There's nothing judgemental in what follows. I've spent inordinate amounts of money on my hobbies over the years and I'm totally okay with people spending their money on what makes them happy.
However, for me, my bike is a utilitarian tool that simply needs to function to the level I need -- and my needs are lowly -- so I'm looking to try and understand how much of the huge premiums I see in the price of pretty much all bike components is indicative of better reliability and longevity, and how much is down to more esoteric concerns that will only benefit those who will either truly benefit from the extra sub 1% performance they might gain; or even just the brand recognition amongst their peers; neither of which hold any importance to me.
If you look at this headset page there are 18 items that all purport to perform the same function that range in price from £6.99 to £99.99.
A 14x mark up from cheapest to most expensive. Can the most expensive really last 14x longer? Or be 14x better in some other way? (If so, how?)
As with all things there is a premium to pay for a top-brand item; and the cheapest available is likely to be not just inferior quality, but possibly poor quality control, thus might not fit etc., but even discounting first and last, there is still a 6x difference between low and high.
Can one be expected to last 6x longer, be 6x lighter, go 6x faster; or some combination of those that makes them 6x better? If not, then what is that 6x premium buying?
And the component that really started this for me, crank arms. As I ride my bike, it feels to me that the crank arms fitted are too short. They are 170mm, which seems to be fairly standard, but 180mm seem to be readily available, so I looked to see how much it would cost me to try a set.
Frankly I was staggered to see that people are apparently willing to spend more on this -- seemingly simple, hardly high tech, essentially unchanged and unchangeable piece of technology -- than I should have paid for my entire bike.
I mean, it is essentially a beam. Once you've done away with the awful cotter-pin fixing arrangement which was a really bad design from the get go, and replaced it with something -- whether the square taper or one of the fluted designs -- it only really need be a piece of bar with a couple of appropriately shaped holes in either end. The stresses and strains are easily calculated and then you trade cost for weight. Simple.
So how come they cost so much? How come "you guys" are willing to spend so much on them?
Besides the perfectly valid -- its my money and I'll spend it how I want to -- can anyone explain to me the justification for spending £200+ on a pair of crank arms?
Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
I didn't know then, what I now know.
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
Headsets are a good example of you get what you pay for. Cheap ones (say around £15) typically last one winter for me on my MTB thne get full of rust and die. A really cheap one constantly needs adjustment, then ovalises and has a tight spot.
By contrast, I have a Hope that has been in service off road since 2006, cost £40 or so.
Cranks:
Shimano 300LX. Ran wonky with a 3mm side to side wobble of the chainring from day 1.
Middleburn, £95, always ran true, just swapped the spider for different chainrings. Half the weight of the 300LX.
Campagnolo Chorus: bought secondhand (15 years old) £50 (£90 new IIRC), wonderful to ride as the Q-factor is less than almost every other crank and doesn't feel like being bandy-legged. That alone was worth it in comfort over 100 mile rides.
Cheap cranks have cheap pressed chainrings - typically I get a single winter out of them, by comparison TA rings at 3x the price last 5 years. Who's the fool now? When you see how well Shimano XT, Dura-Ace and Campag Chorus / Record stuff is still going at 20+ years old then it's not such bad value. My nice road bike has 1994 Campag Record/Chorus stuff. Apart from new jockey wheels and £5 on shifter springs it's needed nothing. Obviously wearing parts like chains, cables and cassettes have been renewed.
A lot of the pricer stuff last a lot longer. Above that you go to racing kit which gives marginal gains and can be more fragile.
By contrast, I have a Hope that has been in service off road since 2006, cost £40 or so.
Cranks:
Shimano 300LX. Ran wonky with a 3mm side to side wobble of the chainring from day 1.
Middleburn, £95, always ran true, just swapped the spider for different chainrings. Half the weight of the 300LX.
Campagnolo Chorus: bought secondhand (15 years old) £50 (£90 new IIRC), wonderful to ride as the Q-factor is less than almost every other crank and doesn't feel like being bandy-legged. That alone was worth it in comfort over 100 mile rides.
