Would you ride bike park trails on a carbon bike? It wasn't all that long ago when the overwhelming answer would have been, "Hell no!" If you were then pressed to answer: "What if the frame were stronger and more durable than the aluminum one you are riding now?" The most probable reply would be, "You'll never convince me that a carbon frame could be trusted."
The first "carbon" frames were basically aluminum or titanium frames with the straight sections replaced by carbon tubes. Unsurprisingly, they cost more and often weighed more than an unmolested aluminum or titanium frame did at the time. Component makers followed suit, replacing aluminum with carbon tubes for stems, fork sliders, and cockpit items, and after those over-hyped products underwhelmed, carbon was downgraded by its detractors (especially, by the cycling media) as "black aluminum" and the proponents of the material are still fighting their way out of that corner.
Carbon wasn't at fault. The pathetic debut of carbon fiber as a frame material fell upon the shoulders of bicycle industry designers and manufacturers, who were locked into the vision that a bicycle frame was nine sticks of pipe, joined together with molten metal and could not create outside of that box. Carbon fiber's promise of greater strength and stiffness at significantly lower weights would not be realized until the manufacturing process was re-tooled, from conception through final product, to take advantage of pre-impregnated materials and molded monocoque-style construction techniques. It was a steep learning curve, but the end result was that carbon became the performance material of choice.
The take-away here is that the material was the same. It was the adoption of technology and manufacturing techniques, new to the cycling industry that turned failure into success. Few remember that it took almost 20 years to develop high-performance aluminum frames that could withstand the test of time – a feat largely made possible by FEA software, newly modified alloys, and innovations in butting and shaping tubes. There have been many inventions in cycling that have left riders with sour tastes because they failed initially or were rejected as a fantasy. Later, a number of them became viable products due to the introduction of a new material, a manufacturing technique, or a new design standard. So, the question for today's poll is simply: "What if..."
Top end forks that will outperform my factory forks on my KTM $8000 Can
Engine Mods (Head, cylinder, piston, crank etc) $5000+ Can
Exhaust system $1700 Can
Wheels $2000+ Can
and this is just what us mortals can get our hands on. When Mitch Payton was contemplating adding a 450 to his Monster Energy Pro Circuit Kawasaki team he built a prototype Bike for Ryan Villopoto. That bike was estimated at $80000, a far cry from what you find on a dealership floor.
I race with vet riders that have bikes over $20000 and thats suspension, Exhaust, cams, upgraded brakes, wheels and graphics. No changes to cooling system, stock internals, or transmission parts.
If the consumer was more supportive of the bike shop they would be able to help far more!
Besides do you really want to send you whole bike away to fix that mysterious creak or the gears or something like that?
Ask for money off your gas bills or your house, or your weekly food shop, your bike is a far smaller cost than a house or anything that goes with it!
Half these people have no clue what they're talking about, that includedes me
Just as fast.....
Everything is expensive and value really is a matter of perspective. I don't see the value in top end golf sticks but someone else does. I dont see the value in $600 football boots but I'm sure many others will. Products and services are only worth what people are willing to spend on it. That is basic economics. People dont work for free and companies need to turn a profit or they die. Money is the life blood of all business. If there was not money to be made then business would not be in that industry. If you didnt make money at work would you still go in? If people were not buying bikes and demanding better product from the manufactures then they would not exist.
Answer: your bike already gets much cheaper, and 95% of the riders, can't really tell a difference anyway. Just buying because some brand marketing guy tells you its the best thing to have...
It's not Price vs Performance. It should come down to Value.
Value being the amount of Performance or Reliability you are getting for the amount of money you are paying.
Just try that for moto It's will cost you six figures. You're not making an apples to apples comparison. The "top end" mx bike at your dealer IS entry level for anyone who is serious about it.
If it weren’t for the ‘high’ prices of the flagship bikes we’d still be on Target and Walmart huffys.
ill click bait to support these doods.
Stop believing the marketing & comparing yourself to the pros and be realistic about what you need to have fun!
That said if anyone knows a good bike shop they could recommend in West Aus I will take a punt.
So you have seen plenty of broken YTs? Can you describe each case with one sentence? Where, what model, whatcolour?
