Is Carbon Road tech that much better than Carbon Mtn bike Tech

[Boeing]

for example, why is it that a top of the line Carbon Full suspension frame, like a Tallboy or an Epic, costs nearly $3,000 less than some top of the line roadies like the Look 695?

is the processing that much different?


some of these Roadie companies really pull the wool over our eyes

 

[Bustedknuckle]

for example, why is it that a top of the line Carbon Full suspension frame, like a Tallboy or an Epic, costs nearly $3,000 less than some top of the line roadies like the Look 695?

is the processing that much different?


some of these Roadie companies really pull the wool over our eyes

Any company that makes a carbon MTB frame is blowing smoke youknowwhere.

Any MTB frame that is really ridden, really crashes some and when a carbon frame falls on a rock, it is into the trash bin...carbon and MTB makes no sense.

But it's light so it must be great, right??

 

[Master50]

Any company that makes a carbon MTB frame is blowing smoke youknowwhere.

Any MTB frame that is really ridden, really crashes some and when a carbon frame falls on a rock, it is into the trash bin...carbon and MTB makes no sense.

But it's light so it must be great, right??

I might agree it is harder to create an MTB frame that stands up to off road but the more recent carbon MTBs are about as tough as a lot of metal frames and in some ways much stronger too. I know so many really hard core XC riders on CF frames that are 3 and 4 years old where they were breaking aluminum and Ti frames in 2 or 3 years. I don't see the fragility you are claiming. Now for all mountain or DH bikes I have no experience but the XC boys here are really riding them on some radical terrain.

 

[bc_hills]

for example, why is it that a top of the line Carbon Full suspension frame, like a Tallboy or an Epic, costs nearly $3,000 less than some top of the line roadies like the Look 695?

is the processing that much different?


some of these Roadie companies really pull the wool over our eyes

I think you'd have to compare apples to apples. How does the cost of an Epic compare to a the cost of a Specialized road frame? Santa Cruz doesn't even make cf road bikes, so it's hard to compare. I mean, Look is just expensive period and a person could ask why a Look cf frame costs so much more than a Specialized or whatever.

I think it boils down to light costs more. Race frames push the limits of light and safe in a way that mtbs don't, so that's probably the cost difference. At least that's my non-cynical pov.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

for example, why is it that a top of the line Carbon Full suspension frame, like a Tallboy or an Epic, costs nearly $3,000 less than some top of the line roadies like the Look 695?

is the processing that much different?

some of these Roadie companies really pull the wool over our eyes

The price of carbon frames has nothing to do with their construction cost. The companies charge what people will pay. The road scene has become d-bags buying stuff to impress other d-bags. People pay big bucks simply so that they can have a more expensive bike than others. Mountain biking is a little different in that anyone that rides a lot will beat the crap out of their equipment, so it does not make sense to pay as much money as a road bike. Also people are less impressed by a toolbag with a 10K bike than they are by a single speeder with skillz, and a lot of the single speeders and similar "minimalists" are using equipment that is cheap.

 

[Master50]

The price of carbon frames has nothing to do with their construction cost. The companies charge what people will pay. The road scene has become d-bags buying stuff to impress other d-bags. People pay big bucks simply so that they can have a more expensive bike than others. Mountain biking is a little different in that anyone that rides a lot will beat the crap out of their equipment, so it does not make sense to pay as much money as a road bike. Also people are less impressed by a toolbag with a 10K bike than they are by a single speeder with skillz, and a lot of the single speeders and similar "minimalists" are using equipment that is cheap.

I take it you think every one should only own what you can afford?
Should Bill Gates only buy a crap bike because he isn't a racer? Dang I am a D bag because I bout super record and a c-50. I only paid $4000 for it so am I less of a d-bag?