Cheap cranks have cheap pressed chainrings - typically I get a single winter out of them, by comparison TA rings at 3x the price last 5 years. Who's the fool now? When you see how well Shimano XT, Dura-Ace and Campag Chorus / Record stuff is still going at 20+ years old then it's not such bad value. My nice road bike has 1994 Campag Record/Chorus stuff. Apart from new jockey wheels and £5 on shifter springs it's needed nothing. Obviously wearing parts like chains, cables and cassettes have been renewed.
A lot of the pricer stuff last a lot longer. Above that you go to racing kit which gives marginal gains and can be more fragile.
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
I took the alloy crank arms off my bike and replaced them with a carbon fibre pair that have a retail value of £280. I paid £130 for them in a sale.
They are a tiny bit lighter and a tiny bit stiffer. If I swapped back to the old pair I very much doubt that my bike would have any real loss in performance, but I ride my bike for pleasure, and every time I look down at those cranks I feel good about riding the bike. Additionally, the fact that I feel good helps me to pedal faster. Seeing my times decrease makes me happier still, and so on. There are a lot of unhappy people in the world, so seeing as I can afford it, why not?
They are a tiny bit lighter and a tiny bit stiffer. If I swapped back to the old pair I very much doubt that my bike would have any real loss in performance, but I ride my bike for pleasure, and every time I look down at those cranks I feel good about riding the bike. Additionally, the fact that I feel good helps me to pedal faster. Seeing my times decrease makes me happier still, and so on. There are a lot of unhappy people in the world, so seeing as I can afford it, why not?
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
With regard to components, up to a point (often about 4 to 6 times the price of the very cheapest components) you get a dramatic increase in performance, quality and longevity; beyond this point you get diminishing returns for any extra money spent. Differences beyond this apex point are small, but some have the money and feeling to notice the difference, so will pay a premium.
I'm not sure I get the point of the thread. I'm sure you have been involved in a hobby where you have paid more money for something than the average person, uninterested in anything beyond basic functionality, would pay for the same. There will be reasons behind this extra expenditure and how much extra you can justify will depend upon a number of things, but I'm sure the average person would baulk at the idea of spending as much, part of that will be because they are uninterested in increased quality, part will be an ignorance of the difference between the cheap (often, cheapest) product and more expensive ones and part will probably be a feeling they are being had.
I have no idea why people spend £3000 on a television. Well, I have an idea, it's just that it is not where my money would go. I wouldn't suggest to home cinema enthusiats that there are no differences of note between a £400 50" TV and a £4000 50" TV without knowing the subject extensively, by which time I may no longer find the £400 TV acceptable in the way I once would have. In this way, ignorance can sometimes be bliss.
Yes, manufacturers will push their luck with prices, but obviously as you go up in quality there are fewer and fewer people willing to spend the money; smaller productions runs, special processing, materials or manufacturing equipment will necessitate higher prices being paid by consumers.
I'm not sure I get the point of the thread. I'm sure you have been involved in a hobby where you have paid more money for something than the average person, uninterested in anything beyond basic functionality, would pay for the same. There will be reasons behind this extra expenditure and how much extra you can justify will depend upon a number of things, but I'm sure the average person would baulk at the idea of spending as much, part of that will be because they are uninterested in increased quality, part will be an ignorance of the difference between the cheap (often, cheapest) product and more expensive ones and part will probably be a feeling they are being had.
I have no idea why people spend £3000 on a television. Well, I have an idea, it's just that it is not where my money would go. I wouldn't suggest to home cinema enthusiats that there are no differences of note between a £400 50" TV and a £4000 50" TV without knowing the subject extensively, by which time I may no longer find the £400 TV acceptable in the way I once would have. In this way, ignorance can sometimes be bliss.
Yes, manufacturers will push their luck with prices, but obviously as you go up in quality there are fewer and fewer people willing to spend the money; smaller productions runs, special processing, materials or manufacturing equipment will necessitate higher prices being paid by consumers.
Last edited by Freddie on 29 Jun 2017, 7:06pm, edited 1 time in total.
