smd4

I’m sure you have.

genejockey 

Yes and no.

smd4

The point is, no comparison whatsoever will be accepted. No matter what level of bike I try to compare, the comparison will be deemed flawed. It doesn’t matter.

To be expected, I suppose, when attempting a discussion with the faux alpha males that seem to make up the majority of cyclists.

genejockey 

Because, lord knows, it's not like you were acting in any way like them.

smd4

Exactly. Thank you.

NumbersGuy

Please clarify the great difference between Fact 11r and Fact 12r carbon, or Dura Ace 11 speed Di2 and Dura Ace 12 speed Di2. How are these different products? We as consumers are paying a tremendous premium beyond inflation for these technological improvements. I fail to see how these have caused greater jumps in price than any prior shift to a slightly lighter and stronger carbon fiber, or adding one more gear to the rear cassette. Aero carbon frames were already a thing 10 years ago, Specialized had the Venge and over 10 years and multiple new generations they merged the aero with the light weight.

If there are actual R&D costs behind these increases then bike companies have been extremely inefficient at making improvements or they’re simply throwing too much money at gains that are minuscule for anyone but elite pro tour riders.

Let’s look at another industry, automobiles, which if anything have had much more new technology implemented in the last 10 years than bikes.

2014 Honda Accord EX-L Sedan Navi: MSRP $30,045
2024 Honda Accord EX-L Sedan Hybrid: MSRP $34,540

15% increase in price against 31% inflation despite the R&D of engineering a hybrid drivetrain, numerous safety technologies, vastly improved cabin tech, increased raw material costs, etc. Auto sales have not exploded since 2014 so the cell phone volume of sales argument is out. Somehow they kept price increases below inflation rates, while the bike industry more than doubled it.

3alarmer 

...if that's really your overall impression, you ought to read (or re-read) Berto's book, "The Dancing Chain"

...in that same book, Berto states that Shimano had a company policy in the 70's and 80's, that 10% of the employees should be engineers, and 10% of revenue devoted to R+D. 10% is a pretty significant number, for R+D. It's how Shimano eventually took over the components market, at all levels. It's how they finally (after a couple of false starts) came up with indexed shifting that worked so well, it made everything in competition with it an also ran for about ten years. But I have no idea what percentage of revenues they devote to R+D currently.

Suffice it to say, practical, workable, indexed shifting and the longer cage rear derailleurs that accompanied it made the mountain bike a reality. And the technology, up through and including brifters, is what made Di2 possible.

People take a lot of stuff for granted as a starting point. There's a lot of prior technological innovation that made the current shifting systems possible.

genejockey 

Do you have actual data? Or is it all this anecdotal stuff?

NumbersGuy

Entry level and mid-tier bikes are just as bad. 10 years ago, a Specialized Allez Sport was $930, now it’s $1,800. 94% increase, or triple inflation for the same period.

NumbersGuy

What data do you want? Those are actual prices. Also feel free to provide any facts to back up your view, since thus far you’ve given zero.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, prices for new cars are 20.33% higher in 2024 versus 2014 (a $6,099.61 difference in value).

Between 2014 and 2024: Cars experienced an average inflation rate of 1.87% per year. In other words, cars costing $30,000 in the year 2014 would cost $36,099.61 in 2024 for an equivalent purchase. Compared to the overall inflation rate of 2.71% during this same period, inflation for cars was lower.

PeteHski

It depends on how much the product and demand for the product changes over time. That’s why inflation is best measured by products that don’t change very much. But even then consumer price indexes are corrected for product improvements over time.

In the case of top-tier bikes there are far more resources involved in producing them today. It is no longer a cottage industry. So it doesn’t surprise me if the halo products are outpacing inflation. But at least the second and third tier versions of those halo products are less than half the price because of the increased sales volume.

smd4

IT’S A STRAW MAN! RUN!

Barring that, post the Jennifer Lawrence gif. Man, she was cute.

NumbersGuy

What resources are being used today that weren’t being used 10 years ago? The percentage increase in bike prices is across the board from entry level all the way up to the top tier bikes. A lot of these bikes have not changed a tremendous amount. Disc brakes are the one significant change, but looking at a bunch of the lower tier models that still offer rim and disc options, that price delta is not nearly enough to explain the massive increases.

smd4

Are they prone to making arguments where you have to whip out the Jennifer Lawrence gif on your phone that you show to all like sharing pics of your grandkids?

PeteHski

Probably more employees and infrastructure today. Shimano seem to open a new facility nearly every year.