Damiano Your a putz. You are the other end of arrogant. I do appreciate a lot of people buy what they can afford and some can afford anything they want but your assessment of that based on your budget is arrogant at the least.
I am not a pro but I have been riding with racers for 25 years and the fact that I chose the top end over the group that matches my performance is my choice.
My physical capability is one thing that should not determine how much I spend since I can obviously afford 2 Pro bikes. So what if I want to spend 200 on a stem, it's my money and make no mistake the fact that my bike is 1 pound lighter because I bought SR instead of chorus hardly makes me or anyone else a D-bag. If anyone holds that appellation I submit it is you for judging me based on what I spend.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

I take it you think every one should only own what you can afford?
Should Bill Gates only buy a crap bike because he isn't a racer? Dang I am a D bag because I bout super record and a c-50. I only paid $4000 for it so am I less of a d-bag?

Damiano Your a putz. You are the other end of arrogant. I do appreciate a lot of people buy what they can afford and some can afford anything they want but your assessment of that based on your budget is arrogant at the least.
I am not a pro but I have been riding with racers for 25 years and the fact that I chose the top end over the group that matches my performance is my choice.
My physical capability is one thing that should not determine how much I spend since I can obviously afford 2 Pro bikes. So what if I want to spend 200 on a stem, it's my money and make no mistake the fact that my bike is 1 pound lighter because I bought SR instead of chorus hardly makes me or anyone else a D-bag. If anyone holds that appellation I submit it is you for judging me based on what I spend.

Another one reeled in.

Do you want to deny that carbon frame cost has little to do with production cost? High end road bikes are luxury items. The cost has little to do with manufacturing or R&D, or technology. Cost is simply what the market will bear, and in a market as distorted as cycling the high price itself is a major allure. In other words there is a large percentage of purchases that are made simply because of the high price and the actual utility compared to lower cost alternatives is not taken into account. Ergo, d-bags buying stuff to impress other d-bags.

 

[Master50]

Another one reeled in.

Do you want to deny that carbon frame cost has little to do with production cost? High end road bikes are luxury items. The cost has little to do with manufacturing or R&D, or technology. Cost is simply what the market will bear, and in a market as distorted as cycling the high price itself is a major allure. In other words there is a large percentage of purchases that are made simply because of the high price and the actual utility compared to lower cost alternatives is not taken into account. Ergo, d-bags buying stuff to impress other d-bags.

Another what reeled in?
In India You can buy 400 minutes of cell time and 10 GB of data for $12 so your are a D-bag for paying 30 or 50. A business shirt is 15 to 20 instead of 150. and high quality shoes are 50 instead of 300.
A high quality steel bike frame might have 200 of material yet it might generate a 2500 price tag and 1 square meter of high quality pre peg CF is 140 dollars. What something costs has little to do with price and I am sure we could all scour your possessions for something you paid too much for. My choice of Colnago is related to cache and the history of the brand. My bike choice actually does get me out the door more often. It also made me face the fact that 10 pounds of the weight I carry is around my waist so I lost that too. No point in spending an extra 3 or 4 grand to lose 6 pounds off the bike but carry another 10 on my ****. As for my bike(s) I paid a lot less than some people do and got an entire bike for less than most pay for the frame alone. It may be emotional or snobbery as you suggest but your D bag assessment is more related to you being the object of your claim than for me or anyone else that choses based on what ever is important to them.
Enjoy your smugness and your POS bike you ride. since you obviously chose a Norco or Huffy to equal your talent.

 

[MD FACG FACP]

I own a Tallboy, and a Ridley Helium. You can't compare the two as far as durability. The Tallboy is much more "duke" than the Helium (obviously). Where the Tallboy holds up on rocky descents the Helium would not. The TB is made to take the beating just because it's carbon doesn't mean it can't take a beating. The TB has basically twice the material as the Helium. I've owned four carbon mtb's two Treks, an Orbea Alma, and the TB never a problem with any of them.