/elephant.jpg)
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
First of all as in everything else, you get what you are willing to pay for.. .. 180 cranks unless you are 6' plus with long legs and strong forget about 180 cranks, many years ago a local very successful race guy trained hard every winter, he was 6'3'' and about mid May changed over to 180's, he was heard to say that before that amount of training miles, many thousands!! he couldn't turn them as they should be turned..and again 180's are quite rare, for every 170 set or even 175mm ... 180's would ime be 1/100.. and normally TT use only.. so they are made in the top group set.. not tiagra or sora afaik although someone here may know different.. will
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
A common "trick" in the cycling world and one which I certainly am a sucker for, is to give enormous discounts on super-inflated prices.
I bought a pair of cranks with a £300 price tag reduced to £40 which was a decent price for them but I am happy that I have a "£300" set of cranks but I would never pay that much!
An item may not be 6x better at any one thing but if it is 50% better in a whole range of things that makes it worth 6 times as much. I am more likely to have a cut-off point of criteria for a component and something just has to reach that point, it doesnt matter if a component can be bought for 10% of the price if it is 99% as good as my standard because it just doesnt make the grade.
On the other hand some things make the grade and cost a pittance and I am happy enough with them.
An example of that is Tourney shifters, http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Shimano-6-Spe ... 1286044650
I bought them for £6 each and am happy to stick them on a bike with a load of extortionately priced other components on it. When it comes to drop bars the price bar is raised and it costs £100 for a pair of gear changers that will do the job.
I share your utilitarian view point when it comes to cars, where things are bought on the best value for money basis, when it comes to bikes there is an extravagance because the utilitarianism has been combined with the joy of owning "beautiful" engineering. Cycling puts top level equipment within the reach of the common working man, though increasingly less and less so.
I bought a pair of cranks with a £300 price tag reduced to £40 which was a decent price for them but I am happy that I have a "£300" set of cranks but I would never pay that much!
An item may not be 6x better at any one thing but if it is 50% better in a whole range of things that makes it worth 6 times as much. I am more likely to have a cut-off point of criteria for a component and something just has to reach that point, it doesnt matter if a component can be bought for 10% of the price if it is 99% as good as my standard because it just doesnt make the grade.
On the other hand some things make the grade and cost a pittance and I am happy enough with them.
An example of that is Tourney shifters, http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Shimano-6-Spe ... 1286044650
I bought them for £6 each and am happy to stick them on a bike with a load of extortionately priced other components on it. When it comes to drop bars the price bar is raised and it costs £100 for a pair of gear changers that will do the job.
I share your utilitarian view point when it comes to cars, where things are bought on the best value for money basis, when it comes to bikes there is an extravagance because the utilitarianism has been combined with the joy of owning "beautiful" engineering. Cycling puts top level equipment within the reach of the common working man, though increasingly less and less so.
Yma o Hyd
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
If you look at this headset page there are 18 items that all purport to perform the same function that range in price from £6.99 to £99.99.
Interestingly to support the point of not making the grade, the one review of the cheapest item is
Can´t be used safely
Has poor fit in the head tube, comes loose when riding.
Assuming of course the reviewer had not mixed up their JIS and ISO.
Yma o Hyd
-
The utility cyclist
- Posts: 3607
- Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
- Location: The first garden city
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
Oceanic wrote:I took the alloy crank arms off my bike and replaced them with a carbon fibre pair that have a retail value of £280. I paid £130 for them in a sale.
They are a tiny bit lighter and a tiny bit stiffer. If I swapped back to the old pair I very much doubt that my bike would have any real loss in performance, but I ride my bike for pleasure, and every time I look down at those cranks I feel good about riding the bike. Additionally, the fact that I feel good helps me to pedal faster. Seeing my times decrease makes me happier still, and so on. There are a lot of unhappy people in the world, so seeing as I can afford it, why not?
This, if doing something/changing out a bit of kit makes you happier/feel good/makaes cycling easier than before then the price is irrelevant, how do you measure pleasure, it's immeasurable financially IMHO.
I also think think when you buy relatively expensive kit you're more likely to want to look after it, that's certainly my feelings with respect to the day bike compared to the more expensive bikes. Some things are workhorses, you don't necessarily want bling, mostly simple function over form, in that there is still a variance as to how people interpret that, everyones levels are different.
