# Insanely expensive bikes



## mpemburn (2 Jan 2022)

I will be the first to admit that I’m pretty cheap—I go for used stuff before I’ll buy something new. Thus, my current, entirely satisfactory ride cost a fraction of a similar new bike.

Now, I live in a pretty affluent part of the U.S. (Maryland), and ride with a lot of people who are either well heeled, or think they are. Since getting back into to road cycling, I’ve been flabbergasted at the amount of money some people are willing to pay for a two-wheeler. One of my friends, who is a strong rider but seldom races, spent nearly $10,000 (~ 7,400 GBP) on a Specialized with the SRAM electronic shifting system. Another friend has _several_ bikes in that range. What do you think is the most a recreational cyclist should spend on a bike?


----------



## JhnBssll (2 Jan 2022)

Whatever they want to is surely the only answer? 

People prioritise things differently, live and let live


----------



## fossyant (2 Jan 2022)

Their money... I think it's daft to keep buying expensive bikes/any bike, then decide you don't like it, lose a load of money then buy another.


----------



## fossyant (2 Jan 2022)

I have a very expensive road bike, custom built for me, but I've had it over 30 years - no expense spared at the time.


----------



## Elybazza61 (2 Jan 2022)

Whatever they can afford.


----------



## Oldhippy (2 Jan 2022)

Horses for courses, but if I'm going to spend any large sum I would want a bike that does it all, daily running about, touring, day pottering, shopping, trailer towing. I have one though and it was nowhere near a grand let alone 10.


----------



## ianrauk (2 Jan 2022)

Whatever they want to spend. Its no one else's business.


----------



## vickster (2 Jan 2022)

People happily spend a 100k on a car and lose 30-50% in depreciation or spend 00s every month on leasing.
The most they’ll lose on a 10k bike is 10k (and it won’t lose that)


----------



## alex_cycles (2 Jan 2022)

mpemburn said:


> I will be the first to admit that I’m pretty cheap—I go for used stuff before I’ll buy something new. Thus, my current, entirely satisfactory ride cost a fraction of a similar new bike.
> 
> Now, I live in a pretty affluent part of the U.S. (Maryland), and ride with a lot of people who are either well heeled, or think they are. Since getting back into to road cycling, I’ve been flabbergasted at the amount of money some people are willing to pay for a two-wheeler. One of my friends, who is a strong rider but seldom races, spent nearly $10,000 (~ 7,400 GBP) on a Specialized with the SRAM electronic shifting system. Another friend has _several_ bikes in that range. What do you think is the most a recreational cyclist should spend on a bike?



I can only decide that for myself. If I had unlimited funds, I would probably buy the best I could find because "why not?".
But, since that isn't my reality, I have one expensive bike that I had brand new and any additional bikes are 2nd-hand (for the time being).
I have got the Roubaix down to under 10p a mile now though (purchase price, excluding maintenance), having done almost 15,000 miles on it. I'm hoping it will last for many more years.

Looking at the market as it is now, £1500 doesn't get you a very high-end road bike now, but I still regard it as quite a lot of money. A lot of clubmates have much more expensive bikes, which is good because it means mine is less likely to be nicked next to theirs.


----------



## Reynard (2 Jan 2022)

What classes as "expensive" is very much a sliding scale. What might be spendy to me could well be peanuts to someone else.

It's not a straightforward thing though, because there are always other questions to ask prior to splurging on something, like "can I justify it", "will I use it enough" and such like.

There's also a big difference between off-the-shelf and custom built. I'd be more likely to pay for the latter rather than the former, because then it'd be exactly what I needed / wanted, built to fit me exactly, and made to last. Same goes for anything bespoke, really, not just bikes.


----------



## Kingfisher101 (2 Jan 2022)

My personal view for myself is that I like value for money. I can have whatever I want bike wise but i just cant stand being ripped off or paying over the odds for anything.I don't race and just ride for pleasure so as long as its o.k mechanically and fits me that's all I'm bothered about.
Everyone is different though and as long as the person can afford it I dont see the problem in anyone buying what they want. Its up to the person, different people have different priorities.


----------



## Arrowfoot (2 Jan 2022)

Cars, planes or motorcycles are different from Bikes. Their prices reflect performance and build. So if you paid for a Ferrari, people know its value. A bike after a certain price point does not doing anything more. It can't go any faster, it cannot take off. You can't have leather trims. And there are bikes that cost more than a entry level car. Go figure. 

Take the recent AbsoluteBlack Oversized pulley wheels farce. Its a dud with false claims of being designed and engineered in England among other things. If I was friend or a colleague, I will tell you if you did not know. 

By the way there are good bikes that are worth more than 10K USD. If you tried electronic shifting you would seldom go back. The riding experience is at another level and worth every penny.


----------



## cyberknight (2 Jan 2022)

alex_cycles said:


> I can only decide that for myself. If I had unlimited funds, I would probably buy the best I could find because "why not?".
> But, since that isn't my reality, I have one expensive bike that I had brand new and any additional bikes are 2nd-hand (for the time being).
> I have got the Roubaix down to under 10p a mile now though (purchase price, excluding maintenance), having done almost 15,000 miles on it. I'm hoping it will last for many more years.
> 
> Looking at the market as it is now, £1500 doesn't get you a very high-end road bike now, but I still regard it as quite a lot of money. A lot of clubmates have much more expensive bikes, which is good because it means mine is less likely to be nicked next to theirs.


im similar, at club rides you can see bikes that are very expensive left unlocked and mine which would be about £1200 now to replace new for old at least has a cafe lock on


----------



## Tim Bennet. (2 Jan 2022)

I don't think you can spend 'a lot' of money on a bike, even if you tried. 

For comparison if you tear the arse out of you bike purchase, loose all sense of restraint and fall for every bit of bling and smooth salesman's chat in the bike shop, it will still only amount to the same as a 3 year old, basic spec, secondhand Honda Civic in grey which no one would ever claim to be an extravagance.

When younger, I spent a quarter of my annual salary on a custom framed bike. My job at the time came with full board and lodging so I thought that 3 months was the longest I could go without money for a beer, clothing, treats or even putting petrol in the car. Devotion to 'Richards Bicycle Book' ensured that it was perfect in every way and 40 years later I still think it was money well spent.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Jan 2022)

They should spend no more on a bike than they would spend on a car.

If you buy a Ferrari you don’t get something faster. You get something that is subject to the same speed limits as all other cars on public roads.


----------



## Gunk (2 Jan 2022)

I have a number of very expensive bikes but I bought them used for a fraction of what they were new.


----------



## Reynard (2 Jan 2022)

I totally get spending the money if riding competitively - marginal gains and all that. You want to minimise inertia, friction and any time lost while changing gears. Plus you also want to minimise drag. Although eventually, you do get to a point of diminishing returns.

But if like me, you're just using a bike for a bit of exercise or "me time", shopping trips and the occasional away day, then there's no point spending silly money. I'm happy with my bikes, and they're probably far better than the engine that powers them anyway.


----------



## JhnBssll (2 Jan 2022)

I have never spoken to anyone that isn't shocked and appalled at the amount I've spent on bicycles but I can't think of any way I could have spent it and gotten better value for my money


----------



## iluvmybike (2 Jan 2022)

Its folk's own business what they do with their money


----------



## Reynard (2 Jan 2022)

JhnBssll said:


> I have never spoken to anyone that isn't shocked and appalled at the amount I've spent on bicycles but I can't think of any way I could have spent it and gotten better value for my money



Yes, but you're not exactly buying off the shelf though, are you? 

I enjoy reading about your builds, because sometimes it's just getting technical just for technical's sake. I bet you can't put a price on the hours of fun (!) you've had tinkering with, at times, some really oddball stuff, just to prove it can be done. Like your Brompton, for instance. That was just insanely bonkers - but in a good way.


----------



## Saluki (2 Jan 2022)

My bike was enomously expensive. After discounts, it was £1080. It currently stands me 14.7p a mile, or 9.2p per km. At the time, it was insanely expensive to me. I had to give it some serious thought and research.
Its a gravel bike but I do long rides, short rides, pop to the shop or to a friend’s house. It goes on holiday and all sorts. It’s my go to, go everywhere and anywhere bike. After 6 months ownership, I sold the carbon roadie that I wasn’t riding (it was cheaper than the gravel bike) and the carbon CX.
I still have 2 x second hand steel roadies, both of which would have broken the bank when new. I have a pub bike too, an aluminium Dawes Galaxy, which I really rather like.

I think ‘insanely expensive’ is subjective. If I won a million pounds on ERNIE, I wouldn’t spend £10k on a bike, or a car. I might give the Genesis a really good LBS service so he feels as good as new again.


----------



## Reynard (2 Jan 2022)

Saluki said:


> My bike was enomously expensive. After discounts, it was £1080. It currently stands me 14.7p a mile, or 9.2p per km. At the time, it was insanely expensive to me. I had to give it some serious thought and research.
> Its a gravel bike but I do long rides, short rides, pop to the shop or to a friend’s house. It goes on holiday and all sorts. It’s my go to, go everywhere and anywhere bike. After 6 months ownership, I sold the carbon roadie that I wasn’t riding (it was cheaper than the gravel bike) and the carbon CX.
> I still have 2 x second hand steel roadies, both of which would have broken the bank when new. I have a pub bike too, an aluminium Dawes Galaxy, which I really rather like.
> 
> I think ‘insanely expensive’ is subjective. If I won a million pounds on ERNIE, I wouldn’t spend £10k on a bike, or a car. I might give the Genesis a really good LBS service so he feels as good as new again.



^^^ this in spades 

It makes sense for a do-it-all- bike, if only for the versatility.

Although I only spent a 1/10 of that on my do-it-all bike, because I bought it used at a good price. Although admittedly, at my height, choice is somewhat more limited than for a taller lady.


----------



## ColinJ (2 Jan 2022)

It is up to other people what _they _spend.

As for me... I spent £2k on bikes a couple of times around 20 years ago (roughly equivalent to about £3.5k now). So quite a lot of money, but not a _crazy _amount of money. I felt that I had got 95% of the benefits of a superbike for around 40% of the price. That seemed sensible.

It isn't likely that I will ever become wealthy enough to spend £10k on a bike now but if I _DID _have £10k spare to spend on cycling I would probably allocate about £6k for a couple of new bikes of different types and £4k to spend travelling to some great places to cycle.

If I somehow _DID _become fabulously wealthy, I hope that it wouldn't change me. I would spend £10k (or so) as above and become a philanthropist. I watched my dear old mum wither away and die from Parkinson's Disease so I would rather make a big donation to Parkinson's research rather than waste money on bikes that I don't really need.

Apart from anything else, I don't want to ride around on something so valuable that I would be constantly worried about it being stolen. (Yes, I could insure the bikes but that wouldn't be much consolation when Joe Mugger waved a machete at my head and demanded that I hand over the bike. [...] <--- That's where you point out that your average mugger wouldn't know a cheap bike from a superbike! )


----------



## tyred (2 Jan 2022)

It's entirely up to the individual on how much to spend or how much they can afford to spend. 

Personally I'd be prefer to have a cheaper bike that I don't have to worry about being damaged and spend the money I saved on touring, nice cakes and beer. 

In reality, a large chunk of the enjoyment I get from cycling comes from building up bikes from bits and pieces.


----------



## Cycleops (2 Jan 2022)

'Insanely expensive bikes' seems to imply people buying them must be insane? But are they? 
The Ferrari comparison is interesting. Mostly bought as a status symbol and to impress other enthusiasts. Race bikes might be bought for the same reason but I can understand why they might be bought as rather nice combination of form and function.
Would I buy one if I could afford it? Maybe, but the actual joy of the cycling part wouldn't increase for me, that's beyond price.


----------



## vickster (2 Jan 2022)

Reynard said:


> What classes as "expensive" is very much a sliding scale. What might be spendy to me could well be peanuts to someone else.
> 
> It's not a straightforward thing though, because there are always other questions to ask prior to splurging on something, like "can I justify it", "will I use it enough" and such like.
> 
> There's also a big difference between off-the-shelf and custom built. I'd be more likely to pay for the latter rather than the former, because then it'd be exactly what I needed / wanted, built to fit me exactly, and made to last. Same goes for anything bespoke, really, not just bikes.


Precisely…I could happily afford a 10k bike but I could never justify it as a £2-3k bike is more than enough for me. I have no desire for £1k wheels or electronic shifting or a high end carbon frame (I could perhaps be persuaded into handbuilt steel  but with mid range components).
Similarly, I could have a 50k+ car but that would be even less justifiable given my annual mileage


----------



## Dogtrousers (2 Jan 2022)

There are plenty of good value bike available. You want a new bike, and don't want to pay a lot for it, don't ... simple. If still beyond your budget, go second hand.



mpemburn said:


> What do you think is the most a recreational cyclist should spend on a bike?


Absolutely none of my business.


----------



## Milkfloat (2 Jan 2022)

I picked my bikes carefully. Anyone who spends more than me or less than me is an idiot.


----------



## Ian H (2 Jan 2022)

For me "a bike" is a collection of different components. The idea of buying a complete bike off the shelf doesn't really quite compute. I want to choose the bars, saddle, gears, etc., that suit me. The result costs what it costs.


----------



## Smokin Joe (2 Jan 2022)

There are no pockets on shrouds. Provided what you spend on a bike doesn't negatively impact on other aspects of your life, spend as much or as little as you want to.


----------



## All uphill (2 Jan 2022)

My bikes haven't generally cost much to buy, but my habit of modifying can add quite a bit over a period of weeks and months.