 

[42x16ss]

Another what reeled in?
In India You can buy 400 minutes of cell time and 10 GB of data for $12 so your are a D-bag for paying 30 or 50. A business shirt is 15 to 20 instead of 150. and high quality shoes are 50 instead of 300.
A high quality steel bike frame might have 200 of material yet it might generate a 2500 price tag and 1 square meter of high quality pre peg CF is 140 dollars. What something costs has little to do with price and I am sure we could all scour your possessions for something you paid too much for. My choice of Colnago is related to cache and the history of the brand. My bike choice actually does get me out the door more often. It also made me face the fact that 10 pounds of the weight I carry is around my waist so I lost that too. No point in spending an extra 3 or 4 grand to lose 6 pounds off the bike but carry another 10 on my ****. As for my bike(s) I paid a lot less than some people do and got an entire bike for less than most pay for the frame alone. It may be emotional or snobbery as you suggest but your D bag assessment is more related to you being the object of your claim than for me or anyone else that choses based on what ever is important to them.
Enjoy your smugness and your POS bike you ride. since you obviously chose a Norco or Huffy to equal your talent.

Ease up there tiger, there are a few types of rider who go all-out when buying a road bike and not all of them are D-bags.

You own an awesome Colnago that was top of the line when it was released because (I assume) you wanted a truly nice bike after owning a string of bikes that weren't quite what you wanted. You now own your dream bike, and you obviously appreciate the difference. No one will begrudge you buying that high end bike when you know what you are getting and how much you are spoiling yourself.

However, there are riders that do have to "keep up with the Jones'" I'm sure a lot of us have seen them before. I remember at the startline of the Noosa Century this year there was a guy (in his late 40's) I spoke to who had just bought a Pinarello Dogma, brand spanking new a month earlier and it was the first bike he'd owned since he was 14. Why that bike? Two of his friends owned Pinarellos and he had to keep up

That's what Damiano is talking about.

 

[richwagmn]

Ease up there tiger, there are a few types of rider who go all-out when buying a road bike and not all of them are D-bags.

You own an awesome Colnago that was top of the line when it was released because (I assume) you wanted a truly nice bike after owning a string of bikes that weren't quite what you wanted. You now own your dream bike, and you obviously appreciate the difference. No one will begrudge you buying that high end bike when you know what you are getting and how much you are spoiling yourself.

However, there are riders that do have to "keep up with the Jones'" I'm sure a lot of us have seen them before. I remember at the startline of the Noosa Century this year there was a guy (in his late 40's) I spoke to who had just bought a Pinarello Dogma, brand spanking new a month earlier and it was the first bike he'd owned since he was 14. Why that bike? Two of his friends owned Pinarellos and he had to keep up

That's what Damiano is talking about.

Who cares if people with money buy a nice bike and aren't as good as a rider as you might be? Good for them. Maybe it makes them a bit more interested in cycling. Or maybe they purchased their Colnago from a LBS and helped the guy make a little money.

Damiano is certainly smug about his opinions. I guess he's just smarter than anyone else.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

Another what reeled in?
In India You can buy 400 minutes of cell time and 10 GB of data for $12 so your are a D-bag for paying 30 or 50. A business shirt is 15 to 20 instead of 150. and high quality shoes are 50 instead of 300.
A high quality steel bike frame might have 200 of material yet it might generate a 2500 price tag and 1 square meter of high quality pre peg CF is 140 dollars. What something costs has little to do with price and I am sure we could all scour your possessions for something you paid too much for. My choice of Colnago is related to cache and the history of the brand. My bike choice actually does get me out the door more often. It also made me face the fact that 10 pounds of the weight I carry is around my waist so I lost that too. No point in spending an extra 3 or 4 grand to lose 6 pounds off the bike but carry another 10 on my ****. As for my bike(s) I paid a lot less than some people do and got an entire bike for less than most pay for the frame alone. It may be emotional or snobbery as you suggest but your D bag assessment is more related to you being the object of your claim than for me or anyone else that choses based on what ever is important to them.
Enjoy your smugness and your POS bike you ride. since you obviously chose a Norco or Huffy to equal your talent.

