Popped into a bike shop next to BabysRUs in Exeter (I was allowed 10 minutes light relief from buying overpriced baby stuff by SWMBO!)
Anyway, there was some nice high end stuff, but blimey some kit is getting expensive. Pivot carbon frames for £2300, and I picked up some Bos forks - might have been the Deville 170s - and they were £1050!
This isn't a rant as such (too little random capitalisation, so sorry), but forks that cost a grand? Really?
I know MTBing is a 'lifestyle' sport now, and that well paid, middle class IT managers have cash to splash, yadda, yadda. But it does seem that some prices are getting silly.
Now, I know that some stuff is still well priced, especially as technology trickles down from the top end kit. Also the fact that there are people willing to buy new kit every year or so means that I'm kept in well priced second hand kit.
Thoughts.....? 😉
If you think bike stuff is expensive, you should try looking at baby stuff!
Oh, hold on.....
Walked into a garage the other day, they wanted £120k for a Ferrari!
Cars are getting so expensive these days...
I agree - the technology in some of the kit is impressive, I just don't think it's needed. not for me anyway.
I know! How much for a bloody mdf wardrobe. They are most definitely having a giraffe. We bought some of the essentials in the sale, but will look for bedroom furniture elsewhere.
I think the Ferrari analogy is not fair. The Bos forks were just an extreme example. But even 'normal' forks from Fox or DT Swiss can be £600+.
Fork prices and tyre prices are getting daft for sure, also your high end Satan Cruz's etc are getting daft now.
You can still get good value though, I'm hoping my xc carbon hardtail build is going to be £600 or so, on one, sales and second hand to the rescue!
A 'normal' car from Volvo can be £40k+. Dacias are cheaper.
Top end has never been cheap. If the market is prepared to pay for such products, then there is a place for them.
A 1995 Rock Shox Judy SL would cost the equivalent of £550 today, with a mighty 63mm of MCU elastomer travel. Think of what you can get for the same money today.
Top end kit has always been expensive.
I remember not being able to afford an LTS-1
c'est la vie
Jury SLs were £600 at the time in '96 (not converted to today's value - that's what they were!), so that'd be £980 now, and as remote rob says, they were utter pish compared to even entry level forks these days.
Tires... The price of tires is actually ridiculous.
20 years ago
Fat chance yo eddy was £1000 Steal
Yeti ARC £1500 Alloy
Top end ti frame £2000
All hard tails.
Had some Rock shox magnesium sl things as well but can't remember what they cost, must have been £700+
Top end has always cost £££
Same as anything. Take golf clubs for example. There are plenty of double digit handicap golfers with multi thousand pound sets of clubs. The fact that they have golf swings that make them look like they are trying to fight off a swarm of wasps means that they could easily use a set of beginners clubs is not relevant to them. They want the best gear money can buy rather than condescend to pay for a few lessons.
Same in mountain bike gear, how many of people who ride six inch travel monster full suss bikes actually get the most out of them? That is not a criticism of everyone who rides them, obviously, but there are plenty of people who mince around field edges and piss easy cinder tracks on bikes that are far too 'big'. At the other end of the spectrum there are also some people who carry a bit more timber around the midriff than optimal, but ride carbon frames. The reality is they would be better off losing half a stone rather than spending hundreds more quid for an irrelevant weight saving.
Boys and toys, innit?
People who spend loads of dosh on kit they can't get the best out of have every right to do so - and so the marketing men get busy convincing them they need it.
Been in the spesh concept store today, was thinking what good value the demo 8 carbon (with middling kit) was.
£4,500. Bikes have changed....
At the other end of the spectrum there are also some people who carry a bit more timber around the midriff than optimal, but ride carbon frames. The reality is they would be better off losing half a stone rather than spending hundreds more quid for an irrelevant weight saving.
😆
Relatively a grand for a fork doesn't seem that steep. You'd pay at least double for a good motorcycle setup.
Long before I had an MTB I remember seeing forks getting on for 800£ in that shop that is/was in Ambleside.