My new bike from Spa was meant to be perfect for me, but after three months I have already changed bar end plugs and want new handlebars.


----------



## cougie uk (2 Jan 2022)

7 grand on a bike is hardly insanely expensive. 
I mean it's way above the average but I'm sure most pro riders bikes are more than that. 

I saw one of the Ineos bikes out the other week. It makes a hell of a flash winter bike.


----------



## Gillstay (2 Jan 2022)

Anything expensive, ie Bino's, cars, motorbikes, I buy second hand as like supercars, they are well made, well looked after and barely used.
So I would buy a expensive bike, but not the depreciation.


----------



## Jenkins (2 Jan 2022)

Have we had the "More money than sense" comment yet or is the usual suspect out checking in skips? 

I'm with everyone else that has said spend what you want to get what you want. When some of my work colleagues expressed surprise at the £1k - £2k price tag of three of my bikes, I just asked them how much their usual 2 week holiday costs and there wasn't much difference except my bikes last longer.


----------



## bonzobanana (2 Jan 2022)

I get a real buzz from getting a bargain and always feel very sad if I have to spend a lot on anything so I'm wired to be a cheapskate pretty much. Also why buy a Ferrari and then put a lawn mower engine in it? I could never justify an expensive bike and I get satisfaction from using s/hand bikes as I feel that is more positive to the environment.


----------



## Reynard (2 Jan 2022)

SydZ said:


> Someone’s “insanely expensive“ is anothers ideal product.
> 
> Whether it be bikes, cars, watches etc.
> 
> I suspect a lot of those decry expensive items are going so out of jealousy.



Not necessarily. Just because I can afford something expensive doesn't mean I absolutely must have it.

My grandfather used to say "I'm too poor to buy cheap stuff" - and he's right. Good quality stuff - whether that's bikes or shoes or art materials or cookware - lasts, and I don't mind spending money where it's warranted. But there's a big difference between good quality and paying over the odds for a "name" just for the sake of it.


----------



## DCLane (3 Jan 2022)

As others have put it depends on what you define as "insanely expensive".

I've posted on here that my son races, and some of the bikes used go well above the £7k equivalent you've stated. £10k+ for a TT / road / track / hillclimb bike isn't uncommon at some of the race events we do.

He's got a new Ridley Noah Fast disc-brake race bike that arrived late last year, part-funded by sponsors, which retails at over £6k. Add in bespoke carbon race wheels, plus two other pairs of lightweight carbon / aluminium training wheels and a range of other alterations he's made (better bottom bracket, cranks, chainrings, rear mech changes) and it's way over the £7k you've stated. But ... it'll be used for racing in the UK and in Europe this year and is his first "new" bike since 2016 instead of racing on second-hand purchases.

However, to keep things in balance he _did_ do a time-trial on Jan 1st on the Carlton I originally bought for £4


----------



## PaulSB (3 Jan 2022)

I can't say I've ever thought of something as insanely expensive. We do have a saying in our household which is "a ridiculous amount of money.' I'm not sure if this is the same meaning.

I have three bikes; a five year old Cervelo, originally £3100, which would cost £5-6000+ to replace given the upgrades I've made; a one year old titanium Kinesis, £3200, as my winter/gravel bike; a secondhand Cannondale which I grabbed from a friend for £500. So a range of costs. I can afford to replace each or all but it's unlikely I would. My Cervelo is still a fabulous bike and in trying to replace her I believe I would struggle to find anything as good. The Kinesis is my forever bike. The Cannondale the go to when I don't need my winter bike but don't want to ride the summer bike.

I'm 67 and my plan is to continue to upgrade my Cervelo with a view to getting another five years from her when I will think about a change. Then I'll be 72 and my needs could be different. With good maintenance and upgrades if needed the Kinesis will easily give me ten years and beyond. I'll be 77 so who knows. I regard these purchases as sound investments in my hobby, sport, health and social life. To put this in perspective my wife's gym and tennis club membership costs £1250 per annum and gives her the same benefits. I argue for less than three years membership each bike has given me something with at least a ten year life. A very sound investment.

If I had to replace the Cervelo I think I'd feel uncomfortable with spending £5000+. I could justify it but not feel comfortable, if that makes sense?

The next purchase I have in mind is a high end e-bike. When? I don't know. At 67 I'm aware the time is approaching when I might want some assistance. It could be one year, I hope it's ten or more. At that point I'll happily spend £££££ to continue enjoying the wonderful riding which is central to my enjoyment of life.

So given all this I have to wonder why the OP views other people's spending as insane. I don't.


----------



## kingrollo (3 Jan 2022)

Due to my asthma I'm not the greatest cyclist. Most people who train for a few months get faster than me.

However cycling helps with my mental health, blood pressure and weight management. - who can put a price on that ?

So yes I spend way more than I need to on bikes. I think I can justify it.


----------



## bonzobanana (3 Jan 2022)

SydZ said:


> Someone’s “insanely expensive“ is anothers ideal product.
> 
> Whether it be bikes, cars, watches etc.
> 
> I suspect a lot of those decry expensive items are going so out of jealousy.



Some high end bikes are actually appalling quality and unsafe. If you have ever watched the videos of Luescher Technik on youtube who is a carbon fibre engineer you can see him analyse many high end frames to see their manufacturing quality is actually extremely poor. There is no direct link between high pricing and high quality. Then you have to factor in if a product is suitable for your tasks. What good to me is a performance road bike with reduced component life and more problematic design when I'm doing general cycling and locking my bike outside a Tesco express etc. Most cyclists have zero use for a high end performance road bike. If I won such a bike in a competition it would be on ebay or facebook marketplace within minutes pretty much. However I'm still very much interested in what is happening at the high end of bicycle models but can honestly say I have zero interest in ever having such a bike. What I would like that money would provide is a larger house in a better location, larger garden etc or be able to do more travelling. It's like mountain biking, I don't really do extreme mountain biking just light off-road cycling at a leisurely pace to explore off-road. So I don't need high end suspension because I would be having to service it frequently and wouldn't really benefit from it for the light off-road I do that is only marginally worse than what a gravel bike could cope with. I've got front suspension on a mountain bike I use but I'm thinking of replacing them with rigid forks.

I think cycling is more about the right tool for the job rather than high end being actually better because in many instances its actually far worse and would be the wrong tool for the job. Obviously if you are a competitive cyclist obsessed with going fast and achieving faster times then a high end bike might be something you would get jealous about if you couldn't afford one though. I just think for the vast majority of cyclists high end bikes are actually a poor choice. Also they sell in extremely low numbers. The average price of a bike sold in the UK is about £380 and that has shot up from about £200 because of the rise of ebikes. As you can imagine £380 pretty much means very few high end bikes are sold its a tiny niche of the market. I noticed on the statistics that in Italy the average price of a bike sold is actually significantly less than the UK, Germany and France and their bike industry is mainly export focused and even the UK is significantly less than Germany. For every £1 spent in cycling in the UK 25p is spent at Halfords and its estimated that 4 in 10 bikes sold in the UK are bought from Halfords (obviously Halfords bikes tend to at the value end typically). That's almost half of all bikes coming out of Halfords. I think Carrera's and Apollo's make up the bulk of sales. I do think Halford's bike sales are slightly skewed more towards mountain bike sales but I've not seen any statistics that support that but their shops always have a lot more mountain bike type models.

Just making the point high end bikes aren't really significant in the marketplace at all, they are really show models for the brand that very few people will ever buy. They are like diamond encrusted toilet brushes not really relevant to most people. So it doesn't really matter if bikes are £12k, £20k or even £30k at the top end because they don't really have any significance in the market place. I would imagine the £800-2k price bracket is where the real action is in retail for road bikes.


----------



## alex_cycles (3 Jan 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> They are like diamond encrusted toilet brushes not really relevant to most people. So it doesn't really matter if bikes are £12k, £20k or even £30k at the top end because they don't really have any significance in the market place. I would imagine the £800-2k price bracket is where the real action is in retail for road bikes.


I'm looking forward to telling my mate with a nice Cervelo that his bike is a diamond-encrusted toilet brush.


----------



## IanSmithCSE (3 Jan 2022)

Good morning,

The answer is clear to me.

When you don't use it because you are scared of the cost of an accident or wear and tear.
When something more important to you, your family or friends is put off to buy or maintain the bike.
I feel that over the last 40 odd years or so we have become used to super cheap products based on imports where the lifestyle of those people making those products is significantly worse than ours, so a £3k bike seems super expensive.

If you inflation adjust a 531 Team Raleigh with Campag Super Record from the 1970/1980s they come out at around £3k in today's money.

They had a pretty basic steel frames, despite all of the marketing to suggest something to the contrary, and pretty basic aluminium alloy and steel parts. So a bike with CF frame and wheels and electronic shifting could be expected to cost a bit more that this.

Yet this sort of bike back then wouldn't have been considered way over the top for most club riders.

I was gutted to find out that the original 753 team bikes were actually made on a production line, okay it was a small line, one guy would build the bottom bracket area and another guy do different joins and possibly a third guy some more. As a 753 frame was very difficult to bend into shape when complete, sorry cold set, each joint needed to be fully cooled down before the next one was made to avoid tension from shrinkage. What this did mean was that the frames had a quite short build time as each person was up to speed on his bit of the batch.

For me the only time that it would be any business of anyone else would be if the purchaser has dramatically misunderstood what he thinks that he is buying compared with what he actually is buying. Has weighs 300lbs, has bought a £10k team bike and wants to mount a seat post rack to carry some shopping on a Saturday, Specialized have tended to have something like a 240lbs weight limit so he would be in big trouble

Bye

Ian


----------



## Cycleops (3 Jan 2022)

@bonzobanana ‘Diamond encrusted toilet brushes’. I like that. Pretty much sums it up as far as I’m concerned, but if people are happy buying them that’s absolutely fine.


----------



## bonzobanana (3 Jan 2022)

alex_cycles said:


> I'm looking forward to telling my mate with a nice Cervelo that his bike is a diamond-encrusted toilet brush.



I'm fairly sure Cervelo frames and forks have been picked apart by both Luescher Technik and Hambini for very poor manufacturing standards. Voids and other issues in the layup of the fibres and very poor tolerances. The brand actually uses a fairly poor quality Chinese factory from what I understand from those videos. It's never about what something costs to make its always about what someone is prepared to pay so suffice to say Cervelo definitely like to operate with a very high profit margin and good luck to them but I will never ever buy their products however rich I become.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=hambini+cervelo


----------



## gzoom (3 Jan 2022)

Jenkins said:


> When some of my work colleagues expressed surprise at the £1k - £2k price tag of three of my bikes, I just asked them how much their usual 2 week holiday costs and there wasn't much difference except my bikes last lonr.



£1-2k for a family holiday abroad in half term is a bargain these days. 4 nights in Nottingham Center Parcs is £1200 for their cheapest accommodation. A ski holiday in Europe is easily £5k+.


----------



## PaulSB (3 Jan 2022)

alex_cycles said:


> I'm looking forward to telling my mate with a nice Cervelo that his bike is a diamond-encrusted toilet brush.


I'm already feeling very hurt!!  

My Cervelo is simply a beautiful machine which helps me get more out of cycling. Pleasure, pure unadulterated pleasure........plus I never ride to Tesco.


----------



## alex_cycles (3 Jan 2022)

PaulSB said:


> I'm already feeling very hurt!!
> 
> My Cervelo is simply a beautiful machine which helps me get more out of cycling. Pleasure, pure unadulterated pleasure........plus I never ride to Tesco.


No. It's a bog-brush, albeit a very NICE bog-brush


----------



## Twilkes (3 Jan 2022)

I can understand how people think bikes are expensive (I used to think a £300 hybrid was mid-range...) but a thousand pounds is about my personal sweet spot.







But that gets me a bike that is easily good enough for what I need it for, and doesn't leave me feeling too guilty if it gets dirty and gritted up in the winter. Still feels a bit raw paying thirty quid for a cassette and twenty for a chain. If you have a nice bike I sincerely hope you look after it!


----------



## Dogtrousers (3 Jan 2022)

I dread to think how much my bike has cost me since I bought it 9 years ago. It still has the original frame, forks, seatpost and mudguards.


----------



## mustang1 (3 Jan 2022)

I am viciously against expensive bikes but the companies will keep selling them if people keep buying them. 

The companies are seeing that ore people are getting vocal about expensive bike prices so they pay YouTube influencers to advertise to us with videos titled "are bikes really that expensive?" (Yes they blxxdy well are). 

They come out with excuses such as bike tech (what friggin tech, hydraulic disks, aero tubes, chain that is narrow wide on alternatelive links? Having a laugh!). It is these "reasons" that I really object to. Then again, they can't say "we charge that amount because we can". 

BUT I've come to accept the high prices. I don't blame the companies for the high prices because the market bares it. And there is the trickle down technology so I usually buy at the low end of the spectrum.


----------



## Twilkes (3 Jan 2022)

I believe there's a UCI rule that says any bikes/tech used in racing also must be available to the public via retail, which is a bit like Arnold Clark selling F1 racing cars. And the R&D that goes into high end bikes needs to be recouped so the prices will be high. There's enough competition in the bike market that I don't think a company would get away with selling a bike for £7k if their competitors same-spec bikes sold for £5k.


----------



## Alex321 (3 Jan 2022)

mustang1 said:


> I am viciously against expensive bikes but the companies will keep selling them if people keep buying them.
> 
> The companies are seeing that ore people are getting vocal about expensive bike prices so they pay YouTube influencers to advertise to us with videos titled "are bikes really that expensive?" (Yes they blxxdy well are).
> 
> They come out with excuses such as bike tech (what friggin tech, hydraulic disks, aero tubes, chain that is narrow wide on alternatelive links? Having a laugh!). It is these "reasons" that I really object to. Then again, they can't say "we charge that amount because we can".



