Why are Modern Bikes So Expensive?
#326
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Eastern Shore MD
Posts: 1,206
Bikes: Lemond Zurich/Trek ALR/Giant TCX/Sette CX1
Liked 1,125 Times
in
559 Posts
Dave, since you ignored my post a few threads ago, I expect you to ignore this as well…
Why is Pogs using deep aero wheels on pure mountain stages? Stages where he flat dominates everyone? Stages where he is displaying his early season form for the cycling world to worry about? On mountains where he is blowing all the ascent records to pieces… on an aero bike with aero wheels…
Why is Pogs using deep aero wheels on pure mountain stages? Stages where he flat dominates everyone? Stages where he is displaying his early season form for the cycling world to worry about? On mountains where he is blowing all the ascent records to pieces… on an aero bike with aero wheels…
#327
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Sigh.. has anyone here been on fast group rides? Or raced? On the flats weight doesn't matter obviously. Aero doesn't matter either because you're sheltered in the pack 90+% of the time coasting along at 100 watts. I suppose if you were some disposable domestique on some pro team, required to lead the team until you were spent and shelled off of the back like a soiled Kleenex, then aero would matter. Or it might help you if your thing is pointless breakaways 50 miles from the finish, but you're going to get caught eventually anyway.
The thing that shells you off the back are the hard climbs and repeated fast accelerations out of corners. There aero doesn't matter either, whereas weight, particularly wheel rotating weight is everything. How much weight matters - you tell me. When you desperately clinging onto a wheel giving it everything you have, then grams can make all the difference. Everyone here should know the panic of seeing the wheel ahead of you slowly drift away, with the knowledge that if the gap grows to 10 feet, you're done for the day.
If the arbitrary UCI weight limit were to be lifted, pro disc brake road bikes would disappear overnight.
The thing that shells you off the back are the hard climbs and repeated fast accelerations out of corners. There aero doesn't matter either, whereas weight, particularly wheel rotating weight is everything. How much weight matters - you tell me. When you desperately clinging onto a wheel giving it everything you have, then grams can make all the difference. Everyone here should know the panic of seeing the wheel ahead of you slowly drift away, with the knowledge that if the gap grows to 10 feet, you're done for the day.
If the arbitrary UCI weight limit were to be lifted, pro disc brake road bikes would disappear overnight.
Your tomes read like you have read "The Rider" by Tim Krabbe one too many times. Even in the Tour de France peloton, it is not the life and death struggle that you constantly refer to.
#328
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,625
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2022 Trek Supercaliber, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Liked 8,954 Times
in
4,198 Posts
Dave, since you ignored my post a few threads ago, I expect you to ignore this as well…
Why is Pogs using deep aero wheels on pure mountain stages? Stages where he flat dominates everyone? Stages where he is displaying his early season form for the cycling world to worry about? On mountains where he is blowing all the ascent records to pieces… on an aero bike with aero wheels…
Why is Pogs using deep aero wheels on pure mountain stages? Stages where he flat dominates everyone? Stages where he is displaying his early season form for the cycling world to worry about? On mountains where he is blowing all the ascent records to pieces… on an aero bike with aero wheels…
Dave doesn't answer direct questions, or involve himself in discussions. He pontificates.
__________________
Platypus gravelus.
Platypus gravelus.
Likes For Eric F:
#329
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 26,249
Liked 10,163 Times
in
4,938 Posts
Sigh.. has anyone here been on fast group rides? Or raced? On the flats weight doesn't matter obviously. Aero doesn't matter either because you're sheltered in the pack 90+% of the time coasting along at 100 watts. I suppose if you were some disposable domestique on some pro team, required to lead the team until you were spent and shelled off of the back like a soiled Kleenex, then aero would matter. Or it might help you if your thing is pointless breakaways 50 miles from the finish, but you're going to get caught eventually anyway.
The thing that shells you off the back are the hard climbs and repeated fast accelerations out of corners. There aero doesn't matter either, whereas weight, particularly wheel rotating weight is everything. How much weight matters - you tell me. When you desperately clinging onto a wheel giving it everything you have, then grams can make all the difference. Everyone here should know the panic of seeing the wheel ahead of you slowly drift away, with the knowledge that if the gap grows to 10 feet, you're done for the day.
