DMC707

Was having a debate with a friend via text when he was comparing a $9000 new 250 class motocross bike to a $9000 mountain bike and asking - "what gives"

I tried explaining that the 9k mtb is a machine worthy of pinning a number on at the World cup level with very minimal mods to personalize it to the rider while the 9k motocrosser , while capable of lining up at any local race around the country, is still a far cry from the machines that the top pros are using , which are probably 50k+ machines easily and that a 9k mx bike would likely compare favorably to a nice, competent alloy or basic carbon entry level MTB in the 3k range. A bike that is not up to a pro's standards, but wouldnt really hold anybody back at the Cat 2 level or below

The argument turned to the theory that high end MTB's have ridiculous profit margins knowing that bike snobs will figure out a way to pony up the dough , while the Motocross manufacturers target a more "proletariat" demographic

I pointed out that these arguments and comparisons have been going on for 35 years, when a Mantis Flying V or Fat Chance Yo Eddy likely cost around $3500 which was the going rate for a new motorcycle then as well, --- and that the cost from Shimano, SRAM, fox and rock Shox was a fixed cost for similar tiers of bikes and the manufacturers dont have as much control over those prices as they do the framesets that they make in house or contract out.

And again the counterpoint -- the Fat Chance from 3 decades ago was hand built by an american builder in a shop that probably had a pony keg of craft beer on tap in the back somewhere while the new school stuff is predominately laid up in a Chinese facility for $200 -- then a bike manufacturer assigns an arbitrary value to it



$9000 Mountain bike




$9000 Motocross bike

wheelreason

Lol.

PeteHski

Did you explain that much of the high-end mtb cost is in engineering it to be as light and efficient as possible using some fairly exotic materials?

Most of the moto cost is in the engine. The rest is pretty agricultural compared to the Yeti.

There may be economies of scale in favour of the moto too, but I have no idea how many of these they produce compared to ultra high-end MTBs.

Ultimately, there are enough competing manufacturers to ensure that pricing is reasonably competitive. There is no monopoly going on with MTBs. But the diminishing returns on top tier builds like this Yeti are very high.

roadcrankr

Great points. Then when one considers operating costs, the MTB blows away the Moto.
Rebuilding the Moto's top-end and bottom-end every couple hundred hours can drain a pocketbook.
You can start adding in other assorted repairs, maintenance, registration, etc. to further illustrate costs.
Although tires may cost the same. ha ha

phughes

Agricultural? lol Not even close. I guess you really aren't very well acquainted with modern motocross bikes. Hilarious. It comes down more to supply and demand, and frame materials, as well as mass production techniques available to large companies like Honda, compared to less automated processes utilized by smaller bicycle companies like the one that made the bike posted.

burnthesheep

I have some polarizing opinion on it in that I see no issue with folks shelling out for the uber expensive bicycles. Reason being, I see plenty of very expensive cars around town and at work all the time. Folks in the cheaper hobbies like running (foot races) still might drive a $40k, $50k, $60k car. Same for folks with cheap bicycles. I'm sure there's plenty that own really expensive cars or houses. I realize also there's some that might be down on their luck and just scrapping by. But for the folks that do have expensive other things, priorities. I won't judge a person who prioritizes an expensive bicycle versus an expensive automobile.

PeteHski

Welded box section and a single pivot swing arm is pretty agricultural relative to the Yeti CF frame. If you made this motocross bike with a CF frame, how much would it cost then?

phughes

Uhmmm... did you not read the part when I mentioned frame materials? Nope, you did not. Calling it agricultural simply because of the frame, is ridiculous. There is much more to it than the frame, a frame that works for the intended use. The frame also had to go through a rigorous design process, in order to withstand the pounding that comes from its intended use, as well as tweaks for handling. It isn't simply something someone welded together in their garage. There is also much more to the bike than the frame.

If you want an example of agricultural, here is one of my bikes, which is definitely agricultural. The Honda 250R is not. Interestingly, the cost of my agricultural motorcycle is quite high, but mainly for the same reason the bike cost is high, numbers manufactured. It is a low volume manufacturer. It is distinctly agricultural though, in ride and design.

Pratt

Never built either a bicycle or a motorcycle, but I suspect another difference between the two in the OP is the skill level, in their respective specialties of the people who build them. My bike was hand built by a now defunct shop, and the welds on the frame are invisible, it looks like it grew that way. Bikes from larger volume manufacturers have, in general, less aesthetic welds.

PeteHski

You are getting too emotional about it. Obviously it is fit for purpose. The Yeti and Honda are chalk and cheese in terms of both their design and manufacture. The only things in common are 2 wheels and the retail price.

john m flores 

Ducati tried designing a MotoGP bike with a carbon-fiber frame several years ago. They failed miserably because riders piloting 250hp motorcycles at the limit of adhesion need fine-tuned feedback about what the contact patches are doing and the carbon fiber frames could not provide that. So they switched to "agricultural" twin-spar aluminum frames and started winning championships with it. Modern twin spar frames are finely tuned to flex because when a motorcycle is leaned over as far as they are it's the flexing of the frame not the suspension that absorbing bumps and communicating to the rider.