You've clearly never worked on the development of such tech. It is very expensive to develop, and the development cost has to be amortised reasonably quickly to be worthwhile.

I've only watched one of those videos (produced by GCN) and while they explained why a bike could cost £10,000, they were also at pains to point out that for most cyclists, the benefits of a £10K bike over a £3K bike would be marginal at best, and unlikely to be worth it.



mustang1 said:


> BUT I've come to accept the high prices. I don't blame the companies for the high prices because the market bares it. And there is the trickle down technology so I usually buy at the low end of the spectrum.


This is, of course, the important factor for most of us. The 105 groupset on my current road bike is as good or even better than the Dura-Ace groupset from 10 years ago.

I would be surpised if we don't see Di2 for 105 within the next 18 months or so, now that there are no mechanical versions of the latest Ultegra or Dura-Ace.


----------



## Gunk (3 Jan 2022)

PaulSB said:


> I'm already feeling very hurt!!
> 
> My Cervelo is simply a beautiful machine which helps me get more out of cycling. Pleasure, pure unadulterated pleasure........plus I never ride to Tesco.



I ride to our local shops on my posh Van Nic


----------



## PaulSB (3 Jan 2022)

One thing I find interesting about this subject, and it's one which pops up in other discussions, is the vitriol which gets aimed at high end bikes. When I think about cycling overall I recognise there are people who ride bikes for many different reasons; for transport, commuting, leisure, touring, gravel, MTB, hobby, racing and much more. I also know there are people who love to tinker, repair, build, restore bikes, etc. There are folk like me who ride for love, enjoyment, pleasure and use an LBS for everything. All seems good to me. Different folks. Different strokes.

Everyone I ride with does it for no reason other than relaxation, exercise, leisure. I've never heard anyone discuss the cost of their bike but I know many, many people who are interested in and compliment others on their purchase. I get a nice feeling when someone compliments my bike. I truly don't understand why those of us who choose to spend our cash in a particular way are viewed with apparent disdain for the choices we make. Almost dismissed as fools.

@bonzobanana can I suggest you try riding a Cervelo? I've ridden one for five years and it's never missed a beat and would argue my real life experience is every bit as valid as a Youtube presenter. No, I'm not feeling precious just a little baffled by some of the views expressed. I don't know much about Hambini other than people trot him out every now and again to prove how poor high end bikes are. Personally I take face to face advice from the LBS which clearly has ripped me off for 20+ years.


----------



## Reynard (3 Jan 2022)

PaulSB said:


> Everyone I ride with does it for no reason other than relaxation, exercise, leisure. I've never heard anyone discuss the cost of their bike but I know many, many people who are interested in and compliment others on their purchase. I get a nice feeling when someone compliments my bike. I truly don't understand why those of us who choose to spend our cash in a particular way are viewed with apparent disdain for the choices we make. Almost dismissed as fools.



Mmmm, well compliments can come from all sorts of people and about all sorts of bikes.

My Wiggins roadie and hybrid always turn heads - people find it unusual to see "fully fledged bikes" in such small sizes. And my Raleigh Max build project does likewise - I get the "wow, did you build that" from MTB riders on the gravel trails out here.

And none of them are what people would call expensive in terms of bikes. So it's not just price, or aesthetics. It's about riding something which is unexpected. Well, in my experience, anyways...


----------



## alchurch (3 Jan 2022)

I saw this lovely ex demo frame going cheap. It had a metallic finish and changes colour depending on which way the light bounces off it .It was a specialised tarmac but the frame was designed for di2.I reasoned that it would probably be my last change to try di2 as my cycling aspirations dropped with age, and so I went for it . I went expensive on the BB because I have had trouble with creaky specialised ones in the past, and so the bike ended up a once in a lifetime super bike (to me) purchase. Any other bike I buy will likely be strong reliable and steady rather than frisky and racy, but no regrets


----------



## Chief Broom (3 Jan 2022)

If all bikes were free i wonder what people would end up riding...i would bet high end [extremely high end]] bikes wouldnt be in the majority, but then im a newbie and dont know ****er all


----------



## Dogtrousers (3 Jan 2022)

PaulSB said:


> One thing I find interesting about this subject, and it's one which pops up in other discussions, is the vitriol which gets aimed at high end bikes.


Indeed, it's a recurrent theme on here. "How dare things that I can't afford exist! It's _wrong!_" Regardless of whether or not something that the offended one actually wants. "That TT bike costs £5k! It's outrageous!" "Do you want a TT bike?" "No, but it's the _principle_ of the thing"

This being a cycling forum I think we can assume that everyone has a bike. So no one here _needs_ to buy a bike. So no one really should care about how much bikes cost. And there's always Halfords and Decathlon if you want a reasonably priced bike.

I last bought a bike nearly 10 years ago. I doubt I'll buy another one for another 10 years, if ever (unless it gets nicked or the frame breaks). Wheels - yes. Drivetrains - yes. Chains, tyres, cables, brake blocks - definitely. Handlebars - maybe, that's crash dependent. Pedals - yes. A whole bike ... probably not.

Does the existence of super expensive bikes, or indeed cars, shoes, watches, hi-fis, cameras etc. bother me? Not a jot.


----------



## iluvmybike (3 Jan 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Indeed, it's a recurrent theme on here. "How dare things that I can't afford exist! It's _wrong!_" Regardless of whether or not something that the offended one actually wants. "That TT bike costs £5k! It's outrageous!" "Do you want a TT bike?" "No, but it's the _principle_ of the thing"
> 
> This being a cycling forum I think we can assume that everyone has a bike. So no one here _needs_ to buy a bike. So no one really should care about how much bikes cost. And there's always Halfords and Decathlon if you want a reasonably priced bike.
> 
> ...


Have to agree with you there. It seems to be a form of inverse snobbery


----------



## Oldhippy (3 Jan 2022)

I'm more left than a left thing with left things hanging all over it but if you want a bike for 10 grand and can afford it, go for it.


----------



## ColinJ (3 Jan 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> This being a cycling forum I think we can assume that everyone has a bike.


I think there are certainly a few who _don't_! 



Dogtrousers said:


> So no one here _needs_ to buy a bike.


And some of ones who _do _have a bike, don't ride it, so they definitely _don't_ need one!


----------



## alex_cycles (3 Jan 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Indeed, it's a recurrent theme on here. "How dare things that I can't afford exist! It's _wrong!_" Regardless of whether or not something that the offended one actually wants. "That TT bike costs £5k! It's outrageous!" "Do you want a TT bike?" "No, but it's the _principle_ of the thing"



I do giggle (to myself) at the fat middle-aged club members who want to shave a few seconds off their rather mediocre 10-mile TT time by buying a £3k bike and disc wheel instead of working hard to get fitter and faster. To me, it's not worth it for the 5-10 times a year it'd be used.
To them it is. It's all good if they have the spare money.

For me it's about value for money. No matter how much money I had, I wouldn't buy a new super-bike unless there was a specific reason it would benefit me (and not just "because I like it and I want it").


----------



## Rusty Nails (3 Jan 2022)

I love people buying insanely expensive bikes with all the latest technology.

It makes it so much more enjoyable when I overtake them on my old, heavy, 3-speed steel bike, fully loaded with shopping, while smoking a Woodbine.
.
.
.
.
.
In my dreams.


----------



## Oldhippy (3 Jan 2022)

As above I can't for the life of me imagine why anyone would spend that kind of money that you can only race about on when you could get proper multi function bikes for a lot lot less money. But why buy a Ferrari or any other bling stuff. Don't get it at all but it pleases some.


----------



## Gunk (3 Jan 2022)

Twilkes said:


> I can understand how people think bikes are expensive (I used to think a £300 hybrid was mid-range...) but a thousand pounds is about my personal sweet spot.
> 
> View attachment 624794
> 
> ...



Me too, about £1000 is the most I’ll spend. But I’ve managed to buy some pretty special used bikes within that budget.


----------



## Smokin Joe (3 Jan 2022)

Oldhippy said:


> As above I can't for the life of me imagine why anyone would spend that kind of money that you can only race about on when you could get proper multi function bikes for a lot lot less money.


Because not everyone is interested in riding "A proper multi function bike". 

A great many cyclists ride either for competition or for long distance leisure challenges and never commute or shop on the bike. A hi-tech machine is entirely appropriate (Though not essential) in those cases, and if someone can afford it why not?

This "More money than sense" stuff only ever crops up on cycling forums. Spend ten grand on a Hi-Fi and it's "Wow, I bet that sounds great" even if the owner is half deaf and has nothing more than a pile of James Last records.


----------



## tyred (3 Jan 2022)

Rusty Nails said:


> I love people buying insanely expensive bikes with all the latest technology.
> 
> It makes it so much more enjoyable when I overtake them on my old, heavy, 3-speed steel bike, fully loaded with shopping, while smoking a Woodbine.
> .
> ...



Stub out that Woodbine. No performance enhancing drugs allowed. It is cheating.


----------



## simongt (3 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> Spend ten grand on a Hi-Fi and it's "Wow, I bet that sounds great"


Precisley the point. If someone spends a lot of money on something that brings them a lot of pleasure; be it a bike, guitar, sound system, car, construction kit, then what the hell - ? Everyone has their own parameters with money.


----------



## ColinJ (3 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> This "More money than sense" stuff only ever crops up on cycling forums. Spend ten grand on a Hi-Fi and it's "Wow, I bet that sounds great"...


Actually... 

A friend invited me round to listen to his then recently upgraded hifi system which probably cost about ten grand. He told me to listen carefully...

He played a CD through the stereo system. It sounded absolutely fantastic. I congratulated him on the setup. No, no, no - that was through the crappy old speaker cables which _'only'_ cost £50/pair.

He pulled the amp out and replaced the cheapskate cables with his new aficionado ones, costing... £500/pair!!!!!!!!!  

He played a CD through the stereo system. It sounded absolutely (identically!) fantastic. I congratulated him on the setup.

I backed slowly towards the door with a fixed smile on my face as he raved about how much '_air_' the cables gave to the sound, and how his ears were finally freed from the distortions introduced by '_oxygen-contaminated_' copper... 

I'm sure that the system would have sounded equally good with £5 speaker cables and several thousand pounds saved on other parts here and there. Similar to buying a £5k bike instead of a £10k bike...


----------



## Dogtrousers (3 Jan 2022)

When I was a student 40 or so years ago I shared a room with a guy with a serious hi fi. I wasn't allowed to touch it.

For some reason he thought it was in some way "better" than my Binatone cassette player. Fool.

(We're still friends to this day. But I have a lifelong aversion to Frank Zappa)


----------



## Milzy (3 Jan 2022)

cougie uk said:


> 7 grand on a bike is hardly insanely expensive.
> I mean it's way above the average but I'm sure most pro riders bikes are more than that.
> 
> I saw one of the Ineos bikes out the other week. It makes a hell of a flash winter bike.


A few club members ride dogma F12’s with super record on in the winter. They’re nuts.


----------



## roadrash (3 Jan 2022)

what people spend on bikes or anything else for that matter is no ones business but their own, they do not need to justify it to anyone else, i dont understand the need for criticism of someones spending habits as it doesnt affect me in any way.
having said that .....i hear that @SkipdiverJohn is in resus having read the thread.


----------



## fossyant (3 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> You've clearly never worked on the development of such tech. It is very expensive to develop, and the development cost has to be amortised reasonably quickly to be worthwhile.
> 
> I've only watched one of those videos (produced by GCN) and while they explained why a bike could cost £10,000, they were also at pains to point out that for most cyclists, the benefits of a £10K bike over a £3K bike would be marginal at best, and unlikely to be worth it.
> 
> ...



It's not, unfortunately. You'll get the extra gears and new STI etc, but the bearings, jockeys and finish aren't a patch on even the old 7400 series.

Even taking an early 90's 8 speed rear XT mech vs a newer 10 speed - the 10 speed is lighter, but it's not as tough.


----------



## Reynard (3 Jan 2022)

Having sat back and thought about it, it's more about having the right tool for the job, and since no two cyclists are the same...

My bikes do what I want them to do, and I'm happy with that. I enjoy riding them and tinkering with them and I don't see the need to have anything more spendy at the moment. In the future, who knows...

Mind, as a former pro snappy, my camera gear is the best. The amount of money I've sunk into gear (film & digital) might have some people on here crying into their beers.  Having said that, my favourite lens is actually my 50mm 1.8, which is the cheapest lens that Canon produce. But because it is so simple from an optical perspective, it's right up there with my L-glass on image quality.

I did once borrow a Canon 300 2.8 plus converters from a colleague with a view to buying, but I didn't bite in the end. While it is an absolutely stonking piece of kit - with a price tag to match, it was just too big and heavy for me to use comfortably on a regular basis, especially when there's a lot of legwork involved and you're already carrying a mountain of other kit. In the end, I bought the Sigma version (used), which is smaller and lighter, albeit not as good. But it was a compromise I was willing to make.

The same applies to bikes, I think.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (3 Jan 2022)

roadrash said:


> .....i hear that @SkipdiverJohn is in resus having read the thread.



No, I'm just chuckling to myself at the knowledge the most I have ever spent in real terms on any bike, new or used, is about £250 in today's money.
That said, it's not like I don't have some half decent quality bikes that would be north of £1k a pop today. I just didn't buy them new and didn't pay much for them.
Nothing wrong with quality gear, so long as it's value for money quality gear. Mugging yourself off though, paying through the nose just so you can show off with a certain brand name, is asking for ridicule and when it comes it's well deserved.


