Carbon Frame Hierarchy?

Imo Santa Cruz hasn't been a "boutique brand" in about 10years, just too common. Oh, look, another Santa Cruz... Yawn.

Sorry if this offends any dentists.

Yep, hence why I invented the new classification of semi boutique.

Leads onto an interesting question though. Who is properly boutique now?

The hierarchy cannot merely be considered by the bike brand, it is in fact a more holistic overview of the persona and intention that elevates the whole velocipede presentation to new levels and is as such dictated by the vehicle it's attached to and the clothing worn by the rider.

VW T6 4WD California & Rapha trail pants for grabbing a pre ride fairtrade organic coffee whilst casually applying some beard wax FTW.

Leads onto an interesting question though. Who is properly boutique now?

I think it's a personal thing - for me personally bike brands that sell complete bikes aren't boutique. Having started in late 80's early 90's when every boutique brand was a frame, not a bike, my personal definition of boutique would be a bike built from frame up, regardless of brand.

SC, transition, Atherton even, can be bought as a complete, off the shelf bike - that to me doesn't make a boutique bike. Any dentist, accountant or Simon cowl could buy one. But one where every component was hand picked by the owner, for specific reasons, doest matter if it's got SLX/XTR, or NX/AXS, that makes the bike a one off boutique for me.

Off the shelf doesn't cut it.

I wasnt looking to get quite so esoteric.

More asking if Transition used to be less well made than Santa Cruz when they were cheaper and have they now improved build quality inline with the price increase and moved up the hierarchy?

asking if Transition used to be less well made than Santa Cruz when they were cheaper and have they now improved build quality inline with the price increase and moved up the hierarchy?

I don't think it matters, heard of many a SC snapping and warranty replacement (but this is probably down to volume of bikes sold).

If Transition have a matching warranty to SC, I personally wouldn't focus on the construction techniques, as I'd have thought they'd be pretty similar.

Confusing cost and quality is easily done.

You’re asking if the quality has increased at a time (when the pricing meeting were happening) of demand outstripping supply, and relatively high inflation/a weak pound?

I mean, it might?

I remember when boutique was frame only. I also remember when those companies started offering complete bikes just to try and close the gap between production and self build.

If Santa Cruz was ever sold without a build kit option, it was a very small window of time.

Going back in time,
Funk
Manitou
Intense
Turner

Were all frames I had when they were frame only.
More recently I've had an Ibis frame but they do offer complete bikes.

Confusing marketing with quality is easily done too.

@tomhoward

It feels like the rate of change of Transition prices has been greater than others 8n a similar place in the market.

Does this mean
A. They used to be comparatively cheap.
B. They've become relatively more expensive for no reason.
C. They've become relatively more expensive because of a relative increase in quality.

The thing is, Transition used to be considered good bikes at great prices but that has changed.

There's not a single thread anywhere about the new Smuggler where price isn't the main point of conversation. To me, it looks like they've become more expensive than they used to be, but not beyond the competition.

Just wondering why. I get the impression everyone is still comparing them to place they used to hold in the market, but is that fair and does it reflect where they are now?

SC, transition, Atherton even, can be bought as a complete, off the shelf bike – that to me doesn’t make a boutique bike. Any dentist, accountant or Simon cowl could buy one. But one where every component was hand picked by the owner, for specific reasons, doest matter if it’s got SLX/XTR, or NX/AXS, that makes the bike a one off boutique for me.

Off the shelf doesn’t cut it.

'Boutique' is all about the top end, personalisation or specialism and generally not mass production or wide product ranges. So SC, Transition, nope, all made by contract manufacturers in Asia and offering a number of bikes that are great examples of fairly standard categories. Nice bikes for sure but not 'boutique'.

Atherton bikes, yes. And something like this -

Could be bought as a full bike spec but they'd still be boutique bikes.

It feels like the rate of change of Transition prices has been greater than others 8n a similar place in the market.

Does this mean
A. They used to be comparatively cheap.
B. They’ve become relatively more expensive for no reason.
C. They’ve become relatively more expensive because of a relative increase in quality.

It's probably supply and demand - if they can demand a higher price why wouldn't they, it's a sign of their success. They may not make as many as they could sell then you don't need to discount to clear bikes plus you create an impression of demand.
'Quality' is something only the general rep for failures/issues and knowing the production processes (QA/QC etc) can tell you. I don't think price is reliably related to technical quality, but it can be in established brands.