And motocross bike typically employ rising rate linkage suspensions.

You're seriously underestimating the technology behind modern competition motorcycles. If anything, it's bicycle that are finally catching with technologies that motorcycles have been refining for decades - disk brakes, sophisticated, variable-rate suspensions, electronic shifting, etc..

PeteHski

I do actually appreciate all this, but my point here is simply that carbon frames are inherently much more expensive than fabricated alloy frames. Let’s say the Moto guys figured out how to make an effective carbon frame. Then the bikes would suddenly become a lot more expensive. The fact that an alloy frame is their optimum solution keeps the cost down - especially at the consumer level.

wolfchild

$ 9000 for a motorcycle is totally worth it....$ 9000 for a bicycle isn't worth it, in fact spending that much on a bicycle is laughable and ludicrous. That bicycle probably took about $ 4000 to actually manufacture. There is nothing special about that particular suspension design or geometry and it's not even e-assisted. You're just paying extra for the brand name and the image that it projects.

PeteHski

Another toilet thread.

DMC707

I'd like to see the proof of that when you have them mass produced in the far east for pennies . Even Colnago has outsourced carbon to the Wild Wild East. Not sure if companies like Yeti do or not, but i just picked that photo arbotrarilly as an example of an expensive bicycle and couldve plugged in anything from Santa Cruz or the S Works lineup etc etc in its place

PeteHski

So you think it costs pennies to design, develop and produce an S-Works frame? Bikes in that price range are not mass produced either.

It gets a lot cheaper with generic open mould frames with little or no control over the layup design or QC. But those are not what you find in legit $9k bikes.

If those motos you are comparing with go carbon, they would suddenly cost a whole lot more than $9k. The cost of designing, developing and producing carbon moto frames is probably not commercially viable, which is also the case with mainstream car production. BMW used a lot of composites in their i3 to compensate for battery weight, but I would imagine the development cost was horrific, justified mostly as a disruptive pilot study.

john m flores 

I recently attended the global launch of the BMW R 1300 GS. The design process took 6 years. Just 4 part numbers carry over from the previous model. The aluminium gas tank and metal frame are ultralight and have contours and indents all along their surface to fit over and around the motor, airbox, and all of the other components they are adjacent to while providing the strength necessary to withstand the forces of a 145hp motorcycle.

When the BMW engineers talked about the designing the components, they talked in increments of 1mm.

I recall Yamaha engineers talking about how raising the rear swingarm pivot of the R1 4mm was a big improvement. Think about the analysis and testing to settle upon 4mm instead of 3mm or 5mm.

You are fixating on frame material and conveniently forgetting that motorcycles have motors consisting of hundreds of parts, many of which need to be constructed with tolerances measured with a micrometer.

A full suspension mountain bike is, by comparison, much, much simpler. Even a $9,000 one.

​

veganbikes

It is also OK to just say "hey I don't know much about bikes, my knowledge is elsewhere".

Your posts sometimes feel like that "bike friend" people have that has one bike and only rides that bike and may not maintain it and certainly barely knows much more than the specific bike they are riding but that person wants to value that opinion which means nothing in most contexts beyond the one bike they ride.

phughes

Not even close to emotional about this. Just that coming from someone who helped run a Honda Kawasaki Seadoo dealership for three years, your calling the Honda industrial is ridiculous. You simply didn't read what I said about materials, which is in line with your thinking. Calling the Honda agricultural because it is welded is like calling a Colnago agricultural because it uses a welded frame. I simply called out a poor description, that's all.

shelbyfv

Compare to any name brand ebike. Hard to justify the ebike other than from an environmental perspective.

LarrySellerz

I think your friend has a point. High end mountain bikes are absurdly expensive. It’s kind of ridiculous.

DangerousDanR

I have spent the last dozen or so years designing control and sensing systems for agriculture, and both the Honda and the Yetti look so primitive it is amazing. I don't see any sensors on either the Moto or the MTB to sense the contour of the ground ahead and keep the saddle level.

LarrySellerz

To add context to others, this isn’t in the realm of strict hard to hit tolerances

big john

Yeti makes frames with different levels of carbon fiber. Their most expensive composition is called "Turq" which can be had for $4300 frame only. Complete XC bikes like the one in the OP can be purchased for less than $4800 with the lower grade carbon.
Yeti spent years developing the "switch infinity" rear suspension which is highly regarded and well reviewed. It uses a "virtual pivot" type of geometry.

Bicycle makers have to purchase everything except the frame itself, generally. Still, nine grand is a lot to spend but if you have the money and want it, why not?
I disagree about whether spending that much is necessary to win any race. The law of diminishing returns is strong here.

I also disagree about that Honda not being race worthy for high level racing. I've had MX bikes and was a fan of the races since the early 70s and always liked to see the privateers do well. Way back the top stars had their bikes hand made by teams on engineers for astronomical costs. At some point the rules said they had to use production based machines. I don't know how close they adhere to that, though.

big john

High end road bikes are worse. It becomes a bling factor, nttawwt. I have no objection to anyone spending whatever they want on bikes, cars, jewelry, whatever.

I worked with a guy some years ago who insisted there was no way a Tour de France bike could cost more than $300.