Pinkbike Poll: How Much Do Race Results Affect Your Bike Purchases?
This weekend sees the return of the global racing season as we may recognise it.
Global may be a bit of a stretch, and the W in EWS might not be getting fully represented out in Zermatt, with many of the top athletes unable or choosing not to attend, but it's a nice piece of what we used to call normality in these turbulent times.
Winning a World Cup DH, XC or EWS event takes a whole myriad of things to come together, from rider to support crew, fitness training to mental preparation and logistics to the bike itself. That last piece of the puzzle being our point of interest for this Friday's poll.
While it cannot take all the credit for producing results, the bike is definitely one important piece of the puzzle and often can lead to a rider feeling at one with the bike under them and enabling entering "the zone" just that bit easier, where brain function actually reduces and the body and mind simply react.
Having attended races over the years, it was easy to spot certain trends in bike choice amongst the teams. Perhaps in WC XC and DH there was a more clear trend of bike choice following the previous season's victors. Of late, the amount of Scott Sparks and Commencal Supremes on show come practice was notably higher than other brands given their repeated success and share of the limelight over the previous race seasons. In years past, was the rise in Demo's out there due to it being a relatively new bike, or was the success of a certain American fuelling the sales?
But does that trend extend outside of the racing elite, even if they are privateers, and into the buying public? Do you look to what bikes are winning in their respective disciplines to guide your purchases?
Author Info:
Member since Apr 6, 2019
Must Read This Week
- Not at all, the race results mean nothing to me, yet seeing a bike (or a brand) winning, especially multiple times and/or across multiple disciplines, has a direct subconscious effect on my buying preferences and habits... for a myriad of reasons.
The saying "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" wasn't just made up.
I watched a LOT of Motocross/Supercross as a kid. My favorite riders were Jeff Stanton, Jean-Michel Bayle, and Jeremy McGrath. All of them rode for the Honda Factory team.
And I won't pretend that I didn't have some pride in the fact that my Dads XR was the same brand.
Now that I'm older, I find that I try not to care which bikes do/do not win (again, its mostly rider). I will admit that I DO feel better about a brand if I've seen/heard about them before. Particularly if they have won.
IE, I don't own a Nukeproof, but seeing that its a multi-EWS winning bike brand, does make me feel better about them (compared to say... Viathon, another "house" owned brand).
Mostly giving some support to the fact that they have designed it well enough to survive the rigors of racing, and also the engineering has been serious enough to try to be competitive.
Fearon had a 134 for local enduros. revolutionmtb.com.au/pro-bike-check-connor-fearons-kona-process-134
I'm sure he won a few on it.
I would like to think it doesn't for me, but I sure do have a purple problem.
I love purple but haven’t got a purple bike yet
I’ve typed with the idea of having a bike repainted, but haven’t braved it yet.
I fell in love with the revel ranger Johnnie green jeans, so that will do me for the next wee while
Mostly because racers (when not contractually bound), tend to gravitate to the best for the use, or what is most reliable. And usually (because they are full time, and way better than me), I can learn something from why they chose it.
Like, I bet DT Swiss sold a lot of EX471's after gwin rode a whole race on just the rim, and it didn't break. And for good reason. People could see what kind of use they could survive.
And, on the flip side. Connor Fearons Kona Process 153 race bike (not the new Process X), has different rear triangle/longer chainstays than the regular bike. Leading me to think that my own Kona Process 153 short chainstays (425mm on a 29'er, and I'm 6'1"), are not conducive to a stable/neutral handling bike.
Also stoped me buying e13 carbon cranks
For instance, most Enduro racers run downhill-tyres in the softest possible rubber. Thats cool, but i don't need DH tyres for my weight and riding style (=slow) and i don't have the fitness of a professional athlete to pedal such sticky monstrosities up the mountain.
And DH racers run shock pressures far above anything i would ever run, because in don't hit boulders the size of doghouses at mach 11.
Yeah but they can't suck thaaaat bad right? Force has lackluster reviews at best but Martin Maes wins.
Interesting bc I tried that bike (albeit a weak setup at a demo event) and didn't jive with it. Both the geo and the rear kinematic (funny bc I'm a previous stumpy owner).
Haha, I couldn't resist!!
@PAmtbiker I think that is a fair stat, but in WC DH, that 1% can be the difference between winning, and being outside the top 10. It's nuts to think that sometimes the top 10 is separated by 2 seconds or less.
Race winning bikes aren't just bought by people who want to win their local races. Race winning brands earn reputations for making high quality bikes, for having good geometry, a good suspension platform, a good overall product. You might not be instantly aware of the connection to racing but it's there.
I own a Commencal and I can't begin to tell you how many people who know very little actual information about the bikes see my rig and say "those are supposed to be really good bikes."
he did the same for Specialized sales where traditionally didn't, Same with Gwin on YT and Amaury on Commencal.....it works regardless of this poll's results. Haha
Though I don't know what a car built with NASCAR tech would look like. A Conestoga wagon?
Racing is only one factor in driving consumer demand. Distribution, advertising (which IS NOT racing), video content and media strategy, etc, are all non-product related factors that go into it. These things, plus a ton of others, are what factor into “brand”.
The actual physical product (the bike, in this case), plus price and value, are still by far and away critical to consumers. Coming at it from my point of view, it seems bike companies often forget this part of it nearly completely, other than making sure the prices are outrageous. As for the “brand” aspect, it’s easier to name companies that do it well (there’s like 3) than those who don’t.
Presence in the market place also really matters. For your average consumer buying in the mid tier they often will have only 1 or two bike stores to choose from. Can basically guarantee to see Trek, Giant, Norco, Specialized and Santa Cruz, at least in Canada.
However the Nukeproof gear I do currently own was bought based on price and reviews (both online and from friends) and I rate it.
Pinkbike reviewers ride a bike occasionally for three months, and call it a test. I ride 3-4 times a week all year, year in and year out.
Our preferences are quite different, I want something that lasts with minimal service, is hardy and durable, and is easily services when needed. I seek my advice elsewhere.
I ride Nicolai
For shopping, personally I'm paying much more attention to reviews and comparison tests. Those are much more likely to affect my purchasing decisions.
But it's more the technology linked to the wining race bike that may influence my choice.
For instance, if I were racing DH, seeing how the Supreme DH has a high pivot, I'm thinking this could make the difference between losing the rear or not in an off-camber curve as the wheelbase extends contrary to a normal pivot.
I also always felt my 2013 Giant Reign felt too long on the ups and too short of the downs, so I've been curious about the whole longer lower slacker thing since the beginning, and though most brands are making longer bikes now, I'd like a Nicolai, but they're not racing.
Also, can we do this poll but with people that actually race?
So I saw the future