Trek is the same regardless, and there is certainly not much a performance 'boost' between top level brands.
Lest we push the Ferrari model too far, understand that Pinarello bikes are not cutomizable to people, which bikes produced by IF and Parlee are, and that customization can bring a bike total upward of $20K. The truth is that Colnago, Pinarello, Canyon, Trek, Specialized, Time, Look, Giant, Ridley, BH, Focus, and De Rosa use the exact same techniques to build their products. The $3,000 difference between the resulting products is an effect of marketing and marketing alone.
Indeed, if I could get a Lamborghini for $100,000, why would I pay $200,000 for a Ferrari? Paying 'more' for a quality is a given, paying as much for 15 pounds of shaped carbon as you would for at least a 1,000 pounds of shaped steel and an internal cumbustion engine there is an obvious dissasociation between the price of the former product and the reality of what it is.
Would it be jealousy that caused me to look askance at you as I passed you in a similar high end sports car at half the price on the high way? Is cycling, the bike only, about the exclusivity of a Ferrari?
Ovidius said:That is not to mention that the hard data is actually there. Pinarello's and Colnago's and Zipp wheels etc are better than other bikes etc. The facts are there, the reviews back it up, the races back it up. What more do you want.
Heh, don't Silence-Lotto ride Canyon - the hard data is definately helping them win races!![]()