Not so long ago there was a fairly close relationship between the cost of a bike, a frame, components and so-on and the quality of the merchandise - if you wanted to play at racing or become a "serious" cyclist then you bought the most expensive gear you could afford.
About 10 years ago the cycle industry got the message on marketing, and suddenly the price of everything went through the roof, as did the sophistication of the promotion, and exotic materials were touted as must-haves.
So, as we are now in the era where -if you choose- you can spend £3000 on just a frame, just how much is it worth spending? Or are we all gullible idiots for allowing the bicycle to become, in my opinion, expensive jewellery with an ever shorter life span and obsolesence after just a few years?
How much should you spend?
-
reohn2
I will agree that some bikes have become "expensive jewellery" especially when you get in carbon fibre bracket.
It seems some folks these days aren't looking for a bike to last them a long time either,a friend told me that some of the racing lads in his club feel out done if they're riding a bike more than acouple of years old.There surely can't much wrong with a frame and forks in that time,wheels maybe need a rebuild and some other bits possibly.So its a keep up with the jones's exercise.
There is a fashion element to cycling due I think to a greater element of disposable income and carbon fibre is most definetly in fasion,steel seems to be out of fashion.But as they say what goes around comes around and if you wait long enough it will come back in,after all it is cycling.
Weight is the thing in cycling the lighter the more expensive and once one gets below say 9kg to get the bike a lot lighter it costs an aweful lot more than say to a bike from say 12kgs to 10kgs.
When if you take into account that most of us are carrying 2 to 3kgs round our waists,it would cost nothing to stop shoving cakes in our gobs, infact it would save us money what with the price of cake!
PS,IMHO if you pay more than about £1800 for a solo and £3000 for a tandem you've been done.
It seems some folks these days aren't looking for a bike to last them a long time either,a friend told me that some of the racing lads in his club feel out done if they're riding a bike more than acouple of years old.There surely can't much wrong with a frame and forks in that time,wheels maybe need a rebuild and some other bits possibly.So its a keep up with the jones's exercise.
There is a fashion element to cycling due I think to a greater element of disposable income and carbon fibre is most definetly in fasion,steel seems to be out of fashion.But as they say what goes around comes around and if you wait long enough it will come back in,after all it is cycling.
Weight is the thing in cycling the lighter the more expensive and once one gets below say 9kg to get the bike a lot lighter it costs an aweful lot more than say to a bike from say 12kgs to 10kgs.
When if you take into account that most of us are carrying 2 to 3kgs round our waists,it would cost nothing to stop shoving cakes in our gobs, infact it would save us money what with the price of cake!
PS,IMHO if you pay more than about £1800 for a solo and £3000 for a tandem you've been done.
Its ‘telling’ that my Galaxy tandem has a screw on Maillard block with no cut-outs and full form teeth, runs with an LX Shimano changer and indexes perfectly first time every time. Of coarse you can’t do it under full pedalling pressure, but so what.
When you see a cycle race and watch them changing gear on a sudden incline you see modern components doing exactly what they are designed for – slick changing under extreme pressure. All long levity of the component has been sacrificed for that perfect shift in one or two races. Yet us chumps buy this stuff for its cred value when 99% of cycling does not warrant it, weather going to the shops, touring or even out on training runs. And we pay through the nose for it, of course for the technology involved it is actually quite cheap but owning a Ferrari when you really need a Landrover is an expensive game.
When you see a cycle race and watch them changing gear on a sudden incline you see modern components doing exactly what they are designed for – slick changing under extreme pressure. All long levity of the component has been sacrificed for that perfect shift in one or two races. Yet us chumps buy this stuff for its cred value when 99% of cycling does not warrant it, weather going to the shops, touring or even out on training runs. And we pay through the nose for it, of course for the technology involved it is actually quite cheap but owning a Ferrari when you really need a Landrover is an expensive game.
Cheers
J Bro
J Bro
-
Dai
I read an interesting article in New Scientist this week about recycling which said that designers of goods (in this case white goods) are having to come around to the fact that many people now want machines to last rather than need to be up-graded evey year or so.