If the arbitrary UCI weight limit were to be lifted, pro disc brake road bikes would disappear overnight.
The thing that shells you off the back are the hard climbs and repeated fast accelerations out of corners. There aero doesn't matter either, whereas weight, particularly wheel rotating weight is everything. How much weight matters - you tell me. When you desperately clinging onto a wheel giving it everything you have, then grams can make all the difference. Everyone here should know the panic of seeing the wheel ahead of you slowly drift away, with the knowledge that if the gap grows to 10 feet, you're done for the day.
If the arbitrary UCI weight limit were to be lifted, pro disc brake road bikes would disappear overnight.
What I was referring to was your absurd obsession with grams. Are you really unable to hang with your group if your bike is a little heavier? How much weight are you talking about? How much difference does a little weight make in your position in the pecking order of your group?
35 years of doing thousands of group ride with hundreds (at least) of riders has shown me that the best climbers will be the first to the top of long climbs, the fastest sprinters will be at the front of any sprints, and the riders who put in huge miles will do the long, brutal group rides better than most of the rest. Minor changes in equipment, wheels, or gear will make little difference in any of that.
Most of my club riding has been at 220 pounds. When I get dropped, it's not because my wheels are 400 grams heavier than yours.
Likes For big john:
#330
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,510
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Liked 4,059 Times
in
1,999 Posts
#331
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,339
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Liked 1,871 Times
in
1,062 Posts
If æro didn't matter, taking shelter in the pack would be meaningless.
__________________
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
#332
For acceleration out of corners, 400g on a wheel set barely registers on a stopwatch. A few hundredths of a sec at most. Crit racers and sprinters are all using aero wheels for a reason. You won’t be seeing competitive sprinters on super lightweight climbing wheels.
For climbing, 400g is worth around 20 secs per hour on a mountain climb, offset by any sailing effects in the wind. Super light wheels may offer a slight advantage depending on the gradient and wind conditions. But they may also be considerably slower in the wind.
If you take your head out of the sand and look around you might learn something new. But I know that isn’t going to happen.
For climbing, 400g is worth around 20 secs per hour on a mountain climb, offset by any sailing effects in the wind. Super light wheels may offer a slight advantage depending on the gradient and wind conditions. But they may also be considerably slower in the wind.
If you take your head out of the sand and look around you might learn something new. But I know that isn’t going to happen.
Likes For PeteHski:
#333
Sunshine
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 17,037
Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo
Liked 8,064 Times
in
4,472 Posts
Likes For mstateglfr:
#334
https://www.bikeradar.com/features/p...e-bike-weights
#335
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: In the south but from North
Posts: 717
Bikes: Turner 5-Spot Burner converted; IBIS Ripley, Specialized Crave, Tommasini Sintesi, Cinelli Superstar, Tommasini X-Fire Gravel
Liked 394 Times
in
222 Posts
For acceleration out of corners, 400g on a wheel set barely registers on a stopwatch. A few hundredths of a sec at most. Crit racers and sprinters are all using aero wheels for a reason. You won’t be seeing competitive sprinters on super lightweight climbing wheels.
For climbing, 400g is worth around 20 secs per hour on a mountain climb, offset by any sailing effects in the wind. Super light wheels may offer a slight advantage depending on the gradient and wind conditions. But they may also be considerably slower in the wind.
If you take your head out of the sand and look around you might learn something new. But I know that isn’t going to happen.
For climbing, 400g is worth around 20 secs per hour on a mountain climb, offset by any sailing effects in the wind. Super light wheels may offer a slight advantage depending on the gradient and wind conditions. But they may also be considerably slower in the wind.
If you take your head out of the sand and look around you might learn something new. But I know that isn’t going to happen.
Times over that period have increased at the MOST by 5.1 seconds per mile. And again, we are comparing the old fashioned skinny tubed steel bike - which they started with - to the most modern AERO bike you can make now. Surprisingly, the whole race times are not that much different either - so it has not lead people to be "fresher" and able to "run" faster - at least not by a lot!