Despite these “massive” price increases over the last 10 years, my 2014 Specialized Enduro cost exactly the same as my 2019 Canyon Neuron and the 2024 version is only slightly more expensive and has electronic shifting. Same tier level bikes. Road bikes are more expensive, I’ll give you that. But if you keep away from top tier level builds it’s not so bad. I only paid £2k for my 2019 Giant Defy and my 2022 Canyon was £4,500 with a second tier build.

Atlas Shrugged

This debate is not about whether the advancements in new top of the line HALO bikes are worthwhile or warranted. That has been flogged to death and will continue to do so for decades to come until those who remember cycling from the 70’s and 80’s age out of the sport.

Your are being disingenuous when comparing the bikes which are 10 years apart. Nothing between the bikes can be transferred over, all of these changes had to be engineered, prototyped and put into production with new materials, molds ect. And all of these costs have to be amortized into the new bikes final selling prices along with inflationary increases as well. Stop with the stupid mass market comparisons such as cell phones and cars the economy’s of scale make those comparisons irrelevant.

Frankly I don't understand your point we all agree these high end bike costs have increase faster than inflation where we differ is that increase can be traced to increases in overall production costs not some mysterious rip off machine which operates in the background pocketing the differential. Bike manufacturers are not the type to be living the life of billionaires with homes in Monaco, flying in private jets and spending the summers on super yachts in the Mediterranean instead bordering on profitability. From small custom builders to Giant there are all average at best for return on investment.

smd4

I look forward to reading your posts in 10 years! What the hell is a HALO bike anyway?

Atlas Shrugged

I hope you are still here with me! Should still be riding, probably on the latest tech. Hopefully you will still be on your Cinelli.

genejockey 

Great! Now where's the same thing for bicycles, so we're comparing data with data, not data with anecdotes. Also, link?

genejockey 

Nah, that's pretty much limited to a few folks here.

smd4

Your’re really teasing me with that tiny writing! If you’re around after me, maybe the Cinelli will go your way. Better to someone who appreciates it—for what it is.

rsbob 

And I thought a halo bike is the one you get in heaven. But the price is the ultimate.

Kai Winters

You're paying for cutting edge technology and yes it is expensive but compare that to a similar wrist watch...no comparison...sports car...no comparison...boat...same...snowmobile...atv...etc etc etc
If you want top of the line stuff you pay through the nose.
But you can buy a nice Timex, Honda, Toyota, etc etc etc and get something very nice for a much more reasonable price.
It doesn't work imo to compare prices from 40 years ago to today...it just doesn't make sense.

You can buy a very good quality bike at a reasonable price and you don't even have to work hard to do it...

genejockey 

1997, I bought my Ritchey for $2000, marked down from $3000 because it had 8 speed Dura Ace as 9 speed was coming out.

2007, I bought a 2006 Bianchi 928 Veloce for $1600, marked down from $2700 because it was last year's model.

2020, I bought a 2020 Canyon Endurace for $2400, no markdown at all.

So, the CF bike with the discs was actually the lowest MSRP of all, even after 23 years.

unterhausen

I take it you have never done any engineering work with carbon? I was mostly addressing people's examples of vintage carbon that wasn't much lighter than contemporary steel frames. Designers were being conservative because they weren't sure there were directions where they could live with lower strength. The benefit of steel is that it's isotropic and the downside is that there isn't much you can do about it. Making isotropic carbon is heavy, much heavier than necessary for bicycles. Look at cheap carbon forks on hybrids for some good examples of this. I'm sorry my post was too subtle or I was unclear. I was aware of what could be done with carbon back then. Everyone knew the trick was designing a structure that used carbon wisely. To be perfectly honest, I was at a loss at what was really safe to do on a carbon bike frame. I was sure I would have to over-build or suffer some failures or both. I'm sure I wasn't alone in this, it's a fundamental problem and you can look at examples of vintage carbon frames to see it in play. A lot of this knowledge is pretty common now, but it wasn't in the early '80s.

As far as analyzing a bike frame well enough to optimize it in any way, my deck of fortran cards was about 3" thick for a flat 6x6 sheet of carbon with various layups. Extrapolate that to a bike frame, and that would be a very large deck of fortran cards. I had to be careful how much I ran it or it would have affected my grade, computer time cost real $ back then.

The examples you give have large loads that can be optimized for carbon and have no need to be isotropic Maybe in the early '80s the military was having stuff designed like an F1 car, but not on any of the fighters I worked on. For example, the F16C/D was designed about that time and the only carbon I remember was in the horizontal tails (stabilators) that were essentially just flat plates glued to an aluminum honeycomb. There was probably more, but I never had to fix anything else that was carbon.