What is great about writing opinions as blunt as possible is that there is always a toolbag that will pick out a sentence or two, take it personally, and start acting like his wife has been insulted. Hence we get you going off on a rant about whether you ride well enough to deserve your bike, something I never even touched on. Obviously you have some deep seated issues about it. HTFU and train more.

In your blind rage to insult me and defend your bike ownership, you never addressed my central point, that the high end road market has devolved to a pathology where the most desirable quality of a bike is often the high price. Perhaps you are not one of those buyers, although your sensitivity about it make me suspicious. But try to tell me there are not a bunch of d-bags that get talked into riding an MS150, waddle into their local McBikeshop, and pick out the highest priced Trek on the floor, people that if you told them you had a Colnago they would ask if there is an ointment to cure it.

Cyclist have always liked to buy nice stuff. Everyone does. In the last ten years since the yuppies tossed their golf clubs and took up cycling, it has metastasized into the same type of rampant "keep up with the Joneses" consumerism that infects everything else that yuppies do.

I will argue that mountain bike culture has not been infected to the same degree. Single speeds and other minimalist bikes have pulled the culture in a different direction. Another point I will make is that while some chubby Cat 6 wannabe can bore people to tears by talking about the dubious and small to neglible benefits touted by the marketing department that made his road bike, the same sort of geek attack from a mountain biker is absurd when how well one rides is determined so much by skill.

 

[Notso Swift]

Nah, Mountain bikers are just too Rad



(I know that by using the word Rad instantly marks me as someone who isn't)

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

the high end road market has devolved to a pathology where the most desirable quality of a bike is often the high price.

I don't think it's the price tag. Id say it has more to do with the fact that cyclists are like tech nerds when it comes to rides, they want the newest and most en vogue. This is still the minority though.

In most cases, cyclists see it as an investment in something they love; maybe it will enhance their enjoyment of such a wondeful sport. If they can afford it, so what. If the bike exceeds their skill level, that will show within the first 10 miles, they will be off the back and even less of a concern than before.

Or maybe some folks just want to reward their hardwork with something nice. No problem with that.

I will argue that mountain bike culture has not been infected to the same degree. Single speeds and other minimalist bikes have pulled the culture in a different direction.

Then one could easily say that these single speed racers are nothing but hipsters with their rigid 29ers trying to prove how tough they are. To each his own. Cycling at an amateur level is profoundly individual; why concern yourself with how others choose to embrace it? I think these are your issues not theirs.

Nah, Mountain bikers are just too Rad



(I know that by using the word Rad instantly marks me as someone who isn't)

Totally Brah!

 

[Boeing]

Who cares if people with money buy a nice bike and aren't as good as a rider as you might be? Good for them. Maybe it makes them a bit more interested in cycling. Or maybe they purchased their Colnago from a LBS and helped the guy make a little money.

Damiano is certainly smug about his opinions. I guess he's just smarter than anyone else.

great reply.

there is a professor at the local Uni here who makes a killing writing text books.

He is a little old nerdy guy (so to speak), with a love interest in cycling but not the fitness level most of us claim to achieve here. He loves following the peloton, and loves Italy etc. he loves to ride a bike to work every day

He bought a Colnogo EPQ record with Zipp wheels and put platform pedals on it to ride to work every day. His commuter bike. full retail

I recon he is getting more personal pleasure out of his approach to cycling than many of us so called roadies

word

I hear all the time in the group rides here guys bashing on not so fit guys on fancy bikes. It is a level of self-aggrandisement I have seen nowhere except maybe posted here on the CN. Irony in the least

 

[Bustedknuckle]

I might agree it is harder to create an MTB frame that stands up to off road but the more recent carbon MTBs are about as tough as a lot of metal frames and in some ways much stronger too. I know so many really hard core XC riders on CF frames that are 3 and 4 years old where they were breaking aluminum and Ti frames in 2 or 3 years. I don't see the fragility you are claiming. Now for all mountain or DH bikes I have no experience but the XC boys here are really riding them on some radical terrain.