I would argue and firmly believe that for most everyone riding, all the changes on road bikes over the last 20 years have had a modest impact upon speed at best. Just ride what you like and be happy.
If you want to spend 15K on a bike, do it and be happy. If you don't, you can get a bike just as good, for much less and be just as fast and I would argue, just as happy!
Last edited by vespasianus; 03-28-24 at 02:07 PM.
#336
I have been looking a lot at the Iron Man Kona as that is a race that has had the same basic bike route (with some exceptions) over 40 years. Bikes of course have evolved significantly and a full aero Tri-bike - as raced by the vast majority of the top 10 finishers are vastly more aero and more advanced than any "road" bike, even a specialized ICI TT bike.
Times over that period have increased at the MOST by 5.1 seconds per mile. And again, we are comparing the old fashioned skinny tubed steel bike - which they started with - to the most modern AERO bike you can make now. Surprisingly, the whole race times are not that much different either - so it has not lead people to be "fresher" and able to "run" faster - at least not by a lot!
I would argue and firmly believe that for most everyone riding, all the changes on road bikes over the last 20 years have had a modest impact upon speed at best. Just ride what you like and be happy.
If you want to spend 15K on a bike, do it and by happy. If you don't, you can get a bike just as good for much less and be just as fast and I would argue, just as happy!
Times over that period have increased at the MOST by 5.1 seconds per mile. And again, we are comparing the old fashioned skinny tubed steel bike - which they started with - to the most modern AERO bike you can make now. Surprisingly, the whole race times are not that much different either - so it has not lead people to be "fresher" and able to "run" faster - at least not by a lot!
I would argue and firmly believe that for most everyone riding, all the changes on road bikes over the last 20 years have had a modest impact upon speed at best. Just ride what you like and be happy.
If you want to spend 15K on a bike, do it and by happy. If you don't, you can get a bike just as good for much less and be just as fast and I would argue, just as happy!
There is certainly no point in whining about the additional weight of disc brakes or wider aero wheels like some do as if it makes them less competitive on their group ride!
Likes For PeteHski:
#337
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,625
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2022 Trek Supercaliber, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Liked 8,954 Times
in
4,198 Posts
Yes, and yes. You aren't the only one here with racing experience, or experience being stretched out in a thin line in the gutter at 30+mph, or experience watching the wheel in front of you creep away and there's nothing more to give to hold on to it. I've done all of that. I did it for years.
It's time to wake up, and climb out of your stubborn little box. Your conclusions are backwards, science proves it, and we see it in action with the racers who have the most to win and lose from it.
Nonsense. If bike weight were that much of a concern, every pro rider's bike would be at the allowable minimum, for every race. Fact: They aren't
Nonsense. If bike weight were that much of a concern, every pro rider's bike would be at the allowable minimum, for every race. Fact: They aren't
__________________
Platypus gravelus.
Platypus gravelus.
Likes For Eric F:
#338
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posts: 33,387
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene '04; Bridgestone RB-1 '92
Liked 7,183 Times
in
3,715 Posts
Please don't bring dirty laundry (arguments, feuds, accusations) from one thread into another, especially involving the same individual(s). That can easily be interpreted as harassment. Thanks.
__________________
See, this is why we can't have nice things. - - smarkinson
Where else but the internet can a bunch of cyclists go and be the tough guy? - - jdon
#339
The pros adopt high-performance gear as quickly as possible. They are not traditionalists; they take advantage of every second, watt and gram wherever possible within and often outside of the rules. Example: carbon frames, in which the pros like Lemond were on carbon well before the tech was ready for the market. Or the Vitus Carbone, which needed a few more iterations of development and larger tube sizes before it was fully cooked. Electronic shifting was adopted quickly as well.
However, when the pros drag their feet as long as possible on some tech, you know that the gear is sub-optimal and actually detracts from race results. Clearly discs are an example here, where the most competitive teams were the last to adopt discs, and then only on inconsequential flat stages. And the team leaders and climbers held out on rim brakes until the manufacturer pressure was impossible to overcome. But again, the entire industry and the pro tour itself exists to sell stuff.