Go fact yourself
Facts... you are an idiot. No point to talk to you again. ever. The very thought of how pointless and miserably unfunny your rebuttal can be, makes me puke inside my mouth. I got dumber with every word you wrote. Good luck Mr.T
Then the irony will be, THAT unlike myself, the same majority will no longer be shredding a bike because they will long lost the emeaning of what is really improtant in life.
For $1550 NZD I can buy a trek roscoe off the floor, with a 1x11 drive train, 130mm fork, and a dropper seatpost, and hydraulic disc brakes. The price of what a capable bike costs has come way down.
@paul7189 you're wrong. The industry doesn't tell you it's shit. That's your own issue. The performance out of a $1,500 bike today blows a $4k bike from 5 years ago out of the water. Disregarding spec, even just geo-wise they're make your day getting up and down a hill easier and more fun.
The value of this year bicycles has grown dramatically with shimano releasing deore m6000 with a 11-42 cassette they have brought 1x drivetrains to the masses for a fraction the cost of GX. SR Suntour has managed to market themselves as a brand worth owning and now are dominating the entry level price point with some stellar suspension products worthy of more praise.
You go and look at a modern mountain bike for $8k from one of the big names and the details are so much better. Can't hide big ugly welds with a sheet of plastic on a bike.
Honestly with how big motocross is, I was greatly disappointed by the product. Just everything looks to subscribe to the "make it beefy, and as cheap as possible" with limited regard to weight, performance, aesthetic.
Sizing can be changed by certain adjustments ie ; forks to clamp height . Geo , not really an issue as with Mx/enduro/trail riding you’ll all be going up down over things and jumping things . You may think there linkage is faff but there’re not . The motor differences between the Mx/enduro are vast . A lot of money goes on weight loss but when you got 60+bhp under your ass a couple of grms hear and there don’t matter . Go ride one for a day and you’ll be glad there’re made beefy !
Let’s say that 899 for 2008 Bigfoot is MSRPn not a blow out sale on pricepoint.
Now let’s look at a comparable bike for MSRP at 1500€ and analyze it:
26bikes.com/shop/bikes/enduro-allmountain/prod/dartmoor-hornet-2017
Better geometry, better brakes, better drivetrain and comparable if not a better fork (55 was an absolute crap).
Now I can list some more stuff: in 2005 I bought new Hayes MAG brakes for 180$ each (today I get new Zees in that price on bike components de) and new Manitou Black Comp for 350$ (Two years ago I paid that for a new Reba). Then in 2006 I bought 66RC2X for 800$ on sale. 100$ cheaper than Lyrik last year. Performance of both forks is uncomparable. Over 2lbs lighter, real damping. 2008 - I buy a Nomad frame for ca 2000$. 2012 - Whole bike costed me over 3500$. Ermm... Capra, Spectral, Radons? Far better than my 2008 Nomad?
Costed me 3500€... a regular, smart person, with smaller mouth (paying full price for the frame) would not pay more than 5,5k. And I still paid 250$ too much for that stupid Hope Crankset. But well... Enve costs... so does Di2 or Eagle...
SLX 11sp groupset 300€, brakes 250€, wheelset hope+EX471/FlowMk3 400€, dropper 250€, controls 200€, tyres+ sealant 100€, Fork 650€.
Boom! Waaay better than some Santa Cruz in posh build. On boutique frame. Get some Commencal Meta on a sale out and you cut the price by 2k. So for 3,5k you get a custom bike that stands for 98% of what’s possible with best bike tech...
As usual, when a bunch of folks find “something that is wrong with the whole world” it means they are bloody hipocrites, accusing other of their own treats.
Again 3,5k for a full suspension bicycle that offers 95% available performance, is not much to ask. Everything above 4k is masturbation. Unless you want to pay for a thing as Starling or Sick Bicycles or Unno which at laest for me, is understandable and admirable. You can also go on AliExpress and build a carbon bike for 3,5k... then I genuinely wish you to crash due to breaking carbon bar for 40$ and getting 30$ carbon seat post in your bum. Then I hope carbon splinter gives you ass cancer so you need to walk around with colostomy bag.
My comment was based on value between the two and the poster was comparing a 8K MTB to a 8K Moto. I was pointing out that he was comparing entry level Moto to top level MTB.