Step up China direct, who don't have to pay for lots of people overpaying for lots of other overpaid people.
I am far from Gnarr core in my riding, and people were riding where and how i ride not to many years ago on forks worse than what now come on the cheapest BSO mountainbikes and loving every minute of it.
So there is no reason I can not do the same on my current set up.
I try to buy the best I can afford, and if someone can afford to pay a shed load of money on components then fair play to them.
But realistically would a £1000 set of forks make a huge difference to my mtb experience over a £300 set, apart from satisfying a little bike envy, no.
But a long as people keep buying them , it will fuel progress and I will benefit, as trickle down technology means I get to ride the the same top end stuff, just I am a couple of years behind.
It is very easy to get get starry eyed over the latest gear but there is a lot to be said for ride what you got and then worry about it when it breaks.
Chip.
You speak the truth. You make sensible points.
Are you new here?!
Step up China direct, who don't have to pay for lots of people overpaying for lots of other overpaid people.
Those little slave kids don't pay themselves.
If you think bike stuff is expensive, you should try looking at baby stuff!
+1 well, +4 😆
pikes/sids are £500 no one needs anything else
+4?
Silly boy! 😉
Does being an IT manager automaticaly make you middle class or is it only the middle class ones whose cash splashing is worthy of note?
midrange has crept up though. 3k for a Kona process 134dl with pretty boggo gear, nothing below 2k for a full suss that would be considered 'desirable' a few that would be plenty good enough but fashion does come into it a bit.am after a new full suss that(probably next year budget permifting) but just couldn't justify the 3-4k that seems de rigeur.
People can spend money as the see fit, I could go off now and cherry pick 10 examples of really expensive things and claim it's all gone mad or I could pick 10 examples of really cheap good value stuff to prove there is still a lot of good deals out there.
If I keep my current bike for 4-5 years I'm happy that the price I paid is worth it.
At the other end of the spectrum there are also some people who carry a bit more timber around the midriff than optimal, but ride carbon frames. The reality is they would be better off losing half a stone rather than spending hundreds more quid for an irrelevant weight saving.
It's always good to get a nice condescending one in early. Could we have the STW approved list of bike purchases by weight category?
The thing Dannyh may have a point, I dropped 1.5 stone a few months back and it has made going uphill much much easier. And it would be expensive to knock the same off the weight of the bikes too. Come to think of it I've not seen many 3 lb trail bikes either.
Another bonus is that whilst the ladieez don't notice the flashest of bikes they do notice the flatter midriff 🙂
It's always good to get a nice condescending one in early.
Would you say that was a condescending thing to say? I can see what dannyh is saying and don't think he's being condescending.
Surely it's just a fact and pretty good example. How can someone weighing 16 stone+ (just a random figure) then say that they need the latest light weight carbon frame to "save some weight"? It just seems a little bit silly.
I can understand it's nice to have, and if you can afford it, why not? And I'm not saying people with the "extra timber" shouldn't have the latest and lightest parts. But maybe if you are "serious" enough to be dropping the cash on something, you should be serious enough to shed a couple of lbs yourself?
Why? Because it's STW point at people and disapprove. Maybe someone chooses the best thing they can afford and saving weight on a bike is a good thing for them to do, they may loose a bit more weight as they go or should tubby people only ride heavy bikes? Also carbon is not always about weight, the stiffness it provides gives very different ride characteristics.
I didn't say tubby people should only ride heavy bikes. And like said, if you can afford it and want it, then go for it. I just don't believe dannyh was condescending. That's all. 🙂
not everyone buys carbon frames just because they are lighter, but having a lighter bike underneath you must be better for certain riding, the same as having a heavier bike is better sometimes?
Well the advantages of a carbon frame can be weight, stiffness and strength. Just picking one and ignoring the other two is just using it as a feeble excuse for a willy waving attack on people with expensive bikes.
No doubt that mountain biking is an expensive game if you want higher end kit but it's always been that way. Its saving grace however are the seemingly endless sales with the big players (CRC etc). I would never buy forks for a thousand quid but I have just bought thousand quid forks for 430 quid from CRC.