Clinchers, and especially hookless is an even more glaring example. The pros absolutely don't want this, as their organization has publicly stated. Some lucky teams, who have the premium tire and wheel sponsors are still on tubulars, despite the impossibility of selling this to the gold-card weekend warrior. Doing the last-second wheel switcheroo or the hot label trick may fool or placate your wheel and tire sponsor.
And don't confuse the PR announcements on team gear choices with what gear is actually used on race day, particularly on the hilly stages. When placings are at stake, the pros pay out of their own pockets for Obermayer's (tubulars of course) thumb their noses at their official sponsors, and go for the win.
BTW: I'm going out for a ride on a carbon road bike with clinchers and hydraulic discs and 32mm GP5000 tires. But I would never be as deluded enough to think that this bike was as high performance as the same bike and model made 10 years earlier.
However, when the pros drag their feet as long as possible on some tech, you know that the gear is sub-optimal and actually detracts from race results. Clearly discs are an example here, where the most competitive teams were the last to adopt discs, and then only on inconsequential flat stages. And the team leaders and climbers held out on rim brakes until the manufacturer pressure was impossible to overcome. But again, the entire industry and the pro tour itself exists to sell stuff.
Clinchers, and especially hookless is an even more glaring example. The pros absolutely don't want this, as their organization has publicly stated. Some lucky teams, who have the premium tire and wheel sponsors are still on tubulars, despite the impossibility of selling this to the gold-card weekend warrior. Doing the last-second wheel switcheroo or the hot label trick may fool or placate your wheel and tire sponsor.
And don't confuse the PR announcements on team gear choices with what gear is actually used on race day, particularly on the hilly stages. When placings are at stake, the pros pay out of their own pockets for Obermayer's (tubulars of course) thumb their noses at their official sponsors, and go for the win.
BTW: I'm going out for a ride on a carbon road bike with clinchers and hydraulic discs and 32mm GP5000 tires. But I would never be as deluded enough to think that this bike was as high performance as the same bike and model made 10 years earlier.
Likes For Dave Mayer:
#340
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,625
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2022 Trek Supercaliber, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Liked 8,954 Times
in
4,198 Posts
The pros adopt high-performance gear as quickly as possible. They are not traditionalists; they take advantage of every second, watt and gram wherever possible within and often outside of the rules. Example: carbon frames, in which the pros like Lemond were on carbon well before the tech was ready for the market. Or the Vitus Carbone, which needed a few more iterations of development and larger tube sizes before it was fully cooked. Electronic shifting was adopted quickly as well.
However, when the pros drag their feet as long as possible on some tech, you know that the gear is sub-optimal and actually detracts from race results. Clearly discs are an example here, where the most competitive teams were the last to adopt discs, and then only on inconsequential flat stages. And the team leaders and climbers held out on rim brakes until the manufacturer pressure was impossible to overcome. But again, the entire industry and the pro tour itself exists to sell stuff.
Clinchers, and especially hookless is an even more glaring example. The pros absolutely don't want this, as their organization has publicly stated. Some lucky teams, who have the premium tire and wheel sponsors are still on tubulars, despite the impossibility of selling this to the gold-card weekend warrior. Doing the last-second wheel switcheroo or the hot label trick may fool or placate your wheel and tire sponsor.
And don't confuse the PR announcements on team gear choices with what gear is actually used on race day, particularly on the hilly stages. When placings are at stake, the pros pay out of their own pockets for Obermayer's (tubulars of course) thumb their noses at their official sponsors, and go for the win.
BTW: I'm going out for a ride on a carbon road bike with clinchers and hydraulic discs and 32mm GP5000 tires. But I would never be as deluded enough to think that this bike was as high performance as the same bike and model made 10 years earlier.
However, when the pros drag their feet as long as possible on some tech, you know that the gear is sub-optimal and actually detracts from race results. Clearly discs are an example here, where the most competitive teams were the last to adopt discs, and then only on inconsequential flat stages. And the team leaders and climbers held out on rim brakes until the manufacturer pressure was impossible to overcome. But again, the entire industry and the pro tour itself exists to sell stuff.
