Kontact 

Indurain won how many riding steel bike in the 90s?

Atlas Shrugged

I guess that question would be relevant over on the C&V sub forum.

Kontact 

1.2 pounds is no less relevant in 1993 than today.

elcruxio

I suppose that if the TDF ever goes back to the early 90's style ie. lots of flat stages, time trials and fairly limited climbing, bike weight won't be such an issue. But the tours these days tend to be a lot more "climby" than in the 90's.

PeteHski

Yeah, it still lost the same amount of time on a climb in 1993 as it would today.

Even as a casual Sportive rider I wouldn't be prepared to accept the weight of a steel-framed bike for anything other than a pan-flat event. It was hard enough doing the L'Etape last year on a £4.5k, 17lb Canyon. I did however fully accept the 1.5 lb gain over the £7.5k version of the same bike. But if I was at the ultra-competitive sharp end I would want to be right on the 15 lb UCI limit - just like every modern pro.

But you know this of course.

livedarklions

Right, and there was a bunch more TT in the tdf in the 90s.
I don't get how '90s tdf has anything substantive to do with today's tdf in terms of the weights of the bikes. The competitors now are all riding a hillier course on lighter bikes. The riders in the'90s were highly likely to be doped.

Honestly, the whole turn of this thread to the question of whether tdf racers really need $14k bikes is absolutely hilarious. The one context where you definitely pay for the diminishing returns because the margins of competition are so small.

I'm just echoing your point here, not arguing with it. I think you're spot-on.

big john

Wasn't he racing against riders on (mostly) steel bikes?
Indurain was a good climber but not a great one. The races he won were tailor made for a TT specialist. He was a great TT rider, one of the best ever, maybe.
He could lose a few minutes on the climbs then destroy the climbers in the TTs.

Kontact 

I know that what is marketed today as a pro bike is different than what was sold back then. But Indurain did well on climbs and his competitors were riding lighter bikes. Climbing was certainly important then as Claudio Chioppuchi got second overall and king of the mountains. You don't nearly win the TdF as a climber on a flat course.

But that ignores the fact that my example of using a cheap carbon frame with Rival would be very light anyway. I ride a small bike, but if I can get down to 16 lbs with a '96 Ti frame, metal bars, stem and seatpost and Rival - a more current bike certainly can get even closer to the limit. You don't need ultraspecialized gear to get down to the UCI limit. Which is probably why it is acceptable for DA to be 200 grams heavier than Red.

Kontact 

6.7kg on an all metal Rival bike:
https://2lo8.wordpress.com/my-non-carbon-bike-6-7kg/

elcruxio

Ah yes, the storied flimcycle with weak flexy wheels, skewers even the author can't recommend and a fantastically rare one off frame which would absolutely not pass any current bicycle strength or stiffness test.

I did a quick shopping list for a reasonable priced china open mold bike with components which would actually last a rider my size (thinking of indurain too) and couldn't get it under 7.6kg. But it's easier if you're tiny.

genejockey 

And how many in the peloton are riding steel today?

EDIT: Also worth noting that his last win, he wasn't riding steel. He was, in fact THE LAST rider to win the TdF on a steel bike.

genejockey 

"I recommend against these skewers on this blog because of the cost and poor quality, but I still ended up using them because I have them and they are very light."

Years ago, the late lamented Bicycle Guide put together a 16 lb bike, using the lightest components they could find, more as a thought exercise than as a bike. It was so noodly it was practically unrideable by anyone over 150 lbs, and the DT shift levers - plastic! - were famous for coming apart in your hands.

Contrast that with the sub 14 lb Aethos S-Works that has brifters and disc brakes and is rated to hold 300 lbs, and runs mostly the very best off the shelf componentry.

genejockey 

Right, and that's why the pro peloton in the TdF doesn't use Rival, or Centaur, or 105.

genejockey 

I'm not even sure what you're arguing anymore, and it's not at all clear that you are either. I mean, I'd be the bikes that Anquetil won 5 tours on were heavier than the ones Indurain won on, but so what? And Anquetil won with 2x5 gears and DT shifters, whereas Indurain's last tours he had 2x8 and Ergopower brifters. So?

rydabent

So much discussion for the simple question, what does a $14,000 bike cost the MFG to build.

