Thank god for retro bikes

[legrandefromage]

It was red, specilaized, £1095 and on the second floor at Grafham Cycling

It had Suntour forks with steel stanchions.

There was too much pressed steel for the price.

Personally I think there's a lot of good value out there if you rootle around but there's a shite load of overpriced chuff too. But as already said, it's gone too far from the simple engineering form a bike takes.

Go 'retro' (in reality, secondhand) and you can build a decent enough bike for 10% of a typical new bike. I've built a 2003 Marin full suss with discs, DT swiss wheels etc for about £250 all in. My 1998 version of the same bike cost about £80 so far whereas I spent £1300 or so for the 2003 Wolf Ridge with the Hope upgrade and sold it a few months later - 'cos it was shit compared to an earlier Mt. Vision I'd tried to emulate.

Its an odd world out there but with 30 years of well manufactured bikes and parts swirling around, you can build what you want, how you want for as little or as much money as you are prepared to spend.

 

[Neil]

I wish this tired assumption that bikes now are hideously overpriced and no better than the mythical "BITD" could just be put to bed...

Well there's always going to be some people who prefer bikes from BITD - whether that's simplicity, golden era / nostalgia, or, I suppose, the argument that retrobikes are notionally cheaper (up to a point) to enthuse over.

All the same, there's a point in that the ceiling and prices of enthusiasts bikes have probably shot up quite a bit - exploiting GAS and those that just want to throw money at something as a proxy for excellence, to disguise their mediocre abilities or potential.

When that's pointed out - which to be equitable - is fair comment, people say "Well factor in inflation..." but when you do that at the bottom end of the market and for entry level stuff, it doesn't work quite the same. The mid and upper have stretched, the bottom end and entry level haven't really moved much - because as I pointed out, for people who aren't that involved with bikes, there's some perspectives that won't easily shift in terms of budget. Some people won't consider more than £100 for a new bike, and some people would be hugely put off that they'd have to spend mega-bucks to get something that's competent off-road.

For myself, I don't have any real interest in modern bikes, whilst I've still got serviceable old ones, I appreciate longevity, but I'm not about to try and assert that my rigid, steel bikes are just as good off-road as modern, competent, FS "rigs". But I don't think the inflation argument comprehensively stacks-up across the piece. I also agree with your point, that actually, for some price points, bikes have effectively become cheaper - once you actually factor in that inflation should have really shifted some price points, and that that wasn't really tenable to the audience, but competition still applies, bikes have had to evolve to having "more" for inflation-adjusted "less".

I don't think that modern bikes are necessarily hideously overpriced. I do think they cannily exploit a willing accomplis, in a demograph that's more than willing to throw money at something, with the perception it will automatically improve either their enjoyment, or performance, and as a result, the median price spent by "enthusiasts" has shifted in a manner with no direct connection to inflation.

 

[legrandefromage]

Thank god for second hand!!

 

[PurpleFrog]

I don't think that modern bikes are necessarily hideously overpriced. I do think they cannily exploit a willing accomplis, in a demograph that's more than willing to throw money at something, with the perception it will automatically improve either their enjoyment, or performance, and as a result, the median price spent by "enthusiasts" has shifted in a manner with no direct connection to inflation.

Do we, in reality, have any idea how much "enthusiasts" typically spend? Aren't the people who pay an extra £200 for a Murray-designed Voodoo instead of a Carrera at Halfords "enthusiasts"?

I think that like an earlier poster you maybe confusing the magazines and BikeRadar with reality.

 

[Neil]

I don't think that modern bikes are necessarily hideously overpriced. I do think they cannily exploit a willing accomplis, in a demograph that's more than willing to throw money at something, with the perception it will automatically improve either their enjoyment, or performance, and as a result, the median price spent by "enthusiasts" has shifted in a manner with no direct connection to inflation.

Do we, in reality, have any idea how much "enthusiasts" typically spend? Aren't the people who pay an extra £200 for a Murray-designed Voodoo instead of a Carrera at Halfords "enthusiasts"?

I think that like an earlier poster you maybe confusing the magazines and BikeRadar with reality.

I'm not confusing anything.

I don't read MTB magazines - least not for well over a decade (realistically, nearly / nearing two), nor do I do "the BikeRadar". My only appreciation of monies spent on modern MTBs comes from the loadsamoney brandishing of those that seem to think they've invented it, and aren't shy about saying so.

 

[PurpleFrog]

I don't think that modern bikes are necessarily hideously overpriced. I do think they cannily exploit a willing accomplis, in a demograph that's more than willing to throw money at something, with the perception it will automatically improve either their enjoyment, or performance, and as a result, the median price spent by "enthusiasts" has shifted in a manner with no direct connection to inflation.

Do we, in reality, have any idea how much "enthusiasts" typically spend? Aren't the people who pay an extra £200 for a Murray-designed Voodoo instead of a Carrera at Halfords "enthusiasts"?

I think that like an earlier poster you maybe confusing the magazines and BikeRadar with reality.

I'm not confusing anything.