----------



## roadrash (3 Jan 2022)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Mugging yourself off though, paying through the nose just so you can show off with a certain brand name, is asking for ridicule and when it comes it's well deserved.


and i wonder who gets to decide whether it is value for money ,quality gear or whether ridicule is deserved,.... sorry well deserved


----------



## cougie uk (3 Jan 2022)

gzoom said:


> £1-2k for a family holiday abroad in half term is a bargain these days. 4 nights in Nottingham Center Parcs is £1200 for their cheapest accommodation. A ski holiday in Europe is easily £5k+.


Pffft. Amateurs. I know of people who apparently spend 8k on a Spanish fortnights holiday. I have no idea how mind you.


----------



## Smokin Joe (3 Jan 2022)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Nothing wrong with quality gear, so long as it's value for money quality gear. Mugging yourself off though, paying through the nose just so you can show off with a certain brand name, is asking for ridicule and when it comes it's well deserved.


Should they be ridiculed as much or even more than the people who piss their money up the wall on alcohol?


----------



## Drago (3 Jan 2022)

mpemburn said:


> What do you think is the most a recreational cyclist should spend on a bike?


Whatever they want to. If people want to work until they're eleventy-eight to pay for frivolous consumer items then thats entirely their business. If that's their choice then good luck to them.

They don't judge me for buying Y fronts from the charity shop, or riding a Rudge Flying Tosser that I found in a ditch, but not having to work to pay for it all so I don't feel inclined to judge them in return.

Live and let live, life choices and all that.


----------



## Fredo76 (4 Jan 2022)

Just wait for Di2.3.1...

"Shifting is unavailable now. Would you like to brake instead?"


----------



## mustang1 (4 Jan 2022)

Can someone explain this to me:
In 2006, a single speed spesh langster cost £350. Circa 2015 it was £700.
The 2006 and 2015 frames were different - oh and it was aluminium!. I don't think they used wind tunnels for that bike. There was no groupset to talk of (no e-shifting etc). There was no new tech like hydraulic brakes (both 2006 and 2015 models used rim brakes).

Why the doubling in price (actually the price went up to £750 then down to £700 and then it went off the UK market)? Inflation? Carbon layup costs? Meh, hardly. Perhaps the market was ready to sustain a price hike. That's ok, it's business, Those guys aren't here for fun and I understand you have to make money regardless of whether its 5% or 500%, whatever they can get away with.

What i dislike is the use of the word "tech" and "R&D" costs when it comes to bikes. I think my noise canceling headphones have more tech than a bike. My phone has more tech, more software development costs (those programmers ain't cheap). But hey, everything is expensive. There is a rumour about perfumes really only costing £5 and the packaging accounts for £70. But hey, that's the overall experience of perfumes.

Anyway, like I mentioned in another thread somewhere in these parts, I won't complain about high bike prices. If it gets too expensive for me, I'll just go running. Say, have you seen the prices of some of those running shoes....


----------



## Nebulous (4 Jan 2022)

I've been watching this thread for a couple of days now, wanting to contribute and not knowing what to say. Some of you will have seen my thread on buying a new titanium bike, specifically for long distance rides, particularly audax. 

I've had a lifetime of being frugal, bringing up a family and making what money we had go a long way. I retired last year, and quickly decided I wasn't ready to stop completely, so took a part-time job with the NHS. Due to staffing pressures I got sucked in (you always do with the NHS) and took more responsibility than I intended and am working more hours than I planned. 

As a result my finances are in better shape than they have ever been. Buying a £5k bike was a self-indulgence, one that I may never repeat, but one which will have no impact on my ability to fund my lifestyle. The only difference it may make is leaving £5k less when I die. 

I was interested in the comments about a standard being applied to bikes and not to other things. Its not the only self-indulgence I've engaged in recently. I bought a new mirrorless camera at the point I retired. No-one has ever asked me what I paid for that. I say I got myself an expensive camera when I retired and comments are often:- "Do you take a lot of photos?", or "What do you take photos of?", rather than cost. With the bike a small number of people will outright ask what a fancy new bike cost, but a lot of others will hint at it:- "That must have cost a lot." 

I've also leased an electric car, mainly to have a second vehicle for my wife when I'm working. People do ask about the costs of that, mainly because many of them regard electric vehicles as out of reach, but without the judgment that is there when they are discussing the bike.

I didn't go from £200 bikes to a £5k bike however. There has been a gradual process of desensitisation to the costs of cycling since I started in 2010. My expenditure on things cycling related has gone from second-hand and Aldi clothes to £150 shoes in that time. My bikes have gone from a Specialized Allez at £560 for a 5 month old £900 bike, to a 2015 tarmac bought with insurance money after being knocked off my bike, which was a £2000 bike I got for £1800 because my LBS messed up and were owe me a favour, and a steel genesis equilibrium for audax with upgraded wheels and a dynamo hub. 

I once read an article by a guy who gave financial advice to lottery winners. He said they all end up in the big detached house in its own grounds with the duck pond, but some of them take a couple of moves to get there, because they don't think that big to start with. If they are in a semi, they'll buy a detached house first and then relatively quickly move again. Their thinking is often just one step ahead of where they are. 

While I'm not in that league, the same principle of several steps to get there applies to me. Buying an allez elite for £560 was as far as I dared go in 2010, but it was the start of a slippery slope. Astonishingly I've just found one on ebay at £550 - amazing for a bike that was £915 new at the time and I got practically unused 5 months later for £560. 

I still find it difficult to comprehend the money some people I know spend on TT bikes, these in particular seem to turn into an arms race, but then that is up to them........


----------



## mustang1 (4 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> Because not everyone is interested in riding "A proper multi function bike".
> 
> A great many cyclists ride either for competition or for long distance leisure challenges and never commute or shop on the bike. A hi-tech machine is entirely appropriate (Though not essential) in those cases, and if someone can afford it why not?
> *
> This "More money than sense" stuff only ever crops up on cycling forums.* Spend ten grand on a Hi-Fi and it's "Wow, I bet that sounds great" even if the owner is half deaf and has nothing more than a pile of James Last records.



Nah I see that comment all over the place:
Computers (why did he buy an Apple instead of WhateverBrand, he has more money than sense).
Cars (why did he buy a ferrari when my modified WhateverBrand is faster, he has more money than sense).
etc etc...
I hear it a lot less these days probably because everyone I hang out with is friggin' loaded!


----------



## Drago (4 Jan 2022)

Think of it this way - the people who make the most noise along the lines that mustang1 describes are usually those that can't afford such things themselves. 

If you can afford it and want to, go for it. If you can't afford it, or can afford but simply do not desire to, then go for it. Its a freeish country.

I would only add one cavaet to that. Don't spend frivolously on unnecessary items and then claim to care about the planet, environment, climate change, ants, lemmings, etc. Don't be like John Kerry, owning your own private jet and part owning a company that leases private jets, then land yourself a job as a climate envoy and preach to the rest of us about consumer restraint. Don't be that twot.


----------



## cougie uk (4 Jan 2022)

Milzy said:


> A few club members ride dogma F12’s with super record on in the winter. They’re nuts.


I figure that by the time you factor in maintenances after a crappy winter and a possible slip on a winter roads - you're better off getting a decent winter bike. Plus that will take full guards so it will be a nicer drier ride.


----------



## Mo1959 (4 Jan 2022)

There's nothing nicer than being able to splurge on something later in life if you have struggled for money earlier. I've bought a few reasonably expensive things the last couple of years with my inheritance from my dad. Sadly, he never seemed to like spending money and could have made his life much more comfortable and treated himself if he wanted, but it wasn't in his nature. Damned sure I'm not going to the grave with it lying in my bank account!


----------



## vickster (4 Jan 2022)

cougie uk said:


> I figure that by the time you factor in maintenances after a crappy winter and a possible slip on a winter roads - you're better off getting a decent winter bike. Plus that will take full guards so it will be a nicer drier ride.


maybe they want to ride their super bikes all year round and don’t care about being splattered with crap (Or the cost of new parts if they don’t clean their bike every time out).

Personally, I’m unlikely to have any one to leave my cash to, and I’ve not spent several hundred k bringing up children so why not spend on myself


----------



## bonzobanana (4 Jan 2022)

PaulSB said:


> One thing I find interesting about this subject, and it's one which pops up in other discussions, is the vitriol which gets aimed at high end bikes. When I think about cycling overall I recognise there are people who ride bikes for many different reasons; for transport, commuting, leisure, touring, gravel, MTB, hobby, racing and much more. I also know there are people who love to tinker, repair, build, restore bikes, etc. There are folk like me who ride for love, enjoyment, pleasure and use an LBS for everything. All seems good to me. Different folks. Different strokes.
> 
> Everyone I ride with does it for no reason other than relaxation, exercise, leisure. I've never heard anyone discuss the cost of their bike but I know many, many people who are interested in and compliment others on their purchase. I get a nice feeling when someone compliments my bike. I truly don't understand why those of us who choose to spend our cash in a particular way are viewed with apparent disdain for the choices we make. Almost dismissed as fools.
> 
> @bonzobanana can I suggest you try riding a Cervelo? I've ridden one for five years and it's never missed a beat and would argue my real life experience is every bit as valid as a Youtube presenter. No, I'm not feeling precious just a little baffled by some of the views expressed. I don't know much about Hambini other than people trot him out every now and again to prove how poor high end bikes are. Personally I take face to face advice from the LBS which clearly has ripped me off for 20+ years.


I think the point about Cervelo is they are not a manufacturer, they are a brand and rely on other factories to make their products and which factories they use may vary depending on factory pricing. Typically the brands that make the best carbon fibre frames and forks are actually manufacturers, they control the quality processes. Canyon for example used to have their frames made by Giant and when Luescher Technik analysed a Canyon frame made by Giant it was probably the best quality frame he had come across but now Canyon have their CF frames made by Quest Composites who are a lower end factory with inferior quality and also quite poor working conditions for their workers. Giant has become too expensive for OEM work for a lot of brands although some still use them for their very high end models. I can't deny that you find Cervelo the best bike to ride perhaps with the best geometry my point is the actual quality of that frame is very poor typically and inferior to much cheaper brands like Giant and Merida. The probability of the Cervelo frame or forks failing is much higher which could lead to injury or death.


----------



## cougie uk (4 Jan 2022)

vickster said:


> maybe they want to ride their super bikes all year round and don’t care about being splattered with crap (Or the cost of new parts if they don’t clean their bike every time out)


Maybe. Or maybe they have spent so much that they can only afford the one bike. Like I was when I was a kid.

Now I'm wiser. It's so much nicer with full mudguards in the rain. And a lot less kit to be washed.


----------



## vickster (4 Jan 2022)

cougie uk said:


> Maybe. Or maybe they have spent so much that they can only afford the one bike. Like I was when I was a kid.
> 
> Now I'm wiser. It's so much nicer with full mudguards in the rain. And a lot less kit to be washed.


I don’t disagree but it’s up to them (as long as they’re not riding in front of me covering me in crap too )


----------



## cougie uk (4 Jan 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> The probability of the Cervelo frame or forks failing is much higher which could lead to injury or death.


Oh yes. You see this through the pro teams. Barely one cervelo rider makes it through the season alive...


----------



## cougie uk (4 Jan 2022)

vickster said:


> I don’t disagree but it’s up to them (as long as they’re not riding in front of me covering me in crap too )


I don't think anyone is trying to make it illegal to ride a superbike in the winter. Clubs usually relegate non mudguard riders to the back of the run though.


----------



## vickster (4 Jan 2022)

cougie uk said:


> I don't think anyone is trying to make it illegal to ride a superbike in the winter. Clubs usually relegate non mudguard riders to the back of the run though.


I don‘t ride with a club, never have, never will. However, I have been showered with crap by passing riders


----------



## bonzobanana (4 Jan 2022)

PaulSB said:


> I'm already feeling very hurt!!
> 
> My Cervelo is simply a beautiful machine which helps me get more out of cycling. Pleasure, pure unadulterated pleasure........plus I never ride to Tesco.



I struggle to see it as a beautiful machine I must admit. It's a poorly made example of a CF bike going by the engineer's analysis of its construction and like all CF bikes its non recyclable. It's basically a bike made from mainly plastic resin that is not durable. I think of the classic steel bikes as beautiful machines but I must admit CF bikes don't really work for me in that way. I see them as purely a performance orientated road bike with a huge amount of compromises. Definitely the right choice if you want a competitively fast bicycle for sure though. I suppose my ultimate bike would be titanium or maybe stainless steel.


----------



## cyberknight (4 Jan 2022)

Mo1959 said:


> There's nothing nicer than being able to splurge on something later in life if you have struggled for money earlier. I've bought a few reasonably expensive things the last couple of years with my inheritance from my dad. Sadly, he never seemed to like spending money and could have made his life much more comfortable and treated himself if he wanted, but it wasn't in his nature. Damned sure I'm not going to the grave with it lying in my bank account!


i will let you know when i can afford to splurge


----------



## fossyant (4 Jan 2022)

At least I know both my road bikes weren't built by some poorly paid worker in a big factory. Both were built by craftsmen. Been pretty good value TBH as had both frames about 30 years.

My most recent purchase was a mountain bike - full suspension. Picked it up in a sale with £600 off RRP. Only spent a grand. That has been outstanding value - it's more capable than me. The world of MTB's is even more expensive than road bikes, when you chuck in suspension. A half decent fork will set you back £500, a rear shock £250 - that's before you stick stuff on it. 