Ti breaking in 2 or 3 years? Then maybe they ought to get something other than a chinese ti MTB frame.

Yep, as long as they don't auger in on the baby heads, CF is fine but smack a tube on a rock, adios CF frame.

 

[Boeing]

What is great about writing opinions as blunt as possible is that there is always a toolbag that will pick out a sentence or two, take it personally, and start acting like his wife has been insulted. Hence we get you going off on a rant about whether you ride well enough to deserve your bike, something I never even touched on. Obviously you have some deep seated issues about it. HTFU and train more.

In your blind rage to insult me and defend your bike ownership, you never addressed my central point, that the high end road market has devolved to a pathology where the most desirable quality of a bike is often the high price. Perhaps you are not one of those buyers, although your sensitivity about it make me suspicious. But try to tell me there are not a bunch of d-bags that get talked into riding an MS150, waddle into their local McBikeshop, and pick out the highest priced Trek on the floor, people that if you told them you had a Colnago they would ask if there is an ointment to cure it.

Cyclist have always liked to buy nice stuff. Everyone does. In the last ten years since the yuppies tossed their golf clubs and took up cycling, it has metastasized into the same type of rampant "keep up with the Joneses" consumerism that infects everything else that yuppies do.

I will argue that mountain bike culture has not been infected to the same degree. Single speeds and other minimalist bikes have pulled the culture in a different direction. Another point I will make is that while some chubby Cat 6 wannabe can bore people to tears by talking about the dubious and small to neglible benefits touted by the marketing department that made his road bike, the same sort of geek attack from a mountain biker is absurd when how well one rides is determined so much by skill.

Here we are on a topic that attacks the process and DM chooses to attack the person.

this is an underlying problem the US bike industry has fallen into itself IMHO. Selling the Vibe and segregating the industry at the same time.

Is your Vibe at risk DM?

child please

 

[MD FACG FACP]

Ti breaking in 2 or 3 years? Then maybe they ought to get something other than a chinese ti MTB frame.

Yep, as long as they don't auger in on the baby heads, CF is fine but smack a tube on a rock, adios CF frame.

This is not true.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

Here we are on a topic that attacks the process and DM chooses to attack the person.

Were you too lazy to read the posts from Master50 and others who started out by attacking me rather than addressing any of my points or could it be that you are using the topic to attack the person? It looks like the latter to me.

Got hypocrisy?

 

[Master50]

What is great about writing opinions as blunt as possible is that there is always a toolbag that will pick out a sentence or two, take it personally, and start acting like his wife has been insulted. Hence we get you going off on a rant about whether you ride well enough to deserve your bike, something I never even touched on. Obviously you have some deep seated issues about it. HTFU and train more.

In your blind rage to insult me and defend your bike ownership, you never addressed my central point, that the high end road market has devolved to a pathology where the most desirable quality of a bike is often the high price. Perhaps you are not one of those buyers, although your sensitivity about it make me suspicious. But try to tell me there are not a bunch of d-bags that get talked into riding an MS150, waddle into their local McBikeshop, and pick out the highest priced Trek on the floor, people that if you told them you had a Colnago they would ask if there is an ointment to cure it.

Cyclist have always liked to buy nice stuff. Everyone does. In the last ten years since the yuppies tossed their golf clubs and took up cycling, it has metastasized into the same type of rampant "keep up with the Joneses" consumerism that infects everything else that yuppies do.

I will argue that mountain bike culture has not been infected to the same degree. Single speeds and other minimalist bikes have pulled the culture in a different direction. Another point I will make is that while some chubby Cat 6 wannabe can bore people to tears by talking about the dubious and small to neglible benefits touted by the marketing department that made his road bike, the same sort of geek attack from a mountain biker is absurd when how well one rides is determined so much by skill.