I don't read MTB magazines - least not for well over a decade (realistically, nearly / nearing two), nor do I do "the BikeRadar". My only appreciation of monies spent on modern MTBs comes from the loadsamoney brandishing of those that seem to think they've invented it, and aren't shy about saying so.

And how many of these high-end bikes have you seen to conclude that we're in danger of being over-run with Carbon Bling??? Or the Titanium Peril, or whatever? My own suspicion is that the results I get from snooping bike sales sites using "popularity" first like this

http://www.edinburghbicycle.com/browse/ ... popularity

..are a pretty reasonable sample of what people are really buying. In this case the first 12 bikes are at the inflation adjusted price of Lava Dome or a lot less.

 

[Neil]

Do we, in reality, have any idea how much "enthusiasts" typically spend? Aren't the people who pay an extra £200 for a Murray-designed Voodoo instead of a Carrera at Halfords "enthusiasts"?

I think that like an earlier poster you maybe confusing the magazines and BikeRadar with reality.

I'm not confusing anything.

I don't read MTB magazines - least not for well over a decade (realistically, nearly / nearing two), nor do I do "the BikeRadar". My only appreciation of monies spent on modern MTBs comes from the loadsamoney brandishing of those that seem to think they've invented it, and aren't shy about saying so.

And how many of these high-end bikes have you seen to conclude that we're in danger of being over-run with Carbon Bling??? Or the Titanium Peril, or whatever? My own suspicion is that the results I get from snooping bike sales sites using "popularity" first like this

http://www.edinburghbicycle.com/browse/ ... popularity

..are a pretty reasonable sample of what people are really buying. In this case the first 12 bikes are at the inflation adjusted price of Lava Dome or a lot less.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick, I'm not arguing that we're about to be overrun with contemporary exotica. Nor that plenty of buyers' budgets are remarkably swayed by modern day excesses - in fact quite the opposite.

Merely that inflation, alone, doesn't adequately explain the dramatic burgeoning in cost of some modern day "rigs", and either cause or effect, in that there appears to be a lot more vocal buyers, whose wallet clearly exceeds talent or effort.

So what, you may say, and I'd agree - that's merely arbitrary observation.

 

[gradeAfailure]

It was red, specilaized, £1095 and on the second floor at Grafham Cycling

It had Suntour forks with steel stanchions.

There was too much pressed steel for the price.

I'm sorry, but again I call BS, or selective memory! Most expensive bike in Specialized's 2011 range with Suntour forks with steel stanchions that was red, was the Hardrock Pro Disc, at £599, not £1095.

Merely that inflation, alone, doesn't adequately explain the dramatic burgeoning in cost of some modern day "rigs", and either cause or effect, in that there appears to be a lot more vocal buyers, whose wallet clearly exceeds talent or effort.

I read this a lot, especially on here, and it just smacks of jealousy. So people have to reach your required standard before they are allowed to spend a specific amount on a bike? Get over yourself...

I'm going to clarify my position here; I have a great retro bike that I bought for £35 on eBay and use to commute on every day I can. I would have to spend a minimum of ten times that in order to get something comparable new - in fact, it would probably be this: http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/vitu ... -prod81001

If you want something simple, basic, durable, then retro stuff is the way to go! However, when I want to hammer down rock-strewn rough descents, hit kickers, take drop-offs, batter through rooty singletrack at warp speed - then give me my modern bike any day. It's not a skill compensator, it's a skill enhancer...!

So, to go back to the OP, magazines exist to tell people about (and advertise/sell) the latest and greatest tech, and the stuff at the sharp end will always be eye-wateringly expensive! In 1991 I couldn't comprehend anyone who could spend over £1000 on the Yo Eddy frameset I read about in MBUK, but plenty did. And I'm sure there were people then saying "£1000 on a frameset; jeez, when did riding bikes in the woods get so expensive and commercialised..!?"

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose...

 

[Neil]

Merely that inflation, alone, doesn't adequately explain the dramatic burgeoning in cost of some modern day "rigs", and either cause or effect, in that there appears to be a lot more vocal buyers, whose wallet clearly exceeds talent or effort.

I read this a lot, especially on here, and it just smacks of jealousy. So people have to reach your required standard before they are allowed to spend a specific amount on a bike? Get over yourself...

Um, I have - and if you hadn't snipped the very next line of my post, there wouldn't be quite the same need to wind your neck in.

Here, I'll reinstate it for you...

So what, you may say, and I'd agree - that's merely arbitrary observation.

I'd already put my opinion in context, you decided to snip that, so you could have something to gripe against.

So I'm going to return the favour: physician - heal thyself.

 

[PurpleFrog]

I'm going to clarify my position here; I have a great retro bike that I bought for £35 on eBay and use to commute on every day I can. I would have to spend a minimum of ten times that in order to get something comparable new...

If you want something simple, basic, durable, then retro stuff is the way to go!

There is a difference between "Used bikes cost less than new ones" and "Modern new bikes are overpriced compared to BITD"...

Used stuff costs less. Is this is a mystery? I didn't think so, but apparently yes!