Personally I wouldn't go lower than Tiagra/Deore for the day/utility bike, I think it's a good compromise in terms of price/function/longevity/looks, for bikes I'm predominantly using for pleasure/liesure I wouldn't go lower than Ultegra/Chorus simply because aethetically it's pleasing, its function is also more efficient in what I want it to do for me and that longevity in terms of how many miles I can get out of it isn't near the top of the rung with regards to the purchasing decision.
Earlier this year I bought (new) a very expensive pair of tubular wheels, they were approx 40% of the RRP because of a very minor cosmetic flaw on the front, they still cost me over £700, will they return 7 x the performance, make me 7x faster, last 7x longer than a set of wheels I'd use for utility/commuter duties, absolutely not. Does that or should that bother me, not in the slightest because the enjoyment and improvement in ride and less amount of effort for the same speed I get from them is worth every penny.
Everyone is different though, some see it as wasteful and being sold something you don't need and are stupid because of it.
There was a discussion on the forum last year over electronic shifting for everyday bikes and Brucey particularly was dismissing it (on the basis of no experience whatsoever) and deriding the concept with no evidence at all and stated that those adopting it were "stoopid", when I challenged his assertions I was banned and had my long standing account closed by the mods without warning
That the cost of electronic shifting could be relatively expensive for everyday bikes is irrelevant, if people want it and it works for them or indeed encourages people to try cycling or cycle further, it doesn't matter the cost.Some people simply can't bear it that others can make a choice with their money simply because it's not what they would do, if one wants to spend £xxxx instead of £xx it's actually none of anyones business and no-one needs to justify it.
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
The utility cyclist wrote:Some people simply can't bear it that others can make a choice with their money simply because it's not what they would do, if one wants to spend £xxxx instead of £xx it's actually none of anyones business and no-one needs to justify it.
I'd ask you to (re-)read both the first and last paragraphs of my OP. You can skip the bits in the middle assuming it's tl;dr.
Last edited by Buk on 29 Jun 2017, 9:04pm, edited 1 time in total.
I didn't know then, what I now know.
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
an interesting point was made by the former ctc tech expert at the York Rally, that in the UK there are only 2 market levels unlike in other countries - the real cheap and the real expensive: the internediate level is not purchased that much compared to the others
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
Riding a bike involves human effort with a physical interface over a longish (or very long period) of time. I think that justifies a lot. That takes us up to £1000 for a bike. Another £500 will improve on that and another £500 get you the bike you really fancy in the right colour. Another £500 might get you to win race or survive in Kazakstan. Above that you might enjoy the human amazement at what engineers can do. But I'll still be at £1000.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
Crikey that is a question and a half isn't it.
Ultimately probably like many others my finances dictate a limit. So my spending varies based on the item. I'm likely to spoil myself when I can afford it sometimes regardless of rational thinking. Equally sometimes I flatly refuse to spend a penny more than I have to.
Here are some examples of what I have bought to point out some random spends in its pricing range and for the hell of it I'll add some rational as to why I opted for those things.
1) I have a Giant Defy 0 with the alluxx frame. Because I am so unlikely to ride more than 60km regularly with a full sportive distance yet to happen. But at the same time knowing I didn't have to spend this much either but it prompts me take better care than just having a tool for the job.It is usually a failing in me to get too excited about stuff that is really cheap and I know there are plenty of decent cheaper bikes out there. Besides if I still lust after something fancy the markets above this price range are plentiful.
2) Based on the distances and regularity mentioned above I bought the cheapest shoes I could find, a pair of Northwest at £37.
3) My track pump is as cheap and cheerful as they come and guess what? It works and has a decent enough gauge which I have cross checked.
4) I have a castelli Perfetto convertible. Probably so I don't have to have a who;e wardrobe with me when we get more than 2 seasons in one day.
5) Here is the crazy eccentric in me.....Both of my CO2 adapters (one for each bike) were painstakingly sought just because!
They are blackburn wayside's and were available off the peg when I was on holiday in the USA last year for around $14. I intended to get one but left without getting it. Low and behold obsessed stupidly over it. I like a challenge and eventually sourced 2 separately from the states once back in the UK and landed them for twice the cost I could have got them for out there!!!
6) I have Btwin shorts and tights as well as DHB because I put my Bargain head on and these things are superb value with an outstanding guarantee.