Thanks so much for explaining all that but I knew it when I took exception to your fish.
I even understand your comments were really not directed at me specifically or even generally. I am however still offended. For what ever reason some guy that barely rides spends 10 or even 15 K on a bike is a great benefit to us all. It drives research and investment on things that benefit us all. If boutique bikes only sold to Racers Then I imagine a lot of the technology would be much simpler and older. We might even be riding friction shifting. I do understand that a C-50 frame sells full retail for 4 to 6 k and I also know it likely cost Colnago 4 or 500.. Knowing that still does not make it available to me at a more reasonable cost but that price has other effects which are good for us all. He provides bikes to teams which supports the sport we love.
Calling a person a D-bag because they spend a fat wallet on a bike they may never be able to truly test isn't fair and at the least it is arrogant for you to call them that.
I am pretty sure that if I could afford it I would own another 1/2 dozen very high end bikes just because I love them all and whether or not I ride them is a little irrelevant. It would still help you by supporting those bike makers.
I will agree that a lot of the stuff we ride today is way over the top for pricing and $600 cassettes are obscenely priced but no one that pays it is a Bag of any kind just based on your criteria.

Be grateful at the opportunities to buy barely used bikes from those that spend anything just because they can. You know that if you could have anything you wanted it would be a lot more expensive than what you are riding now.

Locally we have a guy that owns a helicopter and often flies to the races. Is he a bag because we all had to drive? What does it matter if the investment banker comes to the race on a pair of lightweights and you can't even afford Zipps. What skin is off your nose if the guy with the 15 k bike gets dropped in the neutral zone? I might only prove you can't buy performance but how does he become a d-bag?

It is the judgement of people you don't know that offends me even if I make the argument about myself.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

For what ever reason some guy that barely rides spends 10 or even 15 K on a bike is a great benefit to us all. It drives research and investment on things that benefit us all.

Does it? Or does it drive the bike companies' marketing departments? It seems to me that a lot of the change that is promoted by the industry is change for the sake of change with neglible benefits for the end customer. In other words it is planned obsolescence. I think I would also argue that the insane prices of the high end has pulled the middle upward.

Again, my central point, which is in answer to the OP, is that at the top end of the road market high price has become a main selling point of the product. Bikes are interesting in that beyond a certain price point, and it is not very high, there is little to no real world difference between products. To make the situation even more absurd, the market is driven by recreational riders for whom even large differences would have no effect. What does fifty grams mean to a bike pathlete whose major goal for the summer is the local MS150? Yet those tards will pay thousands of extra dollars for bragging rights about something that will not make a whit of difference to their riding.

The situation has become so pathological that superior products have been eclipsed. A case in point is the prebuilt wheel market. Instead of wheels being custom built for a customer's weight and use out of easily replaceable components, we now have one size fits all wheels made with parts that are impossible to find after a few years sold for a higher price. If a spoke breaks while training, the rider is screwed because the low spoke count will warp the wheel to an unrideable state. In the last two years while riding in BFE I have bumped into three sorry SOBs standing on the side of the road with an unrideable wheel. I do not see that as progress. I see it as stupidity.

 

[Master50]

Well I still think you are being unfair plus the other stuff. As for your characterization of MTB riders being less affected by the marketing hype? You must have missed the local thursday night ride. More and more $6000 carbon beauties show up every week. In fact often more expensive than what the pros ride. And Bragging rights! The testosterone is palpable.

Some of those boutique wheels are pretty sweet and yes I know what a pain an aluminum spoke is to get. The manufacturer does make them but the suppliers don't carry them.
We could discuss the marketing bs and I probably would agree with many of those points, just not calling the people that buy ten such rude names based on your criteria.