£3,500 for a carbon frame you smash rocks against it...yikes.


----------



## bonzobanana (4 Jan 2022)

cougie uk said:


> Oh yes. You see this through the pro teams. Barely one cervelo rider makes it through the season alive...



Well surely there are three factors at play here. One is the professional bikes are not the same as retail bikes and then they are frequently changed. Any CF bike being professionally raced would be scanned for manufacturing faults etc. A normal rider is unlikely to have a car following him with a change of bike ready for him. A normal rider is unlikely to have his bike scanned after a minor accident and the bike they are riding will be general factory production even if the same moulds are used its unlikely to have the same level of attention to detail during manufacture. I honestly can't see Cervelo pro bikes having the terrible voids, wrinkles and poor tolerances as discovered by Hambini and Luescher Technik on retail bikes. 

It's all about probabilities anyway there are probably a lot more failed CF frames by Giant than Cervelo anyway as Giant sell a huge amount of CF bikes. If 3% of Cervelo frames and forks fail compared to only 0.1% of Giant frames and forks that is still going to be mean a lot more Giant failures.


----------



## Alex321 (4 Jan 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> I can't deny that you find Cervelo the best bike to ride perhaps with the best geometry my point is the actual quality of that frame is very poor typically and inferior to much cheaper brands like Giant and Merida. The probability of the Cervelo frame or forks failing is much higher which could lead to injury or death.



I think you re significantly overstating the case here. The quality of the frame may be poorer than some such as Giant, but it is still good enough for normal use.

They still meet relevant standards, and we aren't hearing horror stories of these bikes breaking in normal use.

And your later post is saying "if 3% of Cervelo frames and forks fail compared to only 0.1% of Giant frames and forks" when those figures are probably both an order of magnitude above what actually happens.

If 3%, or even 0.3% of Cervelo frames failed, we would certainly hear about it, and they would very quickly be out of business.


----------



## Dogtrousers (4 Jan 2022)

Cervelo riding - like base jumping and cave diving really.


----------



## cougie uk (4 Jan 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> Well surely there are three factors at play here. One is the professional bikes are not the same as retail bikes and then they are frequently changed. Any CF bike being professionally raced would be scanned for manufacturing faults etc. A normal rider is unlikely to have a car following him with a change of bike ready for him. A normal rider is unlikely to have his bike scanned after a minor accident and the bike they are riding will be general factory production even if the same moulds are used its unlikely to have the same level of attention to detail during manufacture. I honestly can't see Cervelo pro bikes having the terrible voids, wrinkles and poor tolerances as discovered by Hambini and Luescher Technik on retail bikes.
> 
> It's all about probabilities anyway there are probably a lot more failed CF frames by Giant than Cervelo anyway as Giant sell a huge amount of CF bikes. If 3% of Cervelo frames and forks fail compared to only 0.1% of Giant frames and forks that is still going to be mean a lot more Giant failures.


Hang on. So who makes the cervelo pro team frames then ? We know setting up the moulds is one of the large expenses in production of frames. Not really credible that they'd make a mould to make a dozen frames or so ?

I'd pay no heed to Hambini or whatever his name is. It's in his interest to make outrageous claims. 

FWIW cervelo are very popular in ironman circles - so no scanning of bikes as it's solo athletes usually. Traveling round the world. 
Nobody's scared of using them.


----------



## Drago (4 Jan 2022)

cougie uk said:


> Maybe. Or maybe they have spent so much that they can only afford the one bike. Like I was when I was a kid.
> 
> Now I'm wiser. It's so much nicer with full mudguards in the rain. And a lot less kit to be washed.


Or maybe, like me, they ride all their bikes all year round and simply clean and maintain them properly and suffer zero accelerated degradation as a result?

In our climate there is nothing as useles as an outdoor item that cannot/will not be used in bad westher.


----------



## jowwy (4 Jan 2022)

i have had many cheap and expensive bikes over the years.....used in all weathers and non have suffered from degradation due to the conditions they have been ridden in. they have also never suffered major frame failure either, even with a big chap on board, same as wheels.....

you pays your money, you takes your chance....same as everything in life


----------



## Nebulous (4 Jan 2022)

jowwy said:


> i have had many cheap and expensive bikes over the years.....used in all weathers and non have suffered from degradation due to the conditions they have been ridden in. they have also never suffered major frame failure either, even with a big chap on board, same as wheels.....
> 
> you pays your money, you takes your chance....same as everything in life



Keeping them in the house helps - but its certainly possible to destroy bikes in the weather. I did just that to the allez elite I referred to earlier. The fork was a steel / carbon composite, rather than full carbon and there was significant cracking around the join at the legs of the forks. One of the ends of the brake cable welded itself to the cable guide and I snapped the guide off when trying to remove it, and finally the aluminium rims on the wheels had significant corrosion - which I didn't think was possible, probably due to salt on the road. 

Now I'm sure I could have looked after it better, it did over 12,000 miles, being kept in a damp shed, and being out about 3 times a week year round for 4-5 years. I regarded it as a tool to use, and certainly did that, with no regrets. 

The North-East of Scotland can be quite inhospitable, but the conditions certainly contributed considerably to its deterioration.


----------



## jowwy (4 Jan 2022)

Nebulous said:


> Keeping them in the house helps - but its certainly possible to destroy bikes in the weather. I did just that to the allez elite I referred to earlier. The fork was a steel / carbon composite, rather than full carbon and there was significant cracking around the join at the legs of the forks. One of the ends of the brake cable welded itself to the cable guide and I snapped the guide off when trying to remove it, and finally the aluminium rims on the wheels had significant corrosion - which I didn't think was possible, probably due to salt on the road.
> 
> Now I'm sure I could have looked after it better, it did over 12,000 miles,* being kept in a damp shed,* and being out about 3 times a week year round for 4-5 years. I regarded it as a tool to use, and certainly did that, with no regrets.
> 
> The North-East of Scotland can be quite inhospitable, but the conditions certainly contributed considerably to its deterioration.


That cant have helped......


----------



## Falsesummat (4 Jan 2022)

In 1999 I spent£2000 on a Dura Ace equipped Bianch xl ev2. And it was in a sale too. 
One of my close relatives scoffed at the amount of money I'd spent and tried to make out that I was wealthy enough to splash that kind of money on a push bike. He was smoking 40 fags a day which annually was about £2000. When I pointed this out his response was that I was lucky enough to just have a spare £2000. Didn't quite get the saving up bit. 
In the late 90s a decent winter/ audax bike was around £800. Today a Tiagra equipped Tifosi can still be bought from a uk shop for £800.
For your average weekend warrior anything more than Shimano 105 7000 series is superfluous in performance terms. 
IMO, should someone wish to spend £10000 on a bike that's fine and it's their business. However, in terms of cycling performance, anything more than £3000 is not likely to be of a real benefit.


----------



## mustang1 (4 Jan 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> Well surely there are three factors at play here. One is the professional bikes are not the same as retail bikes and then they are frequently changed. Any CF bike being professionally raced would be scanned for manufacturing faults etc. A normal rider is unlikely to have a car following him with a change of bike ready for him. A normal rider is unlikely to have his bike scanned after a minor accident and the bike they are riding will be general factory production even if the same moulds are used its unlikely to have the same level of attention to detail during manufacture. I honestly can't see Cervelo pro bikes having the terrible voids, wrinkles and poor tolerances as discovered by Hambini and Luescher Technik on retail bikes.
> 
> It's all about probabilities anyway there are probably a lot more failed CF frames by Giant than Cervelo anyway as Giant sell a huge amount of CF bikes. If 3% of Cervelo frames and forks fail compared to only 0.1% of Giant frames and forks that is still going to be mean a lot more Giant failures.


I thought the whole point of those super expensive bikes (£15k or whatever the latest price index is) are the same ones that pro teams use, and that's _why_ they are expensive. If the pro-bikes are different, then there's no point having high priced retail bikes?


----------



## vickster (4 Jan 2022)

Falsesummat said:


> In 1999 I spent£2000 on a Dura Ace equipped Bianch xl ev2. And it was in a sale too.
> One of my close relatives scoffed at the amount of money I'd spent and tried to make out that I was wealthy enough to splash that kind of money on a push bike. He was smoking 40 fags a day which annually was about £2000. When I pointed this out his response was that I was lucky enough to just have a spare £2000. Didn't quite get the saving up bit.
> In the late 90s a decent winter/ audax bike was around £800. Today a Tiagra equipped Tifosi can still be bought from a uk shop for £800.
> For your average weekend warrior anything more than Shimano 105 7000 series is superfluous in performance terms.
> IMO, should someone wish to spend £10000 on a bike that's fine and it's their business. However, in terms of cycling performance, anything more than £3000 is not likely to be of a real benefit.


Many cyclists aren't necessarily interested in cycling performance though (whatever that is, my average speed in built up areas is pretty similar regardless of the bike, traffic and weather are a much bigger influence over my speed as well as my innate athletic ability [or lack of])
...I have just grown to like certain things in a bike (like good steel or Ti frames, SRAM groupsets) and they tend to be more costly


----------



## Alex321 (4 Jan 2022)

mustang1 said:


> I thought the whole point of those super expensive bikes (£15k or whatever the latest price index is) are the same ones that pro teams use, and that's _why_ they are expensive. If the pro-bikes are different, then there's no point having high priced retail bikes?


It isn't that the pro bikes are different as such, just that they may well have been scanned (by the teams) to be sure there aren't any hidden faults (with any that do being rejected by the teams), while the retail ones won't have had that.

They will have been produced from the same mould, using the same techniques, they will then just have had the best ones selected.


----------



## Sittingduck (4 Jan 2022)

The OP has a lot to answer for starting this thread... what a doo doo stirrer


----------



## IanSmithCSE (4 Jan 2022)

Good morning,


Falsesummat said:


> ....... in terms of cycling performance, anything more than £3000 is not likely to be of a real benefit.


I sort of get where you are coming from but once the old stock is gone this price rules out Di2.

Pre COVID there were bikes with carbon frame/forks and Di2 at around £2.5k but these had plenty of cost cutting measures to get to that price, £120 wheels, 105 or R Series parts etc and they weren't the big names.

Now the Specialized Roubaix Comp comes in at £3.7k with mechanical Ultegra, Trek do the Domane SL6 with mechanical Ultegra at £3.9k and SRAM eTap at £4.3k.

Ribble do have an offering that would come in under £3k but that has an Aug/Sep 2022 delivery date!

Bye

Ian


----------



## Alex321 (4 Jan 2022)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good morning,
> 
> I sort of get where you are coming from but once the old stock is gone this price rules out Di2.


It would, but for most of us, Di2 is a "nice" luxury rather than something that gives real benefit.


----------



## jowwy (4 Jan 2022)

Falsesummat said:


> However, in terms of cycling performance, anything more than £3000 is not likely to be of a real benefit.


its not always about the performance though.......some got handmade frames that cost nearly that alone


----------



## Dogtrousers (4 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> It would, but for most of us, Di2 is a "nice" luxury rather than something that gives real benefit.


Isn't niceness a real benefit in its own right?

I mean, I could eat KFC but it's horrible so I choose other options that are nice. I see that as a real benefit.


----------



## Nebulous (4 Jan 2022)

jowwy said:


> That cant have helped......



It didn't. Fortunately it helped my argument that the tarmac needed to stay inside.......


----------



## jowwy (4 Jan 2022)

Nebulous said:


> It didn't. Fortunately it helped my argument that the tarmac needed to stay inside.......


i used to have a Tarmac Sl4, was a cracking bike with Zipp 202 wheelset........which combined was over 3k


----------



## JhnBssll (4 Jan 2022)

Whilst I am undeniably an advocate of spending all of your earnings on bicycles there is something to be said about the quality of some expensive frames... My Bianchi XR4 Tavolozza frameset is an absolute joy to ride and is without doubt the nicest bike I've ever had the opportunity of riding but one of the bottle cage mounts is decidedly wonky... This was reported to them shortly after I built it up about 18 months ago and I'm still awaiting the replacement they promised me at the time. It seems like a crazy thing to warranty a frame for to most people but whilst it rides beautifully the wonky cage really upsets my OCD. When you finally justify the spend to yourself and you receive something less than perfect for your hard earned cash it's a bit galling 

First world problems I know


----------



## Arrowfoot (4 Jan 2022)

roadrash said:


> what people spend on bikes or anything else for that matter is no ones business but their own, they do not need to justify it to anyone else, i dont understand the need for criticism of someones spending habits as it doesnt affect me in any way.
> having said that .....i hear that @SkipdiverJohn is in resus having read the thread.


Actually it does not work like that. 

People will always form a view. And that view is based on not how much you spend but what you spent it on. If you buy a painting with a valuation of £200k and paid £230k, that is priced accordingly. But if you bought a bike for £30K, it will naturally become a conversation piece. 

And it does not matter if the bike owner is a millionaire or a salaried journeyman. 

On the hand if you bought a corner cafe for £50k but it failed miserably, there is always respect for people who made an attempt to better their lives. 

Humans are the apex creature because they have the ability to form opinions on information they gather better than any other creature.


----------



## Alex321 (4 Jan 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Isn't niceness a real benefit in its own right?
> 
> I mean, I could eat KFC but it's horrible so I choose other options that are nice. I see that as a real benefit.


Niceness is, but here the post I was responding to was in turn responding to "in terms of cycling performance ... ".


----------



## cougie uk (4 Jan 2022)

Drago said:


> Or maybe, like me, they ride all their bikes all year round and simply clean and maintain them properly and suffer zero accelerated degradation as a result?
> 
> In our climate there is nothing as useles as an outdoor item that cannot/will not be used in bad westher.