I saw a 1.5k boardman full suspension yesterday, it'll do pretty much everything the expensive stuff will do but without the cool name.
^what the podge said.
I think our sport is the classic diminishing returns time. I think that quality kit *does* generally last longer, as long as you avoid uber light or super complex.
Certain quality items work and work and work. It is hard to beat for value a Shimano Deore/SLX equipped, hope hubbed, slightly heavy open bath forked, with generic kit (e.g. OnOne seatpost, bars etc), and liberal lashings of second hand tyres, hardtail.
Is stating the bleeding obvious now considered condescending?
People can spend their money on whatever they like. The fact of the matter is that shedding the same amount of weight from your body as you would 'save' by having a carbon frame versus an alloy would be better in terms of fitness and 'performance' than just splashing the cash. In ninety nine percent of cases. In my OPINION obviously (I'm still entitled to one of those, I assume). 🙄
So do you think heavier people would benefit from stronger stiffer frames or not? Or do you want to ignore those points so you can criticise those with nicer bikes than you feel they deserve, while bleating about some non-existent restriction to your freedom of expression 😆
Mtbing is an incredibly cheap pastime to get into and has never been cheaper due to the amount of secondhand kit now available and generic Chinese imported stuff.
A secondhand on-one with some cheapo consumables from the online chainstores can be had for less than £250
Decathlon shorts,gloves and a pair of trainers and a £30 helmet is all you need to ride
Lessons? Nope
Expensive club fees? Nope
Specialised transport equipment? Nope
The outdoors is FREE (and even trail centres don't cost much)
On most UK trails an expert rider will blitz most mediocre riders on the above kit (hardcore downhill gnar excluded)
Its a BARGAIN!
All the rest is just nice to have
So do you think heavier people would benefit from stronger stiffer frames or not? Or do you want to ignore those points so you can criticise those with nicer bikes than you feel they deserve, while bleating about some non-existent restriction to your freedom of expression
Thanks for the disclaimer smiley. That always makes aggression ok.
Most people would benefit from stronger, stiffer frames (unless you are talking hardtails in which case compliance in the tubes themselves is an advantage in my opinion). But most people would benefit MORE from losing the weight from their body and the accompanying fitness gains.
And I am aware that weight loss and fitness are not necessarily one and the same thing (anorexia and all manner of horrible illnesses for example) before you try to nitpick an argument over a peripheral point as seems your modus operandi.
Anyway I suspect that if I suddenly started agreeing with everything you said, you would try to pick a fight about me not having ideas of my own. 😐
Cheap bikes today are better than most expensive bikes not so long ago. And also cheaper than cheap bikes used to be. I've still got my 90s Carrera in the attic, £350 it was and a great buy in its day. Tange tubes, shimano drivetrain all through, nice bonty wheels, smoke and dart. Oh and a flexstem but you can't win 'em all. And all in all, pretty much as capable as a housebrick, just like every other old bike.
Today, that £350- even ignoring inflation- gets you a bike that if you could go back in time to then, would be the best bike in the world. I mean, you wouldn't even get to ride it, it'd get stolen instantly by a Specialized ninja for reverse engineering. That's pretty damn good.
dannyh - MemberAt the other end of the spectrum there are also some people who carry a bit more timber around the midriff than optimal, but ride carbon frames. The reality is they would be better off losing half a stone rather than spending hundreds more quid for an irrelevant weight saving.
This always strikes me as a particularily daft idea. Do you think anyone's going "Hmm, what will I do, save some weight or buy some carbon? I'll buy new bars, that'll mean it's fine for me to be overweight". It's totally different things and it's not one or the other or a choice between the two. Yes many people can benefit from losing weight but they can't do it in 5 minutes with a credit card and an allen key so putting one against the other is just nonsense.
And saving weight from the bike isn't even equivalent to saving body weight- a lighter bike rides different to a heavier bike. Effectively the rider is sprung mass and the entire bike is unsprung, every time you move the bike that weight loss is in effect.
Anyone can enjoy a mountain bike ride, providing they have two things, a mountain bike and the ability to ride a bike.
You could have a good day out on a 15 year rock hopper.
That said it is nice to have nice things but not having the best does not stop you enjoying what you have.
There is no qualification required to own a six grand bike, regardless of skill, profession, age or bodymass index,
All you require is six grand.
This always strikes me as a particularily stupid idea. Do you think anyone's going "Hmm, what will I do, save some weight or buy some carbon? I'll buy new bars, that'll mean it's fine for me to be overweight". It's totally different things. Yes many people can benefit from losing weight but they can't do it in 5 minutes with a credit card and an allen key so putting one against the other is just nonsense.
Can someone please translate this for me? I guessed from the start that it is disagreeing with me and I'd like to answer, but as I have absolutely no idea what Northwind is on about, I can't.
There is no qualification required to own a six grand bike, regardless of skill, profession, age or bodymass index,All you require is more money than sense.
[img] 
[/img]
I'm a submariner in the royal navy, this means I go away for long periods of time alot of time with no option to train due to constrains of said job. I am fatter 14stone 5ft 9 and less fit than I want to be and I ride a carbon bike why because I work hard for my money and want to enjoy it.
However when you see me on the trails im sure i will fall into the middle aged it guy riding a carbon bike, don't always judge a book by its cover.
Edit. For some reason it posted twice
dannyh - MemberCan someone please translate this for me? I guessed from the start that it is disagreeing with me and I'd like to answer, but as I have absolutely no idea what Northwind is on about, I can't.
I honestly don't know how I can make it any clearer 😕
[Euro - Member
more money than sense.
That statement is often said of me, the sad part being, I have **** all money. 😀
I'm a submariner in the royal navy, this means I go away for long periods of time alot of time with no option to train due to constrains of said job. I am fatter 14stone 5ft 9 and less fit than I want to be and I ride a carbon bike why because I work hard for my money and want to enjoy it.However when you see me on the trails im sure i will fall into the middle aged it guy riding a carbon bike, don't always judge a book by its cover.
Good for you. You have made a decision based on your particular circumstances and are happy with it. Do your (very particular) set of circumstances invalidate my point for the vast majority of people?
If you are a middle aged bloke riding a carbon bike why would you not fit into the 'middle aged guy riding a carbon bike' category? Are you saying there is also an accompanying prejudice here? If so, I wouldn't be able to be prejudiced as most of the time I can't tell a carbon frame from a metal one on sight. That and the fact that it genuinely doesn't occupy my thoughts when I'm out and about. I'm much more interested in saying hello and chatting about the general riding.
None of which actually invalidates my point.
I am now bored.
I am off.
[quote=Northwind ]dannyh - Member
Can someone please translate this for me? I guessed from the start that it is disagreeing with me and I'd like to answer, but as I have absolutely no idea what Northwind is on about, I can't.
I honestly don't know how I can make it any clearer
+1 seemed pretty clear to me!
Today, that £350- even ignoring inflation- gets you a bike that if you could go back in time to then, would be the best bike in the world. I mean, you wouldn't even get to ride it, it'd get stolen instantly by a Specialized ninja for reverse engineering. That's pretty damn good.
New technology may be present, as is a ton of extra weight. And shite quality.
Give me a 80/90s £300 bike any day.
What bike someone rides or how much money they spend on it, there field of work, age, how many inches is printed on there waistband or car they drive has nothing to do with anyone but them.
And if they are not doing you any harm, the only reason behind anyone judging or making any negative remarks or comments is because they are mean people.
If I have a billion pound in the bank and have a six grand bike in the four car garage or earn £250 a week in a fish finger factory and live in a crumbling bedsit with wallpaper falling of the wall behind my six grand bike in the corner of my room , it's got sod all to do with you, mind your own.
Today, that £350- even ignoring inflation- gets you a bike that if you could go back in time to then, would be the best bike in the world.
Can't agree with that. There are some lovely early 90's bikes that still ride superbly now and are at least as capable as a modern £350 bike.
chestrockwell - MemberCan't agree with that. There are some lovely early 90's bikes that still ride superbly now and are at least as capable as a modern £350 bike.
Some examples? There's plenty that are great at the job they did at the time but as soon as you throw in modern brakes and effective suspension the game just changes. Even today's rubbish tyres are mostly competitive. I'd happilly take today's best entry level bikes, stick a bigger rotor and tyres on them, and take them to fort william or similiar, not something I'd say of anything that old.
But OK, a better comparison, £350 in 1990 is equivalent to about £700 today- which is a Voodoo Bizango and 100 bags of starmix.
However when you see me on the trails im sure i will fall into the middle aged it guy riding a carbon bike
i can see the guys designing the next generation crying "think of the fat blokes on the submarines ,they have needs too 😀
ps for the record my thoughts are yes way too ****in expensive
however you cant take it with you and if the governemnt dont screw you out of every penny the bus you get hit by might
SPEND IT ALL NOW
OH ALSO BEST BIKE I EVER HAD WAS A SARACEN rufftrax it cost 200 quid and iirc when it broke it had been hammered for so many years and i mean hammered with no maintenance or TLC that it would have taken more effort to push it off Mam Tor than it was worth so we left it there...........it had done its job admirably
Dannyh in angry posting, well I never
I think the wider question is why does anyone give two hoots about what someone else does with their cash or what they ride?
Some examples? There's plenty that are great at the job they did at the time but as soon as you throw in modern brakes and effective suspension the game just changes. Even today's rubbish tyres are mostly competitive. I'd happilly take today's best entry level bikes, stick a bigger rotor and tyres on them, and take them to fort william or similiar, not something I'd say of anything that old.
I'd much prefer a Yo Eddy, Mountain Goat, Roberts Bollox, Vitamin T, etc running M900 XTR then a £350 modern bike for most types of riding. Yes, they won't win any DH races but will still fly cross country. Granted, canti's come no where near discs but set up correctly they did, and still do stop you. Tweak any of the bikes above to suit modern tastes and they will still be ace.
I'm not saying retro bikes are the equal of modern bikes in the same class, far from it, but a low end modern bike transported back to 1993 would not be held up as the best bike in the world. I'm sure people would like the suss and possibly the discs (If it had them) but the groupset would not work any better then M900 and the weight of the thing would blow peoples mind.
chestrockwell - MemberI'd much prefer a Yo Eddy, Mountain Goat, Roberts Bollox, Vitamin T, etc running M900 XTR then a £350 modern bike for most types of riding.
I suppose this is down to the sort of riding you do, but I was lucky enough to ride a Yo Eddy last year- lusted after them when I was a kid- and what a let down. For basic XC, sure, it's fine within its limitations- for my idea of what mountain biking was in 1990, it'd have been amazing. But today, nope. (I'd still have one mind, or a Xizang maybe...)
We obsessed about weight and top end shifting then because that's all we had to obsess about really. As soon as you add half decent suspension, modern tyres, etc it's a different game.
I don't earn much, (postman, and only on part-time hours), but almost every penny I earn I spend on my bike. Because that's where I like to spend my money. So I agree that people can, and should spend their money where they like, and yes. It is nobodies business. But the point made wasn't "they are a big fella, they shouldn't buy nice things". The point made was that while there are in the shop flashing their debit cards looking for the lightest parts they can buy, they could just ride their bike, and lose weight. I only consider light parts now because at 68kg, 5ft 10in I don't really have mass excess of weight to shed really. So now it's the bike.
Me first, then the bike. Surely that should be the outlook?
But the point made wasn't "they are a big fella, they shouldn't buy nice things". The point made was that while there are in the shop flashing their debit cards looking for the lightest parts they can buy, they could just ride their bike, and lose weight.
Alleluia the angels sang and the bells of heaven rang out. At least one person gets it.
Cheers to the earl of podgeness for that little dig. How are [u]your[/u] trails at the moment and when are mere visitors like myself allowed to ride them again?