I do agree most riders MTB and Moto cant ride their bikes to its potential But that still doesn't mean they shouldnt try to make the bike work better for their individual needs and riding style.
nobody needs a lot of this crazy exotic stuff that is pushed on us. look at the poll they did about aluminum rims vs carbon. a lot of pros don't want carbon because they fail and can't complete a day of enduro so if thats the case why would anyone thats not sponsored want to pay all that money for them?
the $5000 bike with a solid set of aluminum wheels, 1x drivetrain, any one of the good braking systems and a middle to top notch fork is more than enough for 95% of the MTB'ers on the planet. the average joe can get by w/ much less.
i.ytimg.com/vi/DojagvhaJwo/hqdefault.jpg
????
Is the closest to archeology I have ever been
What if we worked as hard on innovating trail features as we do on innovating bike parts?
I'd rather ride a crappy bike on a great trail than the other way around, and I'm more than happy to pay access fees to parks if they offer cool trails.
And there is always more in development. Only thing we could do with is a bit more sun from time to time
I don't need a 13 speed cassette or electronic shifting on my mountain bike. But more or better trails? Absolutely. You make a really good point.
Where I live in CO, we have very few mtb trails outside of ski resorts, and we are stuck riding 2-way, multi-use hiking trails with gobs of people. This just doesn't work for a high-use area, and there are some optional hucks off rocks and such, but we have nothing resembling "jumps".
IMBA clubs' push for multiuser is stupid. They should be pushing hard for mtb trails or alternate day use when mtb trails aren't feasible.
Logging land has been great for riders in BC and WA, but not a lot of places have that. The rest of NA needs a different solution, and I'd absolutely love to see pay trails built for mtb where I live, either on public or private land.
I'd honestly write my local trail building org a $20k check today if they could deliver a one-way, mtb specific trail with features and grade.
Thankfully IMBA is imploding (unfortunate for Dave, I like the guy). Chapters are dropping out left and right for, among other reasons, the dumbing-down of good mountain bike trails. I stopped sending them money 4 or 5 years ago. Well, I still have that money, and what hasn't gone to STC I'd happily donate locally for purpose-built bike access.
-Yes, thats what my motorcycles have
-no, I only like when I don't fit in to a specific category of rider
-undecided
- Yes, I’ll experiment with the idea but will auto live tweet my Strava times
- It’s not possible. Being indignant makes me feel so good. It’s like I can see the whole world beneath me.
- Not sure; I’ve never ridden a bike but I know if I did it would be a home welded 26”plus titanium hardtail with a linkage fork, gearbox and drum brakes
- I'd work on my flips, 360's and drop skillz to win her over
- I'm gay
- I'm googling Rachel right now...
so 10 inches was a bit of an exageration, more like 8 inches, but still...
and theres the footage! i was the guinea pig for this line, we ended up adding another log to the lip of the takeoff and it ran smoothhh, til it all got tore down
I really want to know the reasons behind this.
Do you not service your own bike?
I remember a while back on a forum someone asking if there was a way to to unscrew his BB as he cross threaded it. Everyone on the forum was telling him the BB shell is probably screwed and that the frame is DOA. Ever since then I thought press fit was the solution. After reading time and time again about how press fit creaks people reall hate press fit BB's. I've never experienced the creaking noise yet.
I think there's pros and cons to both but I could never understand the full on hate for press fit.
Also a threaded bb is far less likely to seize in my experience and they didn't discount seizing!
And they sure could seize up haha. Especially before you had external cups like Hollowtech II that had a good interface for the BB tool, those old Truvativ Isis, Shimano Octalink and what not... Damn.
Threaded BB means you never have to worry about it ever again. Luckily, you can convert pressfit to threaded pretty easy. wheelsmfg.com/bottom-brackets.html
But seriously if you know what you're doing it's no big deal.
Not saying they don't need a saddle, but maybe one that isn't the same shape, because the use model is different.
(I've done exactly one DH race in my life)
Bmx'er's got in to the sport sooner?
Mountain bikes started out with geometry suited to the riding, rathe than the road?
Prices went down?
the industry actually adhered to standards, instead of adopting the wordpress model eternal upgrading?
The industry admitted to a huge marketing bias, fired most of the marketing departments and quite preying on the naive?
The problem for me is user serviceability (and this is coming from a bike shop wrench with a full spread of tools at his disposal)
I think a simple threaded interface is 100% better than having to use expensive presses and bearing pullers to service a wear item like a bottom bracket. The alternative to these expensive tools is wailing on your 3000$ frame with a hammer.