PeteHski

Weight is not my ONLY priority in a bike. As an endurance rider I take a balanced view and my upper-mid range Canyon Endurace strikes a good balance for me. SRAM Force AXS, relatively wide DT Swiss carbon wheelset, 30c tubeless tyres and a good, known quality carbon frameset. It's not the lightest bike ever, but it is reasonably light and very comfortable. To make it lighter would require either more cash or some compromises.

Anyway, I'm not really sure what your point is here.

jadmt

how much? while certainly regardless of how much still a bargain compared to this bad boy..

https://www.districtvision.com/produ...ouring-bicycle

genejockey 

Same here, and I'd prefer to spend my money on MORE bikes, rather than less bike.

wolfchild

A bike that's sold for $ 14 000 at an LBS is actually sold at about 3 times the cost of what it takes to manufacture it...So 14 000 divided by 3 equals roughly 4660...So that $ 14 000 bike is actually only worth less than $ 5000....But that's how business works...Bike industry is just like any other business. Their main goal is to be as profitable as they can.

PeteHski

Did that manufacturing cost (ignoring the fact that you just made it up) take into account R&D, design, production infrastructure and all other business overheads? Can you break down that $4660 for us please?

Kontact 

And a 593g fork. If it had been an inexpensive carbon fork the bike would have still made weight with a variety of better components after saving 300 grams.

However, my 1150g XR200 wheelset was not flexy. I weigh 155 and other people road them.

Bikes don't need to be all that expensive to make the UCI minimum.

genejockey 

Some minds only work in COGS.

mschwett 

here is the simplest answer to the question - their average bike costs approximately 80% of what they sell it to the dealer to. most bike companies are not publicly traded so their gross and operating income are not public, but at least one is. giant had an operating income of $312M on revenue of $2930M. that’s just a bit over 10%. so if they sell a $14k bike to a dealer for $10k, it costs them just a bit under $9k to produce that bike. this includes all their costs, to design it, buy the components, assemble the components, rent the land the factory and offices sit on, ship it, etc. not including all those parts of the cost would be idiotic, since you can’t build something without designing it and paying the people who build it and so on. unless you’re advocating stolen IP and slave labor and all that.

i’d be willing to stipulate that a) big bike has slightly higher profit margins than giant and b) high end bikes have slightly higher margins than low end ones, which might being the manufacturers total cost to produce and deliver a 14k bicycle to around 7-8k.

Kontact 

Steel was only used to point out that Indurain beat people riding lighter carbon and titanium in races that were friendly enough to climbers that at least one placed second to him.

The peloton rides what they are sponsored to ride. So no Croce, Chorus, Sante, Ultegra, Force, Sprint, etc. Doesn't matter how good the components are - the top level ones are better advertising for the sponsor.

My point is that you don't need a $14000 bike to be competitive in the pro peloton. Up until last year almost everything was won on cable brakes. Electronic shifting doesn't make you faster. Making minimum weight (if that's even necessary) can be accomplished with fairly ordinary materials and component choices. Sram Force mechanical on 2.5 pound frame will get you there without too much effort and cost less than $5000. So why are we discussing uber expensive bikes as if they are racing necessities?

Since we know that a $14K bike has about $4000 of dealer margin built into the MSRP, I don't see why a pre-profit cost to Specialized would even be as high as $4000. Do you think the various companies that make the parts for that bike sell them for just 10% over cost or something?

Design wise, it is all incremental. Going to all carbon framesets didn't jump directly from 5 pounds to 2 overnight, so the design costs over time are pretty damn modest. Every year somebody scrubs off 20 more grams here or there. It is hardly a ground up process.


And everyone in a niche hobby seems to utterly lose sight of what other consumer goods cost. Consider all the design, tooling and materials cost that goes into a blender - yet you can buy it for a quarter the price of a DA mechanical derailleur. Does anyone actually believe a plastic, aluminum and carbon derailleur costs more to make than a glass, plastic, copper and hardened steel electrical appliance? Even with economies of scale they should be in similar ballparks.
,
No one is going to go into the business of making a 12 pound production bike unless their is some real money to be made. If an Aethos sells for $14000 and a kids bike for $140, Specialized is only selling the Aethos because it profits them 100 times more than the kids bike. Now think about what the profit on a kids bike that wholesales for $100 must be for Specialized to offer it. You think it is only going to be $10? Nope. It's going to be a significant portion of that $100, or they just wouldn't be in the kid bike business. And it's going to be a significant portion of the Aethos' $10000 wholesale price as well.

genejockey 

You realize Indurain's last TdF win was on Aluminum, right? And that his 4th win was the LAST EVER on steel?