It said that pyschology is shifting and that we are making a slow return to the days when we loved and cherished and repaired our possesions rather than dumping and replacing.
IMO Bill Gates has much to answer for in terms of our modern desire to upgrade every five minutes but that's another story.
How long it will take for bike manufacturers to get back to the days when bikes were built to last is a good question but it will probably take a generation or two.
It said that pyschology is shifting and that we are making a slow return to the days when we loved and cherished and repaired our possesions rather than dumping and replacing.
IMO Bill Gates has much to answer for in terms of our modern desire to upgrade every five minutes but that's another story.
How long it will take for bike manufacturers to get back to the days when bikes were built to last is a good question but it will probably take a generation or two.
In some ways it might be good that there is so much over priced exotica on offer. Those that may have regarded bikes as either kids' toys or poor peoples' transport now may start to see them as vital life-style accessories.
But, being someone who has owned a super-bike in the past, I thinkt hat there is definatly a case of diminishing returns with the more you spend. To really take advantage of a £4000 bike I think that you have to be a much better cyclist than me!
And to be honest, my scrap heap flyer can take me to all the places that many superbikes can take their riders, and I don't have to worry about it getting a bit of dirt on it either
But, being someone who has owned a super-bike in the past, I thinkt hat there is definatly a case of diminishing returns with the more you spend. To really take advantage of a £4000 bike I think that you have to be a much better cyclist than me!
And to be honest, my scrap heap flyer can take me to all the places that many superbikes can take their riders, and I don't have to worry about it getting a bit of dirt on it either
-
mankymitts
- Posts: 60
- Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:26am
A few years ago my brother bought a bike second hand dripping with high end campag kit. He drooled over it as it had been used by a UK pro team. His happiness soon turned to misery as a lot of the groupset failed after being hammered by the pros.
This leads me to believe that top end kit is not neccesarily more durable than the stuff mid range.
MM
This leads me to believe that top end kit is not neccesarily more durable than the stuff mid range.
MM
-
Coventarian
-
reohn2
Coventarian wrote:You have price, durability, weight.
As one becomes better, the other two become worse.
Price & weight are easy to measure, you could start talking to your retailer about warranties if you want to know about the third factor.
My LBS says that if he gets any complaints about STI's it's always the high end stuff that fails,so it seems your right.
-
hubgearfreak
- Posts: 8212
- Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 4:14pm
reohn2 wrote:My LBS says that if he gets any complaints about STI's it's always the high end stuff that fails,so it seems your right.
i'm guessing that of the range that any shop sells, then it's the more expensive bikes get used most. some or many of the £200-£300 bikes will get bought with the idea of being used, only to find themselves languishing in the back of a shed after a couple of weeks. these will never give the shop bother obviously. the others may only be used to go to the pub weekly, or the shops and clock up maybe 3 miles a week
similarly, the people that spend £2000 on a cycle, will be serious and go perhaps 5000miles pa. which will show up reliability issues.
i'm not disagreeing with what you're saying, simply putting this forward as a thought
I was tempted by the sales pitch at my local 'Pro' store, nice bloke don't get me wrong, but I've spent far too much in his shop already and he wanted to build me a bike for about £1500 which, as much as I would like it & use it - I can't afford it!
anyway, I have two lightweight bikes in my stable, both secondhand frames (one aluminium, one steel ) & wheels, all new transmission and various control Ergo's / STI's / bars / pedals / mech's / brake calipers / stems / posts etc sourced from cycle jumbles / ebay & websites, both cost me less than £500 and I am more than happy with the results. Maybe a custom built bike would improve my perfomance by some, but I have always built my own bikes.
anyway, I have two lightweight bikes in my stable, both secondhand frames (one aluminium, one steel ) & wheels, all new transmission and various control Ergo's / STI's / bars / pedals / mech's / brake calipers / stems / posts etc sourced from cycle jumbles / ebay & websites, both cost me less than £500 and I am more than happy with the results. Maybe a custom built bike would improve my perfomance by some, but I have always built my own bikes.