This is fascinating, it's not actually a discussion about "quality" or the standard of any of these products, although it's framed using those terms.

This is just consumers discussing their brand perception, and who has done best with their marketing.

^ exactly

‘Offering full builds = not boutique’ is a bit silly. Plenty of super niche, mega money bikes built by folk in sheds can be bought ‘off the shelf’.

Similarly, plenty of mass market brands offer spec changes from the factory.

This is fascinating, it’s not actually a discussion about “quality” or the standard of any of these products, although it’s framed using those terms.

We'll be talking motorcycle maintenance soon.

The only overseas made carbon frames that I think of as being a level up in terms of quality are Pivot. That’s mostly based on press coverage over the years - but it could just be good marketing!

Do you think the offerings from any of the boutique brands are actually better quality than those from a big brand , particularly Scott?

Completely agree with the above about perception and branding.

Last, Actofive, Ancilotti, etc are other examples of boutique where quality seems to be very high.

Fair points, I think I've under estimated the part that marketing plays in all of this. I've no answers or corner to fight. I was just wondering why Transition are currently getting more stick for price increases than their counterparts.

I was just wondering why Transition are currently getting more stick for price increases than their counterparts.

No fight for anyone in specific, but I think it’s their relative rise to previous prices. Brands like SC, Pivot, Rocky & Yeti have always been expensive. Now you can add Transition to that.

Personally, as someone who had a Transition (Spur my other half now has) - I would not be paying £4K for a frame. I got a carbon Element full bike for nearly half that (before I stripped it of parts). I should clarify, that I wouldn’t pay £4K for any frame - and REALLY wouldn’t for a piece of junk like Yeti.

I don’t really get what boutique even is really, probably too confused with niche, which is probably where my bikes sit (Raaw & Rocky Mountain).

Yeah you certainly didn't seem to get the answers you were looking for. Yes you certainly do get many levels of carbon frame, both in materials and production quality.

This doesn't mean cheaper carbon frames are a bad thing, they can actually ride really nicely and be a great option. I ride a Marin Headlands gravel frame which is built with cheaper carbon - so to really simplify it lower modulus sheets, more small bits in simpler shapes, where the layup order/orientation likely isn't paid much attention, and it's held together with more resin. This makes it a bit heavier than some, but still light in the grand scheme of things yet also rides a bit softer with more vibration damping (mostly from having more resin). They are also comparatively quite cheap to buy. All is good. Same thing with YT really, cheaper carbon cheaper production but all safe and fun to ride, cheaper bikes.

On the other end you have Hope. Japanese fibre, made into the pre preg sheets in Manchester then cut, laid up and baked in the Hope factory. Ultimate control over the production, great QC. I have been selling them for over three years and never had a single warranty, of any kind. My own personal HB130 is the first demo we got, Large 09 I think. It's so early the size sticker is stuck behind the bottle cage so I can't see it 😂 They used to be a price premium, now they sit in line or a few hundred cheaper for a frame compared to all the Asia produced big guns.

For Transition and Santa Cruz themselves, I have sold Transition since 2012 so watched them grow and evolve over the years. The Bandit was the new bike when we first got them, a great wee trail bike mostly made from off the shelf tubes but welded into TRs design with a few neat touches. For the carbon itself, the very first carbon frame was the Covert Carbon and I think it nearly bankrupt them. It took so long to get to market and no one in big bike had told them about the plan to go 27.5 that by the time the 26" Covert came out people were too worried about being left behind. Quality was pretty good though, closer to a YT than a Hope, but solid enough. The first real carbon frame to launch was the Patrol. Great frame, lots of fun, they struggled with some bonding issues around pivot insets and cable tie points but improved them all over the years. Moving onto the round tubed Sentinel etc they had sorted most of that, still a 'higher resin' type build so still a bit cheaper than most to buy. Then the current gen frames came out - so when the Sentinel went angular then the Spur, Spire and now the Smuggler. It looks like they moved to a new vendor, the frames look much neater inside and out. Lighter weight and backed up with a better warranty. Very few warranties, still just a few BB bonding issues. But hey you all hate press fit BBs right?

TLDR - Transition pricing has moved up over time in line with increases in their quality.

However, they have now been hit hard with the shipping costs and the pound tanking over the last few months. Which is the main reason you can have a HB916 for £3700 and a Spire is £4000. I would imagine TR are monitoring this and hopefully they can bring it back down in the future.

Santa Cruz I don't sell but do work on a lot of them. Pretty much the opposite of Transitions journey. Since being sold to Pon like all large shareholder owned companies they are required to maximize returns, so have moved to Vietnam and Cambodia for their frame production both of which are usually seen as cheaper options. Quality still seems OK, perhaps a few more warranties but still very solid. But no quality increase in the last 5 ish years. Any increase in price is just economic reasons or business strategy.

As it stands now I would actually say the TR frames are higher quality than a SC frame. They are also still independently owned.

@pigyn

Thanks, I wasn't really expecting an answer to these random musings but really appreciate your reply. Really interesting to hear your thoughts on the current situation between TR and SC.

This is just consumers discussing their brand perception, and who has done best with their marketing.

Isnt marketing the thing that makes something "boutique" above anything else 🤷‍♂️, cirtainly doesn't seem to be performance. When buying anything expensive, part of that cost is buying the brands image and its extension onto yourself.

‘Offering full builds = not boutique’ is a bit silly.

Like I said, this is just my personal pov of what makes a bike "boutique". A bit like a tailor made savile row suit, Vs an of the peg top end suit. Both great suits, but one is cirtainly more interesting than the other.

As for Atherton, I've seen several of their complete builds,on the trails and in shows, but not one with custom parts, riders choice - I'm more likely to be interested in the latter as it's unique.

Same for me with cars - theirs lots of super cars out there, but, if I had the cash I'd rather go down the interesting, one of one route.

I've only ever owned one SC and that was a Bullit when they first came out in 98 and irrc it was about £1000 for the frame. I don't remember them selling complete bikes back then but they may have done.

I always think of a boutique brand being a small independent manufacturer making high-quality frames.

I have never been that impressed with the quality of Transition frames, I know of customers with them that have bearings walking in and out of the bearing seats, terrible frame alignment and the paint quality is questionable as well.

IMHO they have just put the price up as they think the market can stand it, I mean look at Yeti, £4.7K isn't it for a Turq SB160 frame?.

The paint has always been a weak point, the current carbon frames seem a lot better for this. The alu frames do seem to be getting a bit better too, but certainly for a few years there they were pretty fragile. My partner has ridden a Vanquish since launch that has been invisiframed, dropped on her turbo trainer and cracked, protection stripped off then sent for repair, re taped and now another two years down the line from that and still looking great, her Smuggler carbon faired well too, now replaced with a Sentinel carbon.

I have seen some bearing walk too, it's certainly not limited to TR and IMO all bearings pressed direct into carbon should use bearing fit compound. I do when replacing them. One of the clever bits about SC design actually, all bearings are housed in the alu links which makes servicing easier and is certainly one of the reasons they get less warranties. If I was designing a carbon frame from scratch I would try to not bond anything into it. All bearings housed in links, press fit shell and Trek style elliptical threaded inserts for the axles.

I didn't read the OP as anything to do with boutique etc, simply quality. You can have a high quality mass produced product and a low quality boutique one. If you want a high quality carbon frame then boutique is a good way to go though, so a Hope, Atherton, WeAreOne, Allied etc. All fantastic production quality and QC.

HB916 for the big bike, WAO Arrival as a trail bike, Allied BC40 for XC duties then an Echo for gravel duties. Then a separate insurance policy for the shed.

Santa Cruz .. Since being sold to Pon like all large shareholder owned companies they are required to maximize returns, so have moved to Vietnam and Cambodia for their frame production both of which are usually seen as cheaper options.

Pon Holdings is a private company rather than traded/shareholders so the financials may be different, but no doubt the brands have to make money either way.

Anyone doing well designed low volume high end carbon with close control over the manufacturing process should be making really decent stuff.
Unno, WAO, GG etc
Once you're more hands off and pushing volume, I suspect you'll get more QC issues.
I've no doubt that bigger brands have full time Eu/us employed, asia based staff monitoring QC in their factories..

When did Santa Cruz move production to Vietnam & Cambodia? Source please.

Over the past few years. Source - the stickers on the bikes

Trek and Specialized carbon also seems to have a good reputation. Or maybe their warranties are just good and the carbon is average. I wonder how the big brand stuff, with all their power in Asia presumably bringing good q/c, compares to the more expensive stuff from Hope etc. Pretty sure Stumpjumper frames are £3k - not sure a Smuggler is worth £1k more.

Very interesting post @pigyn !

How do you feel the alloy frames from these manufacturers (and others) compare in terms of manufacturing quality? Can one even compare carbon and alloy frames like this or is it too “apples vs oranges”?

I would say I'm not an expert in any of this, but I do get to see inside/around a lot of different brands, both ones I sell and ones I don't. I am doubting myself about the SC country of origin stickers now, anyone with one fancy going to check their stickers 😂

I am stuck at home with my first round of COVID and it's rubbish, feel terrible. Hence the time for big replies.

Interesting comparisons with the alu Vs carbon frames, from an non manufacturer point of view they seem to have the same issues, as in most of the problems are from QC/manufacturing. Perhaps moreso in alu. Most of the carbon frame failures we see are de-bonding, and most of the alu failures are cracks near welds, likely from mistakes by the welder. In part you can design to reduce this, by not having areas of multiple passes etc but at the end of the day, low paid workers on the other side of the world to where the product is going to be used, being pushed hard to get things out the door, mistakes will be made and things will break in a few years use.

As for ranking alu frames it's so hard to say, Banshee and Transition are fantastic but both have suffered in the past with the issues above. And both have designed it out now.

Orbea aluminium frames are welded by robots in Portugal, and robots tend to be very consistent.

Perhaps Jameso wants to chime in and correct me as this is really his area of expertise if I remember right.

Wherever SC are manufactured in the far east it’s in a facility they have an element on ownership / control over rather than a third party making their designs. One thing that has struck me about both the Alu and carbon (C not CC) frames I’ve had from SC is the quality, attention to detail and decent paintwork. There’s a recent Pinkbike podcast with their ceo which is an interesting listen.  I’d not class them as boutique either, in the same way that a Porsche will never be the same as a Ferrari or Lamborghini. High end but relatively speaking mass produced.

When did Santa Cruz move production to Vietnam & Cambodia? Source please.

They haven't.

Orbea make nice frames but as my brother owns one he and many others will tell you about issues with an aluminium bolt which they refuse to replace despite selling a steel replacement as it’s known to snap and distort the rear triangle.

Fwiw having had a Santa Cruz and transition I don’t see any tangible difference in quality. Transition support was very good and I think post sales support makes a difference. I’m not sticking up for transition - recent prices are ridiculous. I paid £1800 for a complete aluminium smuggler four years ago with revelations and ok basic components.

Current US to UK pricing is ridiculous. It
Will be interesting to see if/how that drops especially as the likes of YT drop big discounts off their bikes. A Jeffsy with Fox 36 st Swiss wheels etc for £2899 (plus posting) is hard to argue against.

IMHO they have just put the price up as they think the market can stand it

Clearly this.

They weren't cheap before and I don't believe for a second they were on a tight margin then. It's just greedy and really poorly timed. Something they're going to live to regret IMO.

And to address the OP from a slightly different angle, it's interesting to contrast the "hierarchy" of carbon frames in road compared to MTB.

In road the frames are generally pitched as composite, carbon or hi-mod carbon and buyers have a broad understanding of the differences. There are even T-numbers for the Toray carbon fibre they use.

Rarely see that in MTB, instead we are expected to assume that we're getting the good stuff because we're paying £xxxx.

Maybe Santa Cruz's C bikes are lower-mod and their CC bike higher-mod carbon, but I am only surmising based on characteristics I understand from road bikes.
https://www.santacruzbicycles.com/en-GB/tech/materials

Don't we deserve a bit more info if we're gonna pay that much?

it was me that made the comment on the other thread about transition vs SC

let me just clear it up what i meant

SC as far as im concerned has the best QC, finish and back up in the UK - the paint is solid, the parts are solid, everything feels well put together and general feel of the bike is as top line as your going to get (mass produced at least), i know people slag them off, i get it, but they hold the value much better than anything else and still pretty desireable even when a new model comes out.....

transition, great ethos and philosophy being rider owned, and great uk back up, sometimes hard to get spares (maybe covid backlog who knows) - but quality isnt in the same league, ive always accepted this as the price used to reflect it, now in my opinion youd be mad to buy a transition over a SC, (all modern bikes ride well and all almost identical geo), transition are great to get in touch with with issues (even over in the US), but the frames i dont feel are as well made, the paint isnt great, the bolts are made of cheese, and you just dont get that same premium feel as SC

i think for the money if the frames were 3k then they are great, (still dear mind!), but up at 4k a sentinel is now 300 quid dearer than a SC megatower for example, is pretty nuts....

they ride really well and other than a few QC issues and paint/bolts etc i really do love the sentinel i have now, great geo, and a good all round bike, but at 4k i will not be buying the next version of it, money (if i can even afford one next year at this current rate of ridiculousness pricing wise) i would head back to a SC or similar, and knowing in the future ill get more back for it selling 2nd hand

hierarchy? im not sure id class it as that, but SC is a premium brand over transition imo, and ive not a problem with this at all, given transitions *were* always cheaper and seemed a relative good buy

and its not just transition they all need to take a long look at themselves - 4599 for a sb160?! similar for a orbea, trek

specialized seem to have gone away from frame only this last few years bar the enduro (£4k)

they are all ridiculous and nobody can justify the cost to me

i have not spoke to a single person that is willing to pay ~£4k for any sort of frame at RRP, i dont know who they are expecting to sell at this price in quantities?! what is the target audience here? most people never massively grumbled at 3k for a frame only, but this latest hike is just nuts, in terrible times

surely someone has to grasp that people just will not pay daft money for frames alone like this, certainly not in big numbers, i expect if they kept the frames at ~3k ish they would sell a hell of a lot more than at 4k ish and surely selling more quantity for less is a better model than selling hardly any for more?! i dunno maybe im wrong, but i have no kids, decent income in the house and i point blank refuse to pay these daft amounts now, id prefer to run my current one into the ground than give in paying over 4k for a frame! and im pretty sure im not alone in this thinking

only option i can see is they are going to have lots of surplus and having to take 20% off the rrp to bring them back in line with what they were going for before all these crazy price increases

I don’t think bike manufacturers are looking to sell lots of frame only units though - they presumably make some extra margin when they sell a whole bike with components. Particularly with Santa Cruz (I think it was)you could see this with some high end models when for a time you could buy all the same parts at RRP and build a bike cheaper.

That said - the new Transition full builds aren’t good value for money at all - where a lot of people in the middle of buyers wealth / disposable income wise might have gone with slightly more premium brands in the past - I think a lot might move down the chain a bit and / or not change bikes as regularly.

exactly - its not just the frame only audience who are getting shafted (but most people i know buy frame only and not full bikes), any one in the market for a bike at 4-5k will not pay that sort of money for average at best components if they know anything about bikes, and probably 2 years ago was around half the price for the same build/spec......this is why ive always bought frame only, yes you pay a premium to get the frame only initially, but shopping around you'd get a really well specced bike (chose your own components) for a similar price to a full branded build.....now even that's not feasible as the frame only are so daft you cant even get around it that way...

i think exactly what youve said the target audience of the past is going, people will simply just not bother and hold onto the current rides for an extra year or two until things either crash or get back to realistic

You need to be clear about what we are rating things against.

As for Carbon Frames, yes things like Santa Cruz and Transition are fancier but in terms of quality - the Scott I've just bought is exceptional, the build, the paint quality, the fit and finish, are exceptional, I am really impressed.

Speicalized and Giant (quiet at the back!) similarly, their 'quality' is very very high.

Just as with cars - the best quality cars are Toyotas, not Bugattis or Ferraris.

no they dont have dashboards made of material you can lick, but in true Engineering 'quality' terms, Toyota are still, and have been for a long time, the standard.

Shows how much profit margin there must be in the frames if CRC can cut the price by 50% on a '23 frame with the new '23 Rockshock shock.

https://www.chainreactioncycles.com/nukeproof-reactor-290-carbon-frame-rockshox-2022/rp-prod213218

That uses T700/T800 - so not the highest end Toray stuff.

Isn't the frame linked above a 2022? In any case, that doesn't necessarily mean they're still profiting. It just means they're happy they've made their planned margin across the whole batch and selling off 2022 stock at a small loss is better than having it sit about costing money.

It's very hard to objectively/quantitatively define the quality of bike frames.

Tour Magazine are probably doing the best, with a range of testing equipment I've heard described as rivalling most manufacturers.

However Tour Magazine is only published in German, and they're only interested in road bikes.

Not sure who we have looking at MTB frames - Hambini 😀 ?

New NP Reactor must be coming out soon, but yeah - I imagine they're selling those off at cost or a bit more.

Having started in late 80’s early 90’s when every boutique brand was a frame, not a bike, my personal definition of boutique would be a bike built from frame up, regardless of brand.

Soooo, winspace and light bicycle are "boutique" then. And XACD, Waltly, Kinesis (old kinesis, not new kinesis UK)

Think the "buy a frame and build it, then it's boutique" model needs some serious thought!