Clinchers, and especially hookless is an even more glaring example. The pros absolutely don't want this, as their organization has publicly stated. Some lucky teams, who have the premium tire and wheel sponsors are still on tubulars, despite the impossibility of selling this to the gold-card weekend warrior. Doing the last-second wheel switcheroo or the hot label trick may fool or placate your wheel and tire sponsor.
And don't confuse the PR announcements on team gear choices with what gear is actually used on race day, particularly on the hilly stages. When placings are at stake, the pros pay out of their own pockets for Obermayer's (tubulars of course) thumb their noses at their official sponsors, and go for the win.
BTW: I'm going out for a ride on a carbon road bike with clinchers and hydraulic discs and 32mm GP5000 tires. But I would never be as deluded enough to think that this bike was as high performance as the same bike and model made 10 years earlier.
EDIT: I have yet to see any indication that your experience or knowledge is superior to everyone else's. It's fine to have opinions and preferences, even if they're wildly different than everyone else, but making statements as if their irrefutable facts, without any references to support your claims, isn't going to get you very far.
__________________
Platypus gravelus.
Platypus gravelus.
Last edited by Eric F; 03-28-24 at 04:30 PM.
#342
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 19,352
Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace
Liked 13,203 Times
in
6,777 Posts
The pros adopt high-performance gear as quickly as possible. They are not traditionalists; they take advantage of every second, watt and gram wherever possible within and often outside of the rules. Example: carbon frames, in which the pros like Lemond were on carbon well before the tech was ready for the market. Or the Vitus Carbone, which needed a few more iterations of development and larger tube sizes before it was fully cooked. Electronic shifting was adopted quickly as well.
However, when the pros drag their feet as long as possible on some tech, you know that the gear is sub-optimal and actually detracts from race results. Clearly discs are an example here, where the most competitive teams were the last to adopt discs, and then only on inconsequential flat stages. And the team leaders and climbers held out on rim brakes until the manufacturer pressure was impossible to overcome. But again, the entire industry and the pro tour itself exists to sell stuff.
Clinchers, and especially hookless is an even more glaring example. The pros absolutely don't want this, as their organization has publicly stated. Some lucky teams, who have the premium tire and wheel sponsors are still on tubulars, despite the impossibility of selling this to the gold-card weekend warrior. Doing the last-second wheel switcheroo or the hot label trick may fool or placate your wheel and tire sponsor.
And don't confuse the PR announcements on team gear choices with what gear is actually used on race day, particularly on the hilly stages. When placings are at stake, the pros pay out of their own pockets for Obermayer's (tubulars of course) thumb their noses at their official sponsors, and go for the win.
BTW: I'm going out for a ride on a carbon road bike with clinchers and hydraulic discs and 32mm GP5000 tires. But I would never be as deluded enough to think that this bike was as high performance as the same bike and model made 10 years earlier.
However, when the pros drag their feet as long as possible on some tech, you know that the gear is sub-optimal and actually detracts from race results. Clearly discs are an example here, where the most competitive teams were the last to adopt discs, and then only on inconsequential flat stages. And the team leaders and climbers held out on rim brakes until the manufacturer pressure was impossible to overcome. But again, the entire industry and the pro tour itself exists to sell stuff.
Clinchers, and especially hookless is an even more glaring example. The pros absolutely don't want this, as their organization has publicly stated. Some lucky teams, who have the premium tire and wheel sponsors are still on tubulars, despite the impossibility of selling this to the gold-card weekend warrior. Doing the last-second wheel switcheroo or the hot label trick may fool or placate your wheel and tire sponsor.
And don't confuse the PR announcements on team gear choices with what gear is actually used on race day, particularly on the hilly stages. When placings are at stake, the pros pay out of their own pockets for Obermayer's (tubulars of course) thumb their noses at their official sponsors, and go for the win.
BTW: I'm going out for a ride on a carbon road bike with clinchers and hydraulic discs and 32mm GP5000 tires. But I would never be as deluded enough to think that this bike was as high performance as the same bike and model made 10 years earlier.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."
"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."