-
reohn2
hubgearfreak wrote:reohn2 wrote:My LBS says that if he gets any complaints about STI's it's always the high end stuff that fails,so it seems your right.
i'm guessing that of the range that any shop sells, then it's the more expensive bikes get used most. some or many of the £200-£300 bikes will get bought with the idea of being used, only to find themselves languishing in the back of a shed after a couple of weeks. these will never give the shop bother obviously. the others may only be used to go to the pub weekly, or the shops and clock up maybe 3 miles a week
similarly, the people that spend £2000 on a cycle, will be serious and go perhaps 5000miles pa. which will show up reliability issues.
i'm not disagreeing with what you're saying, simply putting this forward as a thought
I'd suspect that it is the mid range kit (105/veloce)that gets the most hammer,though i do see the reasoning behind what your saying.
-
Coventarian
Take a look at http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=3805
What you get when you pay more for a chain is stronger riveting, shinier side-plates and maybe lighter weight, and none of those things are likely to make it last longer!
I suspect what applies to chains applies to everything else. More money buys more performance, but durability is another matter.
E.g. tyres. Take a look at Schwalbe's website. There's a technical information document which can be downloaded. They have touring tyres (Marathon) and racing tyres (Stelvio). Some quotes:
"Marathon type tires should generally last for 6000 to 12000 km..... The Stelvio Competition tire should generally last 3000 to 7000 km".
Also
"In order to make a tire with very low rolling resistance, it is necessary to compromise on other important factors such as puncture protection or grip."
"Almost all SCHWALBE tires have a puncture protection belt, though we purposely decided not to include them in the special light and sports tires."
What you get when you pay more for a chain is stronger riveting, shinier side-plates and maybe lighter weight, and none of those things are likely to make it last longer!
I suspect what applies to chains applies to everything else. More money buys more performance, but durability is another matter.
E.g. tyres. Take a look at Schwalbe's website. There's a technical information document which can be downloaded. They have touring tyres (Marathon) and racing tyres (Stelvio). Some quotes:
"Marathon type tires should generally last for 6000 to 12000 km..... The Stelvio Competition tire should generally last 3000 to 7000 km".
Also
"In order to make a tire with very low rolling resistance, it is necessary to compromise on other important factors such as puncture protection or grip."
"Almost all SCHWALBE tires have a puncture protection belt, though we purposely decided not to include them in the special light and sports tires."
-
hubgearfreak
- Posts: 8212
- Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 4:14pm
reohn2 wrote:I'd suspect that it is the mid range kit (105/veloce)that gets the most hammer,though i do see the reasoning behind what your saying.
i really don't know what 105 veloce is, but i'm guessing it's de-raillers(middle-priced)?
that'd make sense, someone who spends £2000 on a bike would be sure to keep it clean & oiled, and only use it for special occasions / timetrials.
the £200 bikes still see little/no use.
the middle priced ones are those used by 20+mile commuters and serious training people
i think that we are agreeing?
-
Mrs Tortoise
- Posts: 453
- Joined: 8 Jan 2007, 11:44pm
- Location: Dorchester, Dorset
Isn't all this very much a case of, 'you pays your money and takes your choice', plus an element of purpose, for which you are buying or building the bike. I also expect the look of the object will also feature, apparently, people buy cars for their looks rather than their safety element.
I don't spend a fortune, none of my bikes cost more than £600, although I've had things like wheels upgraded when I thought it useful and viable. I don't race, so while performance is more a question of struggling up hills than doing a round 20, my machines fill all my current needs - once they stop doing that, then I'll see what's available that might fit the bill!
I don't spend a fortune, none of my bikes cost more than £600, although I've had things like wheels upgraded when I thought it useful and viable. I don't race, so while performance is more a question of struggling up hills than doing a round 20, my machines fill all my current needs - once they stop doing that, then I'll see what's available that might fit the bill!