Riding through crud and grit on the road will have a higher wear rate than riding the same distance in summer. Sure you can ride a superbike all year round but there's better bikes for winter. A dry bum is nice in the winter.


----------



## Milzy (4 Jan 2022)

cougie uk said:


> I figure that by the time you factor in maintenances after a crappy winter and a possible slip on a winter roads - you're better off getting a decent winter bike. Plus that will take full guards so it will be a nicer drier ride.


They are also very strong riders so if I turn up on a winter bike I’m at another disadvantage. Theirs always that one ego who wants to drop you.


----------



## Drago (4 Jan 2022)

cougie uk said:


> Riding through crud and grit on the road will have a higher wear rate than riding the same distance in summer. Sure you can ride a superbike all year round but there's better bikes for winter. A dry bum is nice in the winter.


I cycle commuted all weather, 6000 miles a year for 11 years, and through dilligent maintenance sufferered to accelerated wear, and no damage to cosmetic finishes. None. Nada. Nowt.

Certainly some bikes may be better equipped for more comfortable for such conditions but I, and others of this very thread, have proven there is no risk of damage or degradation to even the most expensive machine if one maintains it accordingly. 

It doesn't even take much in the way of time or effort. No mollycoddling, no drying off after each ride or tucking it up in bed with a horlicks and a bedtime story. Just sensible maintenance.


----------



## roadrash (4 Jan 2022)

Arrowfoot said:


> Actually it does not work like that.
> 
> People will always form a view. And that view is based on not how much you spend but what you spent it on. If you buy a painting with a valuation of £200k and paid £230k, that is priced accordingly. But if you bought a bike for £30K, it will naturally become a conversation piece.
> 
> ...


For me and many other people it works exactly as I said


----------



## Ridgeway (4 Jan 2022)

i‘ve opened a rehoming centre for abused carbon,







all 3 came home in bags and boxes with a story to tell, one was an insurance right off, one a failed diy build project and the other was just a bargain. I’m luckily that i don’t mind taking a punt on a bike and then putting in some work to get them right, all of mine are worth more now than I paid for them as all the parts except the wheels were second hand.

i also use and lightly abuse them, they definitely don‘t get treated with kid gloves although I do service them well. The middle bike was on a 3hr wet ride last Friday, I’m not precious about them at all and am more than happy for my children to use them when we go out on family rides.

PS don’t tell anyone in my cycling club as they all think I’m a dentist with “loadsa money” and not a serial carbon rehoming sales engineer__


----------



## Arrowfoot (5 Jan 2022)

roadrash said:


> For me and many other people it works exactly as I said







Here is a non bike example. If a child wants an opinion on the case of the twins who were into plastic surgery. I think it would be irresponsible of me to tell the child that it is their money and they can do anything with it. There is always a tipping point.


----------



## Arrowfoot (5 Jan 2022)

Ridgeway said:


> i‘ve opened a rehoming centre for abused carb
> 
> 
> PS don’t tell anyone in my cycling club as they all think I’m a dentist with “loadsa money” and not a


"Abused carbon". "carbon rehoming" sounds like virtue signalling. So I guess they are "rescue" bikes. Sounds like a plan to get my next bike that won't rattle the home front.


----------



## Colin Grigson (5 Jan 2022)

I’ll happily leave myself open to ridicule for what I choose to ride. I couldn’t be happier with my bike and for the mental well-being it provides me it’s actually cost effective. Cycling is a strange hobby, in that, those that buy ‘insanely expensive bikes’ are often seen as ‘more money than sense’ - whilst it’s true in my case (not because I have money but rather because I lack sense ), there are myriad reasons why others do so. I’ve received nothing but nice comments from other cyclists whilst out on mine so suspect it’s the anonymity of a forum that brings out the worst in some people. Anyway …. get ridiculing


----------



## mustang1 (5 Jan 2022)

Colin Grigson said:


> I’ll happily leave myself open to ridicule for what I choose to ride. I couldn’t be happier with my bike and for the mental well-being it provides me it’s actually cost effective. Cycling is a strange hobby, in that, those that buy ‘insanely expensive bikes’ are often seen as ‘more money than sense’ - whilst it’s true in my case (not because I have money but rather because I lack sense ), there are myriad reasons why others do so. I’ve received nothing but nice comments from other cyclists whilst out on mine so suspect it’s the anonymity of a forum that brings out the worst in some people. Anyway …. get ridiculing
> View attachment 625076


Don't say I didn't warn you... but that is ridiculous (ly nice!)


----------



## jowwy (5 Jan 2022)

Colin Grigson said:


> I’ll happily leave myself open to ridicule for what I choose to ride. I couldn’t be happier with my bike and for the mental well-being it provides me it’s actually cost effective. Cycling is a strange hobby, in that, those that buy ‘insanely expensive bikes’ are often seen as ‘more money than sense’ - whilst it’s true in my case (not because I have money but rather because I lack sense ), there are myriad reasons why others do so. I’ve received nothing but nice comments from other cyclists whilst out on mine so suspect it’s the anonymity of a forum that brings out the worst in some people. Anyway …. get ridiculing
> View attachment 625076


Its definatley insanely black…….i like it


----------



## ianrauk (5 Jan 2022)

Colin Grigson said:


> I’ll happily leave myself open to ridicule for what I choose to ride. I couldn’t be happier with my bike and for the mental well-being it provides me it’s actually cost effective. Cycling is a strange hobby, in that, those that buy ‘insanely expensive bikes’ are often seen as ‘more money than sense’ - whilst it’s true in my case (not because I have money but rather because I lack sense ), there are myriad reasons why others do so. I’ve received nothing but nice comments from other cyclists whilst out on mine so suspect it’s the anonymity of a forum that brings out the worst in some people. Anyway …. get ridiculing
> View attachment 625076


its a stunner


----------



## roadrash (5 Jan 2022)

Arrowfoot said:


> View attachment 625048
> 
> Here is a non bike example. If a child wants an opinion on the case of the twins who were into plastic surgery. I think it would be irresponsible of me to tell the child that it is their money and they can do anything with it. There is always a tipping point.


I really dont need any of your examles , its obvious that you cant accept that me and other people do not care what someone spends there own money one, why you find it so hard to understand I do not know ,..... or care any more.


----------



## Rusty Nails (5 Jan 2022)

Arrowfoot said:


> View attachment 625048
> 
> Here is a non bike example. If a child wants an opinion on the case of the twins who were into plastic surgery. I think it would be irresponsible of me to tell the child that it is their money and they can do anything with it. There is always a tipping point.


Is it true that these two were anti-vaxxers who had just died of Covid?


----------



## Rusty Nails (5 Jan 2022)

Colin Grigson said:


> I’ll happily leave myself open to ridicule for what I choose to ride. I couldn’t be happier with my bike and for the mental well-being it provides me it’s actually cost effective. Cycling is a strange hobby, in that, those that buy ‘insanely expensive bikes’ are often seen as ‘more money than sense’ - whilst it’s true in my case (not because I have money but rather because I lack sense ), there are myriad reasons why others do so. I’ve received nothing but nice comments from other cyclists whilst out on mine so suspect it’s the anonymity of a forum that brings out the worst in some people. Anyway …. get ridiculing
> View attachment 625076


Get rid of that garish yellow colour on the tyres. Really ruins a great bike


----------



## simongt (5 Jan 2022)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> just so you can show off with a certain brand name, is asking for ridicule and when it comes it's well deserved.


And what some don't understand is when they buy a fashion item, generally clothes with the brand name in large letters on them, the maker is getting free advertising which the customer is by default, subsidising - !


----------



## cougie uk (5 Jan 2022)

Colin Grigson said:


> I’ll happily leave myself open to ridicule for what I choose to ride. I couldn’t be happier with my bike and for the mental well-being it provides me it’s actually cost effective. Cycling is a strange hobby, in that, those that buy ‘insanely expensive bikes’ are often seen as ‘more money than sense’ - whilst it’s true in my case (not because I have money but rather because I lack sense ), there are myriad reasons why others do so. I’ve received nothing but nice comments from other cyclists whilst out on mine so suspect it’s the anonymity of a forum that brings out the worst in some people. Anyway …. get ridiculing
> View attachment 625076


Nice - but on the small chainring ? As if you ever need that ring !


----------



## cougie uk (5 Jan 2022)

Ridgeway said:


> i‘ve opened a rehoming centre for abused carbon,
> 
> View attachment 625032
> 
> ...


Is that a Team Ineos bike there ? Ex team or do they sell them like that ? 
Nice collection but aren't they all pretty similar ?


----------



## Alex321 (5 Jan 2022)

Rusty Nails said:


> Is it true that these two were anti-vaxxers who had just died of Covid?


I don't think they were anti-vaxxers as such, just (wrongly) didn't feel they personally needed vaccination.

They weren't opposed in principle to the vaccines, or to others having them.


----------



## Dogtrousers (5 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> I don't think they were anti-vaxxers as such, just (wrongly) didn't feel they personally needed vaccination.
> 
> They weren't opposed in principle to the vaccines, or to others having them.


A bit like me and DI2


----------



## MichaelW2 (5 Jan 2022)

Yay for spending large amounts of money at your local bike shop. It keeps them in business for when I need a new brake block.
Most of the population regard any sum iver £$99.00 as expensive.


----------



## Dogtrousers (5 Jan 2022)

MichaelW2 said:


> Yay for spending large amounts of money at your local bike shop. It keeps them in business for when I need a new brake block.
> Most of the population regard any sum iver £$99.00 as expensive.


To be fair, £$99 is a bit steep for a new brake block


----------



## Arrowfoot (5 Jan 2022)

Rusty Nails said:


> Is it true that these two were anti-vaxxers who had just died of Covid?


According to France 24 News they had not taken it.


----------



## Arrowfoot (5 Jan 2022)

Ridgeway said:


> i‘ve opened a rehoming centre for abused carbon,
> 
> View attachment 625032
> 
> ...


I have been trying to get one from TDF but no luck. More a trophy for the home, mounted. The bikes are lovely.


----------



## Arrowfoot (5 Jan 2022)

Colin Grigson said:


> I’ll happily leave myself open to ridicule for what I choose to ride. I couldn’t be happier with my bike and for the mental well-being it provides me it’s actually cost effective. Cycling is a strange hobby, in that, those that buy ‘insanely expensive bikes’ are often seen as ‘more money than sense’ - whilst it’s true in my case (not because I have money but rather because I lack sense ), there are myriad reasons why others do so. I’ve received nothing but nice comments from other cyclists whilst out on mine so suspect it’s the anonymity of a forum that brings out the worst in some people. Anyway …. get ridiculing
> View attachment 625076


Thats a beaut


----------



## Smokin Joe (5 Jan 2022)

simongt said:


> And what some don't understand is when they buy a fashion item, generally clothes with the brand name in large letters on them, the maker is getting free advertising which the customer is by default, subsidising - !


They do understand it, but it doesn't bother them. My fridge has the makers name on the front as does my TV.

I've never felt the desire to take them off, and to me a bike without a brand name on the tube looks a bit plain and boring.


----------



## Drago (5 Jan 2022)

Arrowfoot said:


> According to France 24 News they had not taken it.


I read that they had the first jab and it had caused their heads to swell up and disfigure. It was in the Star, so is clearly true and beyond reproach or challenge.


----------



## jowwy (5 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> They do understand it, but it doesn't bother them. My fridge has the makers name on the front as does my TV.
> 
> I've never felt the desire to take them off, and to me a bike without a brand name on the tube looks a bit plain and boring.


i wonder how many non brand items the poster has in his house??? i'm guessing, not many.......i wonder if he knows he subsidising their advertising lol


----------



## T4tomo (5 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> a bike without a brand name on the tube looks a bit plain and boring


agree. I think my best bike has its brand name on in 17 different places. The irony is you can tell exactly what brand it is from the colour


----------



## Drago (5 Jan 2022)

T4tomo said:


> The irony is you can tell exactly what brand it is from the colour


Ah, another one with a Barbie bike.


----------



## Gunk (5 Jan 2022)

Arrowfoot said:


> I have been trying to get one from TDF but no luck. More a trophy for the home, mounted. The bikes are lovely.



I’ve got one from 2012, Bernie Eisel’s old Team Sky bike. It’s hanging on my Sons bedroom wall


----------



## roadrash (5 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> They do understand it, but it doesn't bother them. My fridge has the makers name on the front as does my TV.
> 
> I've never felt the desire to take them off, and to me a bike without a brand name on the tube looks a bit plain and boring.


well said


----------



## Alex321 (5 Jan 2022)

jowwy said:


> i wonder how many non brand items the poster has in his house??? i'm guessing, not many.......i wonder if he knows he subsidising their advertising lol


There is a big difference between something sitting in your house with a (usually) small maker's name visible, and walking around in public with it in large letters across your chest or back.

None of my household tech or appliances have the manufacturer name in large enough lettering to really classify as "advertising" IMO, with the possible exception of my lathe, which has distinctive Axminster colouring and quite a large Axminster Craft logo on the side.


----------



## alex_cycles (5 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> None of my household tech or appliances have the manufacturer name in large enough lettering to really classify as "advertising" IMO, with the possible exception of my lathe, which has distinctive Axminster colouring and quite a large Axminster Craft logo on the side.



And I imagine walking around in public with it is so cumbersome that you seldom bother?


----------



## Alex321 (5 Jan 2022)

alex_cycles said:


> And I imagine walking around in public with it is so cumbersome that you seldom bother?


Indeed. Nobody ever sees mine who might be likely to be influenced into buying one.