"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
#343
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,625
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2022 Trek Supercaliber, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Liked 8,954 Times
in
4,198 Posts
#344
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 19,352
Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace
Liked 13,203 Times
in
6,777 Posts
#345
The Wheezing Geezer
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Española, NM
Posts: 1,266
Bikes: 1976 Fredo Speciale, Rivendell Clem Smith Jr., Libertas mixte
Liked 1,140 Times
in
542 Posts
From listening to the podcast, it does seem like modern SOTA bikes are more expensive to design, test, and manufacture, alright. Lots of costs mentioned. Also interesting is Factor's marketing strategy of racing sponsorship and racing performance, which is hardly something I wish to complain about.
Very interesting perspective in the podcast, thanks for posting it.
Very interesting perspective in the podcast, thanks for posting it.
__________________
Beneath the valley of the underbikers.
Beneath the valley of the underbikers.
#346
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: In the south but from North
Posts: 717
Bikes: Turner 5-Spot Burner converted; IBIS Ripley, Specialized Crave, Tommasini Sintesi, Cinelli Superstar, Tommasini X-Fire Gravel
Liked 394 Times
in
222 Posts
Some bike prices from 2001.
What I find interesting is not that the bike frame prices are cheap - the highest one is about $3200 today -but the weight of the bike frames and the overall weight of the bikes. Frames have gotten much lighter but components must have gotten much heavier to make up for the weight difference we see today.
What I find interesting is not that the bike frame prices are cheap - the highest one is about $3200 today -but the weight of the bike frames and the overall weight of the bikes. Frames have gotten much lighter but components must have gotten much heavier to make up for the weight difference we see today.
Likes For vespasianus:
#347
Over the hill
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24,426
Bikes: Giant Defy, Giant Revolt
Liked 1,265 Times
in
718 Posts
What I find interesting is not that the bike frame prices are cheap - the highest one is about $3200 today -but the weight of the bike frames and the overall weight of the bikes. Frames have gotten much lighter but components must have gotten much heavier to make up for the weight difference we see today.
__________________
It's like riding a bicycle
It's like riding a bicycle
Likes For urbanknight:
#348
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Eastern Shore MD
Posts: 1,206
Bikes: Lemond Zurich/Trek ALR/Giant TCX/Sette CX1
Liked 1,125 Times
in
559 Posts
Some bike prices from 2001.
What I find interesting is not that the bike frame prices are cheap - the highest one is about $3200 today -but the weight of the bike frames and the overall weight of the bikes. Frames have gotten much lighter but components must have gotten much heavier to make up for the weight difference we see today.
What I find interesting is not that the bike frame prices are cheap - the highest one is about $3200 today -but the weight of the bike frames and the overall weight of the bikes. Frames have gotten much lighter but components must have gotten much heavier to make up for the weight difference we see today.
Todays top of the line Trek = 13k+/-.
The Look and Pinarello have an even bigger delta... way out pacing standard inflation.
And you could probably say that the CF manufacturing process back then was more expensive - new design and development, probably less automated... the Trek was probably hand made in the USA,, the Pinarello hand made in Italy... Look bikes hand crafted in France... not anymore.
Likes For Jughed:
#349
That $4700 top of the line Trek in todays dollars = 8k.
Todays top of the line Trek = 13k+/-.
The Look and Pinarello have an even bigger delta... way out pacing standard inflation.
And you could probably say that the CF manufacturing process back then was more expensive - new design and development, probably less automated... the Trek was probably hand made in the USA,, the Pinarello hand made in Italy... Look bikes hand crafted in France... not anymore.
Todays top of the line Trek = 13k+/-.
The Look and Pinarello have an even bigger delta... way out pacing standard inflation.
And you could probably say that the CF manufacturing process back then was more expensive - new design and development, probably less automated... the Trek was probably hand made in the USA,, the Pinarello hand made in Italy... Look bikes hand crafted in France... not anymore.
Asian labour is cheaper, but there is lot more involved in producing monocoque cf layups vs bonded carbon tube. If they were manufactured in the US today then they would be even more expensive.
$8k today still buys you a bike technically well in advance of what was on the market back then.
#350
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Posts: 6,358
Bikes: 1989 Cinelli Supercorsa
Liked 3,313 Times
in
1,992 Posts
Likes For smd4: