are we being conned ?



Originally posted by Blimp
Bring on some competition...

I'm with you all the way on that one.

Pretty soon this thread will venture into the matter of dominance by one or two major players and how they use their clout to maintain their dominance using tactics similar to a certain operating systems vendor. The key difference is there are a bit more computers out there than there are bicycles and the bicycle component vendors do a good job of not killing all attempts at competition.

The fact that it's extremely expensive to manufacture a small quatity of high tech parts only supports these vendors' charging top dollar for their high-end designs.
 
If you don´t want it don´t buy it they say , the problem is we are losing the alternatives and each time the technology changes the prices rise AND DON´T COME DOWN , a half decent carbon fork is still twice the price of a good ali or steel fork , carbon rear ends are actually cheaper for manufacturers but they still charge a premium price for frames of this type .
My worry is that too many people are being priced out of buying a road bike as they have been with the mtb thing , cycling shouldn´t be like golf , a sport for only the fat of wallet .
Three chain rings are great , even the pros use them on occasion ( remember the Angliru in the Vuelta 2000 + 2001 ? ) , so don´t criticise if your superman and don´t ride mountains , for us they give an option for low gears without messing up your ratios for the rest of the time .
Aero wheels , fine but it´s getting difficult to buy something conventional ( and people like K. Bontrager still prefer them ) that are strong , comfy , easy to maintain and that don´t get you blowen all over the place in a side wind .
I can´t change my bke every year nor do I want to so can the manufacturers please only change everything when it´s better , not just a different colour, I mean white carbon !
 
Originally posted by el Inglés
If you don´t want it don´t buy it they say , the problem is we are losing the alternatives and each time the technology changes the prices rise AND DON´T COME DOWN , a half decent carbon fork is still twice the price of a good ali or steel fork , carbon rear ends are actually cheaper for manufacturers but they still charge a premium price for frames of this type .
My worry is that too many people are being priced out of buying a road bike as they have been with the mtb thing , cycling shouldn´t be like golf , a sport for only the fat of wallet .

Prices will continue going up, inflation and all. The cheapest new car made today is still more expensive than a typical car 10 years ago (or so, you get the idea).

-HIGH END-
1980s prices for a road bike with full Dura Ace - $949.99
(http://www.vintage-trek.com/PriceListNov24_80.htm)
2004 Price for a Trek with full Dura Ace - $3899.99
(http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2004/road/5500.jsp)

-LOW END-
1980 Complete Trek road bike - $365
(http://www.vintage-trek.com/PriceListNov24_80.htm)
2004 Complete Trek road bike - $569.00
(http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2004/road/1000.jsp)

1980 price for a Datsun 280ZX Limited Edition - $14,285.00
(http://adcache.collectorcartraderonline.com/10/7/6/54561976.htm)
2004 Price for a Nissan 350Z loaded - $36,970.00
(http://www.earnhardt.com/new/search...t=Sticker&per_page=15&page=1&cyl=%&updown=ASC)

I offer these to show that the lower end bikes have actually gone up less than high performance bikes, and even less than cars.

While the minimum wage has risen 55% since 1980 (http://www.adaction.org/mwbook.html) and bottom end bike prices have risen 64% it seems that minimum wage earners may have to wait an extra payday before they can afford a new bike today.

However with inflation, $365.00 for a bike in 1980 would equal $868.42 now, so lower end bikes are actually substantially cheaper now than they were over 20 years ago! (per dollar value)

Allan
 
We'll to throw my 2 cents in, I don't think prices have changed that much. I remember buying my Campy SR grouppo for my Cannondale back in 1984 and it cost about $1100us and just last month I ordered a new 2003 Campy Record grouppo and it was $1200 with hubs, I did opt for the CF cranks though which bumped the price up some more. Also back in 1984 I had custome wheels built using my already purchased hubs, they suppiled the spokes, nipples and state of the art Assos aero rims this set me back another $250 each. Building my new bike I purchased a set of Campy Nuetron wheels for less than the wheels cost in 1984 to build. The pricing of the high end Trek is alot of money compared to what I spent. Last I think inovation will always cost any manufacturer that stays at the forefront of their field needs to recoup cost of R&D that is why high end equipment cost so much at first and then the technology will trickle down to the lower end. Check out new cars 20 years ago only the most expensive ones came with fuel injection, cruise control and anti-lock brakes, now almost all new vehicles have the innovations.
 
Originally posted by stevek
I use my bike for transporation. so it has to be locked up when I go into some place. I don't leave it for hours though. but whats the use of having a bike if you have to leave it home because you ahve to worry about it getting stolen?

I understand the need for bikes as transporation. But who is really going to use a "TCR1" for shopping? That would be crazy. I only ride my road bike for training or to work. Where it is in my section all safe. The average cyclists with an average bike, would be alright......

Memph
 
Originally posted by flea77
First off it is "pathetic" not "pathic". Next, I dont appreciate you calling me pathetic. I use all three rings as I just started riding six months ago after eighteen years as a couch potatoe. And I am sure there are pros out there who think you are pathetic for your gear selection.

I say anyone who rides any kind of bike, regardless of gears, is taking a step in the right direction and should be appluaded for their efforts.

Allan

I agree that anyone who rides deserves to be "patted on the back". If you are taking my statement the wrong way, then you must be one weak cyclist. I would never use a triple chainring. Lived in British Columbia with some huge TdF style mountains. Only had my double chainring at a 39-52. Able to climb at still 100rpm, no baby chainring needed. Now that I live in Ontario, which is flatter. My chainrings are now 42-52 (56, if racing).

I cycle with a friend who has a triple and she drives me crazy. She goes so slow because of the triple. Always in the baby gear. I have to coast to go slow enough to keep up.

I understand the need for the triple. Rich, beginner, weak, older riders who want to be able to spin. So the baby gear is there for them. That is why DA has a triple....

Memph
 
Originally posted by Memphmann

I understand the need for the triple. Rich, beginner, weak, older riders who want to be able to spin. So the baby gear is there for them. That is why DA has a triple....

Memph

I was seriously wondering what that little ring in front was for ... Granted I live in oh, so flat, Chicago ... maybe that's it. But, my small ring (28) is sparkling clean ... and on the 38 and 48 I'm never on the larger cogs in back. maybe I need some tougher gearing ... ah, the upgrade bug. I'll wait awhile.
 
Originally posted by swimmeronwheels
I was seriously wondering what that little ring in front was for ... Granted I live in oh, so flat, Chicago ... maybe that's it. But, my small ring (28) is sparkling clean ... and on the 38 and 48 I'm never on the larger cogs in back. maybe I need some tougher gearing ... ah, the upgrade bug. I'll wait awhile.

You have a 28-38-48. That is a small large chainring. Would really have to spin to keep up with the boys who use a 52 or even a 56.

You can say you never use the baby chainring, but how true is that? It is there, unlike not having one. I am not tempted to use this ring as I do not have it. Or does chain falling of my 39 count as my baby ring?

More power to all that need this baby ring..... :)

Memph
 
Originally posted by el Inglés
Is it just me but does anybody else out there feel that the lastest fetish for carbon is getting beyond a joke ? Every time somebody makes an old piece from carbon the price rockets , now this was bad enough when carbon forks were introduced and they are better than the alternatives but look what´s happening now .....
Now carbon / composites are good materials but do we need brake levers , handlebars , seat pins , cranks etc ( I´ll come back to wheels later ) made from this material ? We all fall off at times , sometimes our fault , a veces no , so how do we get home with broken levers ,bars etc . If it´s metal it bends and you can , with difficulty, get home ; if carbon it breaks and your stuck . Now a fork that´s hit hard enough to break carbon will render steel or ali unridable, the same with wheels , a choice of taco or kibble but seat pins that crack if not fitted with a torque wrench , I mean it´s getting silly and everytime the price doubles at the very least with little advantage except it´s black ( and now that´s common they are developing WHITE carbon !!! ).
Can we please call a halt while we decide what our priorities are , because if the industry is not careful it could kill the goose the way the overdevelopment of moutain bikes resulted in bikes that people could no longer afford to buy , and an industry in chapter 11 .

ps has anybody noticed how difficult it´s getting to buy a non-anatomic handlebar ? if they are made it´s only in the most expensive model ( Ritchey , Deda ) ???????????????

Your can only be conned if you allow yourself to be. Do your research and then decide if the difference is worth your money or not. Don't go by other peoples opinions. When if comes to performance some people will spend a lot of money for a very small improvement and to them it is worth it. To others though if the improvement is very small then they don't feel it is worth thier money. You decide what's best for you. The more choices the better for everyone.

Matt
 
Originally posted by mfallon
Your can only be conned if you allow yourself to be. Do your research and then decide if the difference is worth your money or not. Don't go by other peoples opinions. When if comes to performance some people will spend a lot of money for a very small improvement and to them it is worth it. To others though if the improvement is very small then they don't feel it is worth thier money. You decide what's best for you. The more choices the better for everyone.

Matt
I agree. I used to do upgrades on my computer. Now I wait. My bike is even less so. I see few upgrades that will really make me happy. I am finding if something does not really improve what I am doing or make life easier I don't enjoy spending money on it as much.
I enjoy getting something that really benefits me.
 
Consider also that the companies have a good idea already what the designs may be several years from now, but they don't market the products that are on the "bleeding" edge. That's a marketing blunder. Instead, they baby step us along on the cutting edge, getting us all in the habit of looking for improvements, small as they may be. This is done in just about every industry.

I think Picasso even employed this principle in his paintings. He was accused of not being innovative enough, but his reply was that people have trouble "understanding" art that is entirely new. Popularity, and thus profitability, seem to follow a continuum, a gradual change.

What is frustrating is that they don't seem to be extremely accommodating to those who need old parts. Clearly, the replacement parts market is much smaller from the get-go for bicycle parts. After all, many people don't repair much. Some put their bikes in the garage. Others just buy new bikes. If the repacement parts market were expanding, the parts prices would go down, the availability would go up. It's the opposite because the market continues to shrink as the replacement parts are not on the newer bikes and as people start to replace their older bikes.

So no, I don't think we are getting conned. Change is inevitable. Imagine yourself a manufacturer. You want to maintain high margin, but you want low price to appeal to a bigger audience. You always have to watch to make sure you don't lose sales due to the competition's more popular innovations. It's quite a balancing act.

By the way, I got a great used Cannondale road bike on Ebay. It fits me perfectly. It's about 20 years old with only maybe 1000 km on it when I bought it. I bet there are a lot of good older high quality bikes in this country if you look.
 
I rode all Record until they started making "road contact" parts out of carbon fiber. Now I ride Record and Chorus. I *know* I would have replaced at least one lever and the rear derailleur had they been carbon. Alloy? It's just scraped--and working still.

The bottom line: I cannot afford to consider any portion of my grouppo disposable. And quite frankly, it shouldn't be.
 

Similar threads