There are people though who use them and have Youtube channels, so they are then giving free advertising.


----------



## jowwy (5 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> There is a big difference between something sitting in your house with a (usually) small maker's name visible, and walking around in public with it in large letters across your chest or back.
> 
> None of my household tech or appliances have the manufacturer name in large enough lettering to really classify as "advertising" IMO, with the possible exception of my lathe, which has distinctive Axminster colouring and quite a large Axminster Craft logo on the side.


Not every garmemt has its name branded in large letters across its front or back…….maybe the items you wear does, probably mkenzie carp from sports direct i expect…..

but hey what was i supposed to expect from some posters………have a good day.


----------



## Alex321 (5 Jan 2022)

jowwy said:


> Not every garmemt has its name branded in large letters across its front or back…….maybe the items you wear does, probably mkenzie carp from sports direct i expect…..
> 
> but hey what was i supposed to expect from some posters………have a good day.


Of course they don't (and nothing I wear does).

But the original point about the "free advertising" was about those items which do - "when they buy a fashion item, generally clothes with the brand name* in large letters* on them".

The post of yours I responded to then appeared to be suggesting that having any items with brand names on them was the same free advertising.

I have no idea what you were "supposed to expect" or what you mean by that, though I guess it means you don't think my opinion worthwhile.


----------



## Smokin Joe (5 Jan 2022)

Drago said:


> Ah, another one with a Barbie bike.
> 
> View attachment 625106


Lose the saddle and that colour scheme would look fantastic on a full size road bike


----------



## Rusty Nails (5 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> Lose the saddle and that colour scheme would look fantastic on a full size road bike


I once worked on an Argos Cycles (not the cheap goods store) bike that had been sprayed in those colours in stripes along the tubes. Obviously an expensive one-off spray job.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (5 Jan 2022)

Colin Grigson said:


> I’ll happily leave myself open to ridicule for what I choose to ride. I couldn’t be happier with my bike and for the mental well-being it provides me it’s actually cost effective. Cycling is a strange hobby, in that, those that buy ‘insanely expensive bikes’ are often seen as ‘more money than sense’ - whilst it’s true in my case (not because I have money but rather because I lack sense ), there are myriad reasons why others do so. I’ve received nothing but nice comments from other cyclists whilst out on mine so suspect it’s the anonymity of a forum that brings out the worst in some people. Anyway …. get ridiculing
> View attachment 625076


 A gorgeous looking piece of kit.


----------



## alex_cycles (5 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> Lose the saddle and that colour scheme would look fantastic on a full size road bike


It would hurt like hell to ride it though


----------



## Ridgeway (5 Jan 2022)

cougie uk said:


> Is that a Team Ineos bike there ? Ex team or do they sell them like that ?
> Nice collection but aren't they all pretty similar ?



no Ineos bikes there, all were salvaged as I like to call it.

but you’re right they are pretty similar overall. The black F8 is the weight weenie at under 7kgs and the orange/white K10 is very similar to the white F12 although the later is easily the most aerodynamic of the three, one I believe should be sold (so I’m told) but I’ve started commuting (yeah I know) on the K10, not very sensible but it wakes me up


----------



## simongt (9 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> My fridge has the makers name on the front as does my TV.


Ahh, but I take it that you're not walking around with said 'fridge or telly on your shoulder when you're out and about - ? !


----------



## roadrash (9 Jan 2022)

simongt said:


> Ahh, but I take it that you're not walking around with said 'fridge or telly on your shoulder when you're out and about - ? !


does your bike have the makers name and model etc on it, or your car if you own one , how about your phone, watch etc


----------



## Alex321 (9 Jan 2022)

roadrash said:


> does your bike have the makers name and model etc on it, or your car if you own one , how about your phone, watch etc


Most of these things do. *Most* of them discreet enough to not really be free advertising. 

Quite a few bikes do have the maker's name in quite large letters though.


----------



## roadrash (10 Jan 2022)

If the name is on it then it is advertising , whether it be large or small


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2022)

roadrash said:


> If the name is on it then it is advertising , whether it be large or small


And branding


----------



## Alex321 (10 Jan 2022)

roadrash said:


> If the name is on it then it is advertising , whether it be large or small


I disagree.

I think there is a massive difference between having the name easily visible to anybody who glances your way (advertising) and discreet brand name on an item tat people aren't really going to notice unless they are looking for it (not advertising IMV).


----------



## Dogtrousers (10 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I think there is a massive difference between having the name easily visible to anybody who glances your way (advertising) and discreet brand name on an item tat people aren't really going to notice unless they are looking for it (not advertising IMV).


And that massive difference is what?

I've missed a chunk of this thread so the answer is probably above. 

Bikes have long been heavily branded, but there wasn't so much room on steel tubes to put the frame makers name like PERCY SCROGGINS as there is on a carbon down tube, but it didn't stop them trying. Remember those red Raleighs that desperately tried to convince us that Raleigh didn't _only_ make sturdy three speed roadsters? Brandy McBrandface.

I don't think it's a good or a bad thing. It's just a thing.


----------



## Ian H (10 Jan 2022)

People seem to be conflating 'hi-end' with racing. Not every expensive bike is a Ferrari equivalent.


----------



## Alex321 (10 Jan 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> And that massive difference is what?
> 
> I've missed a chunk of this thread so the answer is probably above.


This part of the discussion started when Simon said


simongt said:


> And what some don't understand is when they buy a fashion item, generally clothes with the brand name in large letters on them, the maker is getting free advertising which the customer is by default, subsidising - !



Others then suggested that any brand name on any item is the same.

*My view* is that it is only advertising if it is clear and obvious when you aren't particularly looking for it (which is the "massive difference" I am talking of).

The suggestion given there clearly is "free advertising". Some bikes you will almost certainly say would be. But something like my phone, no. It has the word Samsung on the back, but that is only visible if you are holding the phone up, without a case.

My Clarks shoes, have the brand name on the sole, but only in raised letters, which are only visible if I have my feet up on something.



Dogtrousers said:


> Bikes have long been heavily branded, but there wasn't so much room on steel tubes to put the frame makers name like PERCY SCROGGINS as there is on a carbon down tube, but it didn't stop them trying. Remember those red Raleighs that desperately tried to convince us that Raleigh didn't _only_ make sturdy three speed roadsters? Brandy McBrandface.
> 
> I don't think it's a good or a bad thing. It's just a thing.



Agreed. I can certainly see the argument with many modern bikes that the brand name is prominent enough to class as "free advertising".


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2022)

but thanks to years of branding and advertising, your phone will be recognisable as a Samsung and probably your shoes as Clarks


----------



## Alex321 (10 Jan 2022)

vickster said:


> but thanks to years of branding and advertising, your phone will be recognisable as a Samsung and probably your shoes as Clarks


Really?

You must have a lot more brand awareness than I do. I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a Samsung, a Motorola or a Google phone without a close look or seeing the lettering.

And I wouldn't be able to tell the brand of a pair of brogues, whether is is Clarks, Pavers or one of the expensive independent cobblers.


----------



## Dogtrousers (10 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> I can certainly see the argument with many *modern *bikes that the brand name is prominent enough to class as "free advertising".


And not modern ones too.

Twas ever thus.


----------



## harlechjoe (10 Jan 2022)

Some people buy an expensive bike and sell it with very little use, So eventually someone buys a great bike at a more affordable price.

For me the frame of the bicycle is most important. I had my last bike for years and upgraded the components due to wear, tear or personal preference. Although my last bike was never the price of a really expensive bike it certainly worked as well as one. I have every intention of keeping my new bike going in the same way as the past one and should last for a good 10 years or so.


----------



## proletaratOne (12 Jan 2022)

Oldhippy said:


> Horses for courses, but if I'm going to spend any large sum I would want a bike that does it all, daily running about, touring, day pottering, shopping, trailer towing. I have one though and it was nowhere near a grand let alone 10.


A bike that does it all… unfortunately I don’t think that bike exists

Trouble is like most tools, something that is pretty good at all things is VERY good at nothing


----------



## JhnBssll (12 Jan 2022)

"A jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one."

People often use this phrase in the negative, leaving off the second half... I much prefer it in full, I learnt it on here only recently 😊

But then I don't have any 'jack of all trades' bikes, just 7 bikes for specific purposes, so what would I know


----------



## Oldhippy (12 Jan 2022)

proletaratOne said:


> A bike that does it all… unfortunately I don’t think that bike exists
> 
> Trouble is like most tools, something that is pretty good at all things is VERY good at nothing


Mine does all I need.


----------



## bonzobanana (13 Jan 2022)

mustang1 said:


> I thought the whole point of those super expensive bikes (£15k or whatever the latest price index is) are the same ones that pro teams use, and that's _why_ they are expensive. If the pro-bikes are different, then there's no point having high priced retail bikes?



Same moulds, same materials but surely QC checks and scanning would be much more likely for bikes destined for professional racing. Again I'd point out that the retail Cervelo frames analysed by Hambini and Luescher Technik had serious quality issues that impacted their strength and durability and had poor tolerances. I just can't see those issues being the same for bikes being professionally raced.


----------



## fossyant (13 Jan 2022)

MTB's have branding on the underside of the down tube - can be seen whilst in 'the air' for pros, and for us mere mortals, whilst upside down in a ditch. Genius.


----------



## Alex321 (13 Jan 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> Same moulds, same materials but surely QC checks and scanning would be much more likely for bikes destined for professional racing. Again I'd point out that the retail Cervelo frames analysed by Hambini and Luescher Technik had serious quality issues that impacted their strength and durability and had poor tolerances. I just can't see those issues being the same for bikes being professionally raced.


While as has also been pointed out here, in the real world, we are not hearing of excessive failures in such frames.

I think what they are interpreting as "serious quality issues" are in fact almost certainly pretty trivial.

I do agree that the frames raced by the pros are much more likely to have undergone more stringent QA, very likely including scanning. 

But I have seen nothing to suggest any significant rate of failure in normal use for any of the main manufacturers.


----------



## Smokin Joe (13 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> But I have seen nothing to suggest any significant rate of failure in normal use for any of the main manufacturers.


But it must be true, it was on Youtube. Just follow the link from the "9/11 was an inside job" video.


----------



## bonzobanana (27 Jan 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> But it must be true, it was on Youtube. Just follow the link from the "9/11 was an inside job" video.


While Hambini is a competent engineer many of his videos are done for shock value admittedly but you can see the issues he is raising. Raoul at Luscher Technik is completely different, he is a huge fan of CF and has even made his own CF frames. He is an ex-Boeing CF engineer and he is very plain speaking with no obvious bias I can find and I pretty much trust completely what he states. When he is literally showing you the voids and issues in these frames how on earth can you doubt it? From what I've seen elsewhere such manufacturing issues reduce the stated load capacity of such frames so if you have a CF frame stated for riders up to 120kg but with serious manufacturing issues the real weight rating for that frame could be maybe 60-90kg because of the structural imperfections. That's just a random figure I have come up with but you get my point that structurally they are much weaker but still sufficient strength perhaps for the majority of cyclists who ride them. A compromised frame structurally doesn't mean immediate failure but obviously there is a huge safety implication especially for heavier riders.

The fact is you can have two identical CF bikes but one is significantly weaker than the other despite both being used to the same level. You can get that with aluminium and to a lesser extent steel if one frame has been used far more than the other with heavily fatigued tubes but not straight out of the showroom typically.


----------



## bagpuss (27 Jan 2022)

The late Ray Booty once told me with regard the cost of a bike. " Its no good having a £1.000 bike if you have only got a £100 pair of legs"


----------



## alex_cycles (27 Jan 2022)

bagpuss said:


> The late Ray Booty once told me with regard the cost of a bike. " Its no good having a £1.000 bike if you have only got a £100 pair of legs"


They don't make bikes cheap enough to be a good match for most of our legs then


----------



## Alex321 (27 Jan 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> While Hambini is a competent engineer many of his videos are done for shock value admittedly but you can see the issues he is raising. Raoul at Luscher Technik is completely different, he is a huge fan of CF and has even made his own CF frames. He is an ex-Boeing CF engineer and he is very plain speaking with no obvious bias I can find and I pretty much trust completely what he states. When he is literally showing you the voids and issues in these frames how on earth can you doubt it? From what I've seen elsewhere such manufacturing issues reduce the stated load capacity of such frames so if you have a CF frame stated for riders up to 120kg but with serious manufacturing issues the real weight rating for that frame could be maybe 60-90kg because of the structural imperfections. That's just a random figure I have come up with but you get my point that structurally they are much weaker but still sufficient strength perhaps for the majority of cyclists who ride them. A compromised frame structurally doesn't mean immediate failure but obviously there is a huge safety implication especially for heavier riders.
> 
> The fact is you can have two identical CF bikes but one is significantly weaker than the other despite both being used to the same level. You can get that with aluminium and to a lesser extent steel if one frame has been used far more than the other with heavily fatigued tubes but not straight out of the showroom typically.


All this is theoretical reduction in strength.

Has he actually then tested samples of the frames with and without these voids or other issues to destruction, to find out what their actual strengths are?

Perhaps the stated 120kg weight limit is correct for the frames with issues, and the perfect ones could take 150Kg.

I would hope that the manufacturers build in reasonable margins in their stated weight limits, and would also hope they test those using standard frames, not ones which have been specially prepared. They don't want to be getting hundreds of claims for damages due to failed frames.


----------



## alex_cycles (27 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> All this is theoretical reduction in strength.
> 
> Has he actually then tested samples of the frames with and without these voids or other issues to destruction, to find out what their actual strengths are?
> 
> ...