- I would be tempted by a light gearbox, but if that's at the expense of durability, there'd be no point. I'd want to try one out too , bearing in mind a lot of people reckon gearboxes and hub gears can feel "draggy"
- The pedals thing will probably always be personal preference. I like flats and my iffy knee probably does too
- What does automatic shifting actually bring, in terms of benefits, for 90% of riders. Niche applications, but I can't understand why anyone would ever expect it to be mainstream
- Carbon still has the problem that you can't verify its integrity (voids, delamination, dry fibres, etc) without ultrasound scanning your bike after every crash, knock, etc so it's just not a very end-user-friendly material. Getting one season out a £3,000 wheelset still doesn't sound too good, either
- I'm 6'2" and have size 13 feet, so the idea of anything being designed to fit me "just right", out of the box, is an entirely foreign concept. Knob-twiddling isn't the most fun thing to do on a bike, though, so I'd take the 95%
- This is a silly idea; anything that limits a rider's options is a step back, isn't it? Knacker a fork, or wear something out, then have to send the entire bike off, or buy a new one? Not for me, thanks
In a house on the street
Where you lived
Maybe I'd be outside as you passed on your bike. Would I know?
Buy the carbon frame, its cheaper!
Stick with AL, its more durable
Undecided.
You have to pay the people who design and market it let alone make it, ship it and other boring admin.
Carbon is expensive due to the R&D, but I like your thinking.
I wouldn't know, because I don't use them. They are poor solution to a problem that didn't really exist.
What if gearbox drivetrains were almost the same weight as derailleur drivetrains?
IF they were guaranteed durable as a regular rear mech set up sure.
Lightweight tires?
Really, you have to ask this? less rotational weight...
Pedals?
There is NO way freestyle competitors would develop clipped pedals. That's just silly. C'mon.
Automatic rear mech?
Preselecting won't cover all situations, so what happens those times you cannot plan for? No thanks...
Carbon rims?
Mmmm.. make it TWO seasons, and maybe. I'd rather be able to buy OUTLAWS again at a reasonable price... have no idea what made their prices go up...
Carbon Frame?
They'll never be the same price. Too much marketing hype over the years on carbon for them to redact any of it. Nice thought though.
Suspension?
My suspension already performs at 95% Where are you coming up with this stuff???
No seats?
Shirley, you can't be serious....
Cockpit components?
Again? really? Limiting my choice as a consumer is only going to create unappy, reluctant customers. The auto industry already does this...
------------------------------
Overall, less marketing mumbo jumbo, and more desire to actually create a useful, durable product at a decent price. MOST major companies fail at this, miserably.
-yes
-no
-this is as inane as the original polls
Bearing's aren't meant to be pressed into carbon, or any soft material. Manufacturers need to bond in a metallic insert into the bottom bracket area to press the bearings into then you can have all the advantages of pf with no creaking.
Same goes for headset bearings, exactly the same issue but arguably worse as you don't have the option of buying things like hope's pf bottom bracket to solve the issue.
Bearings pressed into carbon last a matter of years before ovalising the bore and scrapping off the frame, but maybe this is the manufacturers plan?
• obvious answer
• throw-away counter answer
• undecided
“Overwhelmingly, the bike market chooses (obvious answer from leading question).” - Sold Data
I don't take parts bike to bike, as I find all parts have a definite life cycle in BC conditions. If I am breaking something, I find that everyone else is too. Here in BC all of the sram brakes went south, the LBS was replacing with shimano under warranty; that would be great if you couldn't interchange your brakes.
We're definitely still in that era now...
What if gearbox... : the main problem with gearbox it's drag, not weight. Drag free derailleur over a light and slow gearbox any day.
What if light tyres...: durable light tyres sound good, but sidewall support and grip are more important. So heavy tyres for me
You can buy parts for 1997 motorcycles and dirtbikes all day long...
F#@k that il wish for world peace and a billion pounds its more likely
I thought by now the only holdback was price. Surprised to see people in the poll saying they’d go alu at the same price.
What a f*cking stupid question. If these materials were identical, there'd be no need to choose between them would there?
That's my experience.
You mean weren't interchangeable, correct?
Oh, wait...
nice !! don't give up #CavalerieBikes !
And they're marginally more $