 

[42x16ss]

Thanks so much for explaining all that but I knew it when I took exception to your fish.
I even understand your comments were really not directed at me specifically or even generally. I am however still offended. For what ever reason some guy that barely rides spends 10 or even 15 K on a bike is a great benefit to us all. It drives research and investment on things that benefit us all. If boutique bikes only sold to Racers Then I imagine a lot of the technology would be much simpler and older. We might even be riding friction shifting. I do understand that a C-50 frame sells full retail for 4 to 6 k and I also know it likely cost Colnago 4 or 500.. Knowing that still does not make it available to me at a more reasonable cost but that price has other effects which are good for us all. He provides bikes to teams which supports the sport we love.
Calling a person a D-bag because they spend a fat wallet on a bike they may never be able to truly test isn't fair and at the least it is arrogant for you to call them that.
I am pretty sure that if I could afford it I would own another 1/2 dozen very high end bikes just because I love them all and whether or not I ride them is a little irrelevant. It would still help you by supporting those bike makers.
I will agree that a lot of the stuff we ride today is way over the top for pricing and $600 cassettes are obscenely priced but no one that pays it is a Bag of any kind just based on your criteria.

Be grateful at the opportunities to buy barely used bikes from those that spend anything just because they can. You know that if you could have anything you wanted it would be a lot more expensive than what you are riding now.

Locally we have a guy that owns a helicopter and often flies to the races. Is he a bag because we all had to drive? What does it matter if the investment banker comes to the race on a pair of lightweights and you can't even afford Zipps. What skin is off your nose if the guy with the 15 k bike gets dropped in the neutral zone? I might only prove you can't buy performance but how does he become a d-bag?

It is the judgement of people you don't know that offends me even if I make the argument about myself.

A lot of good points there. Most of the time when I see that brand new rider on a 10-15K bike wobbling along by himself I don't think "D-Bag", I think "Did the shop even suggest an entry level bike and/or bunch to learn from?"

I worked in a shop when I was at uni and if a new rider came in looking to blow big cash the first thing I would ask is "What do you expect from this bike?" because I didn't like seeing someone spend huge money on a bike that either doesn't suit, or isn't what they thought they wanted.

When the rider in question knew what they wanted from their bike after learning to ride and were capable of making an informed choice (regardless of their skill level) THEN I'd encourage them to spend the big $$$

Sorry if it sounds snobby, but that's because I get sad when I see someone sold a huge dollar bike that probably isn't what they will really want 3-6 months down the track. That isn't promoting the sport - it's profiteering.

 

[mad black]

for example, why is it that a top of the line Carbon Full suspension frame, like a Tallboy or an Epic, costs nearly $3,000 less than some top of the line roadies like the Look 695?

is the processing that much different?


some of these Roadie companies really pull the wool over our eyes

Back to the original discussion...

I believe the point is a very valid one. And all I can say is that about 50% of the price of a Look is due to the image you buy with the bike. The same goes for brands like Colnago, Pinarello, Time, Basso, Bianchi, De Rosa... All of these are brands have a long standing tradition in road cycling and all of them are names associated with cycling for almost a century in most cases. What you get for your money is often questionable. I'd go as far as to suggest that a Carbon fibre frame made in Taiwan these days is of higher quality than any manufactured in Europe.

Specialized and Trek are spending enormous amounts of money in road racing sponsorships these days with the aim to attain an image like the traditional Italian and French brands only to be able to charge similar premiums on their bikes. And it's clearly working - just examine the retail price of the S-Works tarmac frame since the first model was introduced in 2006!

Applying the opposite logic Colnago, Look and Co. don't need to spend as much money on sponsorship to sell their bikes for premium prices. They simply can charge whatever they feel like and people will pay whatever is asked. (I'm saying that without any judgement on anyone buying such bikes.)

Mountainbiking doesn't have these long lasting traditional companies (yet) hence the consumer pays less for the name but more for the technology. Although it has to be said that there's still a premium on top end bikes from the likes of Specialized, Santa Cruz, Serotta, Cannondale,... BUT almost all MTB Carbon fibre frames these days are manufactured in Taiwan which also costs less than any frame manufactured in North America or Europe.

 

[Notso Swift]

The Look may not be the best example because it is a module, including Cranks, Stem, seat post and the associated bearings.


Economics 101 increase a products want and as a direct effect you change the demand elasticity