7) If I ever get a smart trainer it will cost more than my Defy......another glimpse of eccentricity and I look over my shoulder incase the men in white coats are coming to get me.
8 ) Bike computer? a pre owned cat eye thing that was probably about £20 new. But it tells me the time, the journey distance, the current speed etc. I don't even think I would have stretched to this much if I had to buy one .....at least before I used it.
9) I will never splash out on a helmet cam.
Thats me. So in a nutshell you say tomatta......
Ultimately probably like many others my finances dictate a limit. So my spending varies based on the item. I'm likely to spoil myself when I can afford it sometimes regardless of rational thinking. Equally sometimes I flatly refuse to spend a penny more than I have to.
Here are some examples of what I have bought to point out some random spends in its pricing range and for the hell of it I'll add some rational as to why I opted for those things.
1) I have a Giant Defy 0 with the alluxx frame. Because I am so unlikely to ride more than 60km regularly with a full sportive distance yet to happen. But at the same time knowing I didn't have to spend this much either but it prompts me take better care than just having a tool for the job.It is usually a failing in me to get too excited about stuff that is really cheap and I know there are plenty of decent cheaper bikes out there. Besides if I still lust after something fancy the markets above this price range are plentiful.
2) Based on the distances and regularity mentioned above I bought the cheapest shoes I could find, a pair of Northwest at £37.
3) My track pump is as cheap and cheerful as they come and guess what? It works and has a decent enough gauge which I have cross checked.
4) I have a castelli Perfetto convertible. Probably so I don't have to have a who;e wardrobe with me when we get more than 2 seasons in one day.
5) Here is the crazy eccentric in me.....Both of my CO2 adapters (one for each bike) were painstakingly sought just because!
They are blackburn wayside's and were available off the peg when I was on holiday in the USA last year for around $14. I intended to get one but left without getting it. Low and behold obsessed stupidly over it. I like a challenge and eventually sourced 2 separately from the states once back in the UK and landed them for twice the cost I could have got them for out there!!!
6) I have Btwin shorts and tights as well as DHB because I put my Bargain head on and these things are superb value with an outstanding guarantee.
7) If I ever get a smart trainer it will cost more than my Defy......another glimpse of eccentricity and I look over my shoulder incase the men in white coats are coming to get me.
8 ) Bike computer? a pre owned cat eye thing that was probably about £20 new. But it tells me the time, the journey distance, the current speed etc. I don't even think I would have stretched to this much if I had to buy one .....at least before I used it.
9) I will never splash out on a helmet cam.
Thats me. So in a nutshell you say tomatta......
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
The original link was to 1" headsets. Good ones are getting rare now. The Dura Ace one is very nice. I've got one put by that I picked up for a lot less than that page shows, but I can understand the premium price.
Cheap 1" headsets come undone in normal use and are a complete pain. Mid-range ones can be quite good and give decades of service. High end ones are just nice
Cheap 1" headsets come undone in normal use and are a complete pain. Mid-range ones can be quite good and give decades of service. High end ones are just nice
-
The utility cyclist
- Posts: 3607
- Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
- Location: The first garden city
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
Buk wrote:The utility cyclist wrote:Some people simply can't bear it that others can make a choice with their money simply because it's not what they would do, if one wants to spend £xxxx instead of £xx it's actually none of anyones business and no-one needs to justify it.
I'd ask you to (re-)read both the first and last paragraphs of my OP. You can skip the bits in the middle assuming it's tl;dr.
I read it, so why do you think what I said is aimed at you personally, where have I singled you out with what i said in mind? My statement is accurate however, that some people simply can't bear that other people have choices and will spend their money on things they wouldn't or don't agree with and make a song and dance about it. you only have to read many threads on this forum to know this is true.
Re: Who pays 14x as much for an 'equivalent' item? And why?
The utility cyclist wrote: My statement is accurate however, that some people simply can't bear that other people have choices and will spend their money on things they wouldn't or don't agree with and make a song and dance about it. you only have to read many threads on this forum to know this is true.
So you weren't responding to my question so much as hijacking it to respond to some other threads you've encountered here. Okay, thanks.
I didn't know then, what I now know.