Indeed. It's not like we hear stories of hundreds of failed frames.


----------



## bonzobanana (27 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> All this is theoretical reduction in strength.
> 
> Has he actually then tested samples of the frames with and without these voids or other issues to destruction, to find out what their actual strengths are?
> 
> ...



I don't think its theoretical at all as Raoul is highly skilled and his business is based on checking and repairing CF frames and has shown many frames and forks that have failed due to poor manufacturing as well as frames and forks that have just failed due to impacts and over-tightening etc.

It's important to understand CF frames are hand-made and therefore can vary in quality quite a lot. The process of QC checking presumably can fail on occasion especially with large orders. While CF is a state of the art material the manufacturing process is labour intensive and quite basic.

If you look at this picture from the Quest Composite site that makes Canyon and Trek frames you can see terrible conditions, sitting on small tables, hair nets not being worn properly and just horrible vile working conditions for CF production. Only one of those people has to lay up the CF badly to create an issue in some frames or forks etc. CF production is recognised as the least consistent of all frame materials with the worst working conditions because of the long hours needed for frame and fork production.


----------



## Alex321 (27 Jan 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> I don't think its theoretical at all


So where is the data on him testing them to destruction?

Without that, it most certainly is theoretical.

But you didn't address what I said in the rest of that post at all. Those defects may well make the frames weaker. But "weaker" is a relative term. It may be (and IMO is very likely) that the "weaker" frames are in fact perfectly suitable for the average rider who weighs as much as the manufacturer stated limit.

You keep talking as if his data shows these frames to be not fit for purpose, when if that were the case, manufacturers would be facing unacceptable numbers of claims, and we would be hearing horror stories all the time about frames failing in normal use.


----------



## bonzobanana (30 Jan 2022)

Alex321 said:


> So where is the data on him testing them to destruction?
> 
> Without that, it most certainly is theoretical.
> 
> ...



Its an interesting theory that the manufacturer's weight limits allow for poor construction and these frames and forks are still capable of their stated weight limits. I personally think its far more likely the weight limits are reduced but still capable of handling most cyclists. Despite CF bikes making up a tiny percentage of bikes sales the number of recalls for CF frames and forks is very high compared to other materials. However lack of exact data doesn't stop anyone from using their common sense that voids and cracks in CF will reduce safety and weight capacity of those components. You don't need data to understand a ship with a hole in the side of its bow will sink or a huge crack in the middle of a bridge will cause it to fail etc. You can make logical assumptions rather than illogical assumptions. 

When frames and forks are designed and engineered it will be to a specification and when manufactured many samples will be used to test to the certification standards and required tests. The manufacturer or independent test house will not be using poorly manufactured frames for certification purposes. Many of the frames that failed that Raoul has dealt with has been due to manufacturing errors but others he has analysed due to accidents etc. He has plenty of videos on his Youtube channel of varying types.

The idea that its just theory that a poorly manufactured frame is more likely to fail is to be honest delusional. Cracks and voids are easy to understand that they reduce the strength of that material. Maybe one day someone will pay to have a poorly made CF frame and fork go through the certification process testing to see how it compares with a well made frame but I can't see where the money would come from to do those tests which could cost 10s of thousands of pounds. Certification testing isn't cheap.


----------



## fossyant (30 Jan 2022)

I think bonzo doesn't like carbon bikes


----------



## alex_cycles (30 Jan 2022)

fossyant said:


> I think bonzo doesn't like carbon bikes


I think it's getting boring now


----------



## fossyant (30 Jan 2022)

You can get badly welded bikes made in sweat shops in the far east - made of steel and alluminium. Many are poorly made generally.


----------



## Alex321 (30 Jan 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> The idea that its just theory that a poorly manufactured frame is more likely to fail is to be honest delusional.


1. You need to learn what the word "theory" means. You can be 99.999999% certain of what will happen, but until physically tested, it is "just" theory.
2. This is pretty well irrelevant anyhow, since nobody has suggested for one moment that they wouldn't be more likely to fail. It stands to reason they would, so that is a complete straw man.




bonzobanana said:


> Cracks and voids are easy to understand that they reduce the strength of that material. Maybe one day someone will pay to have a poorly made CF frame and fork go through the certification process testing to see how it compares with a well made frame but I can't see where the money would come from to do those tests which could cost 10s of thousands of pounds. Certification testing isn't cheap.


I would be very surprised if manufacturers carefully select which frames get tested to use only the best ones. That would work out FAR more expensive in the long term.

I would be even more surprised if their stated weight limits don't have a BIG margin built in, to the extent that any frame that gets through their regular QA process will be strong enough to handle that limit.

Manufacturers aren't stupid, and they know that a lot of their sales hinge on their reputation. The reputable manufacturers simply aren't going to allow frames out of such poor quality that any significant number will fail in normal use, when ridden by normal riders within the stated weight limits.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (31 Jan 2022)

fossyant said:


> You can get badly welded bikes made in sweat shops in the far east - made of steel and alluminium. Many are poorly made generally.



That's true, but welded steel frames can generally be mass produced with a high degree of repeatability and really poor welding is usually visible, and quite obvious to anyone who knows what good welding looks like.
With carbon fibre frames on the other hand, the defects are hidden within the inner structure, and at the minimum, you would need an endoscope type camera to inspect one non-destructively.


----------



## shep (31 Jan 2022)

I suppose the answer is, if you don't think Carbon is safe, not for you or just plain shyte, stick to something else.


----------



## Kestevan (1 Feb 2022)

shep said:


> I suppose the answer is, if you don't think Carbon is safe, not for you or just plain shyte, stick to something else.


But, but, but I really need to tell everyone who doesn't agree with me that they're wrong...

Or at least I would need to if I hadn't already been killed multiple times by faulty carbon frames.


----------



## bonzobanana (5 Feb 2022)

fossyant said:


> I think bonzo doesn't like carbon bikes



That's just a childish response for sure especially as I really like CF bikes I believe they are a wonderful creation but like any performance product its a compromise. No one is going to say Ferrari or McLaren cars are reliable or safer than standard cars its just the nature of their design, performance as a priority in design. Anyway it always feels when you get an insulting reply in a normal discussion the person receiving the insult has won the argument so thanks for that.


----------



## Grant Fondo (5 Feb 2022)

Not sure what this argument is about, but one observation i would make is that CF frames have come on a very long way. The Synapse I bought in 2006 was a dog imo and wish I had stuck with aluminium. Not the case now, and modern carbon gravel bikes are amazingly light and strong, an impressive feat really.


----------



## Alex321 (5 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> That's just a childish response for sure especially as I really like CF bikes I believe they are a wonderful creation but like any performance product its a compromise. No one is going to say Ferrari or McLaren cars are reliable or safer than standard cars its just the nature of their design, performance as a priority in design. Anyway it always feels when you get an insulting reply in a normal discussion the person receiving the insult has won the argument so thanks for that.


Any clue where tgere was an insult there? Or even why it was particularly "childish"?

The impression you had been giving was that you didn't think most carbon frames are fit for purpose. It doesn't seem particularly childish to suggest as a result that you don't like them. And certainly not insulting.

The response from Kestevan on the other hand, I could have understood you posting the above reply to that.


----------



## Peter Salt (5 Feb 2022)

What a silly argument this is. Material is a material. If the frame/fork/component is well-designed and built it will be good, if not, it won't. That's it.

Price-wise, 'expensive' is a very relative term. I personally built my bike from 2nd hand parts and love it. Cost me to under £450, but then I upgraded the wheels which took that to £950. Pricey? Maybe for some. Then again, I do have several wrist watches worth much more and they literally just look nice and tell you the time.

If you want to dish out 20k on a bike, I say do it. Treat yourself


----------



## fossyant (5 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> That's just a childish response for sure especially as I really like CF bikes I believe they are a wonderful creation but like any performance product its a compromise. No one is going to say Ferrari or McLaren cars are reliable or safer than standard cars its just the nature of their design, performance as a priority in design. Anyway it always feels when you get an insulting reply in a normal discussion the person receiving the insult has won the argument so thanks for that.



Funny that, I bought a no expense spared race bike over 30 years ago, all Dura Ace, thing is it's still going strong and rides like new, so not necessarily any compromise at all.


----------



## marzjennings (5 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> That's just a childish response for sure especially as I really like CF bikes I believe they are a wonderful creation but like any performance product its a compromise. No one is going to say Ferrari or McLaren cars are reliable or safer than standard cars its just the nature of their design, performance as a priority in design. Anyway it always feels when you get an insulting reply in a normal discussion the person receiving the insult has won the argument so thanks for that.


I'm very late to an ongoing conversation, but I ride a CF mtb frame and without compromise. In fact I find CF frames stronger and more reliable having killed 2 steel and 2 alu frames through just riding. And for mtb wheels, CF every time. I abuse the heck out my CF rims getting years more use than alu ones. Plus in the event of a crash I'd much rather be inside a McLaren carbon shell than any alloy bodied car.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (11 Feb 2022)

fossyant said:


> Funny that, I bought a no expense spared race bike over 30 years ago, all Dura Ace, thing is it's still going strong and rides like new, so not necessarily any compromise at all.




They are compromised in terms of material content and strength. in really arduous conditions a realatively heavy Tourer with a 531ST frame and more "agricultural" spec mechanicals is going to hold up better than a weight-optimised race bike made of the lightest version of 531 and a top end groupset. The reason yours is still as good as new probably has a lot to do with how you treat it and how heavily it's loaded.
You wouldn't try to plough a field with a racehorse and a cart horse is not going to win many races....


----------



## Roseland triker (11 Feb 2022)

Maybe Volvo could make carbon fibre cars and bikes eradicating the need for death by faulty frame manufacturing.....

Just a thought...


----------



## fossyant (11 Feb 2022)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> They are compromised in terms of material content and strength. in really arduous conditions a realatively heavy Tourer with a 531ST frame and more "agricultural" spec mechanicals is going to hold up better than a weight-optimised race bike made of the lightest version of 531 and a top end groupset. The reason yours is still as good as new probably has a lot to do with how you treat it and how heavily it's loaded.
> You wouldn't try to plough a field with a racehorse and a cart horse is not going to win many races....



Eww 531 is so common !  Like that carbon rubbish, every Tom , Dick and Harriet has it. 👅


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (11 Feb 2022)

fossyant said:


> Eww 531 is so common !  Like that carbon rubbish, every Tom , Dick and Harriet has it. 👅



Don't tell me, yours is Columbus!


----------



## fossyant (11 Feb 2022)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Don't tell me, yours is Columbus!



SLX of course and the other 653, not the commoners stuff !


----------



## Smokin Joe (11 Feb 2022)

I was a Columbus fan back in my competitive days. I never really got 531.


----------



## Hover Fly (13 Feb 2022)

I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.


----------



## Dogtrousers (13 Feb 2022)

Hover Fly said:


> I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.


It's easy. They normally have little stickers on them


----------



## IanSmithCSE (14 Feb 2022)

Good morning,

For those who haven't read it, way back a blind comparison was done between Tange Prestige and Columbus SL, they built two frames with identical dimensions and made them into bikes with identical components.

"Reprinted" on http://www.bgcycles.com/new-page-1

Bye

Ian


----------



## cougie uk (14 Feb 2022)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good morning,
> 
> For those who haven't read it, way back a blind comparison was done between Tange Prestige and Columbus SL, they built two frames with identical dimensions and made them into bikes with identical components.
> 
> ...


Fascinating stuff ! But the article suggests that 753 wasn't a success ? I thought it was at least in the UK ?


----------



## IanSmithCSE (14 Feb 2022)

Good evening,

It does say _commercial success _so once you write off tubesets that were supplied to pro teams and frame builders for marketing builds at a discount then maybe the sales weren't that high.

I do remember a club 25 when someone turned up with one of those new fangled 753 frames and he was branded a show-off with too much money, this confused me as I was at school at the time and a full 531DB frame was expensive! Looking back on it, it seems to be the same argument that we have now on bikes around the £10k mark, £5k is fine.

As I remember it, at club level 753 was not publicly respected, it's the same as Di2 nowadays. It wasn't that long ago that Di2 (753) was too expensive for many women's pro teams and many amateur teams use Ultegra rather than Dura-Ace.

It was never suitable for a touring bikes, there never was 753st, and back then there were fairly few high income individuals who were "into" cycling, so a 531frame was already a significant commitment for most riders.

Nowadays you can get a £10k bike from a retail shop, but 753 frames were mostly only available from a local frame builder, yes there were a few Raleigh 5 Star dealers who could get you a Raleigh one. Again as a generalisation local frame builders weren't interested in the people who could afford a high priced frame just because it is good and affordable to them, many weren't even interested in offering complete bikes and were pretty much unknown to the non enthusiast.

Having said all of this, 753 does appear to be a marketing product not an engineering one, it was the same alloy as 531 and heat treated and this metal and heat treating seems to have been offered in other dimensions (.... we control the vertical, we control the horizontal) 20 odd years before it was offered as 753 bike tubing.

When made to lightweight bike tubing dimensions the tubing has limited other uses.

So yes, there are still 753 frames on ebay, but a surprising number are almost NOS, someone's best bike that was rarely used and is now sadly _my departed partner's (in practice husband's) cherished bike._

Bye

Ian


----------



## Profpointy (14 Feb 2022)

Ming the Merciless said:


> They should spend no more on a bike than they would spend on a car.
> 
> If you buy a Ferrari you don’t get something faster. You get something that is subject to the same speed limits as all other cars on public roads.



My car cost twice what each of my two full sized bikes cost. My 2nd hand Brompton was a good bit less.


----------

