Ribble Stealth vs DeRosa 838, the same or urban myth?
Comments
-
Bordersroadie wrote:The paint job on the DeRosa is stunning and certainly worth a premium, in my opinion, but not the premium that customers pay. That is almost all markup.
The frames are identical apart from paint and I daresay the Ribble is marginally lighter as a result.
It goes against all business logic that Xpace would either make to order separately or stock separately two different qualities of lay-up/carbon from their one mold, just so that customer a or b can claim a small (and unsubstantiated) marketing USP compared to the other; it's nonsense in the truest meaning of the word.
Understand your comments, however, two thought;
Its "mould", not mold, and also, as for the business side, it would be very easy for xpace to mass produce x amount of carbon layup 1 and x amount of carbon layup 2. Not difficult?0 -
I am going to hit De Rosa head on with this, and again get back on this thread.0
-
Here's a thought for you guys have you ever considered that they are the same frame but that De Rosa and Ribble actually collaborated in the design? Not unheard of when you look at the way modern industry works.0
-
De Rosa guy 1: Heya luigi! You wanna getta da help to designa da bike?
De Rosa guy 2: Yeah! How abouta Colin from Preston?Insta: ATEnduranceCoaching
ABCC Cycling Coach0 -
Not saying they did Nap but stranger things have happened.0
-
ALIHISGREAT wrote:might be the same mould.. but the same production process?
Weighing the two frames would give you an indication of whether the materials used and process are the same. Significantly different weights mean different material/process. Same weight means likely to be same materials/process.0 -
Depends where you are - actually, this is a complicated one!Dizeee wrote:Its "mould", not mold,
Looks like in general, people in the UK use "mould" for both the shape-making thing and the stuff that grows on your 2-week old bread, while in the US people usually use "mold" for both. But Wikipedia claims that Americans sometimes use "mould" for the shape-thing and "mold" for the fungus, while people in New Zealand apparently do it the other way around - "mold" is the shape-thing and "mould" is the fungus!
It does strike me that if there are two spellings in common use and two completely different meanings, we should globally settle on one word meaning one thing and the other word meaning the other... Some enforcement required. But forcing the Americans to use A4 and metric should come first...0 -
Dizeee wrote:Bordersroadie wrote:The paint job on the DeRosa is stunning and certainly worth a premium, in my opinion, but not the premium that customers pay. That is almost all markup.
The frames are identical apart from paint and I daresay the Ribble is marginally lighter as a result.
It goes against all business logic that Xpace would either make to order separately or stock separately two different qualities of lay-up/carbon from their one mold, just so that customer a or b can claim a small (and unsubstantiated) marketing USP compared to the other; it's nonsense in the truest meaning of the word.
Understand your comments, however, two thought;
Its "mould", not mold, and also, as for the business side, it would be very easy for xpace to mass produce x amount of carbon layup 1 and x amount of carbon layup 2. Not difficult?
I'm not convinced of Bordersroadie's argument either. If the factory can offer a degree of customisation it makes them more attractive as a supplier. And DeRosa want to offer something different to the factory standard to give people reason to pay more for their product.0 -
earth wrote:Dizeee wrote:Bordersroadie wrote:The paint job on the DeRosa is stunning and certainly worth a premium, in my opinion, but not the premium that customers pay. That is almost all markup.
The frames are identical apart from paint and I daresay the Ribble is marginally lighter as a result.
It goes against all business logic that Xpace would either make to order separately or stock separately two different qualities of lay-up/carbon from their one mold, just so that customer a or b can claim a small (and unsubstantiated) marketing USP compared to the other; it's nonsense in the truest meaning of the word.
Understand your comments, however, two thought;
Its "mould", not mold, and also, as for the business side, it would be very easy for xpace to mass produce x amount of carbon layup 1 and x amount of carbon layup 2. Not difficult?
I'm not convinced of Bordersroadie's argument either. If the factory can offer a degree of customisation it makes them more attractive as a supplier. And DeRosa want to offer something different to the factory standard to give people reason to pay more for their product.
I'd be really surprised if they offered different layups, and then went to the bother of finding out if one was better than the other.0 -
Until a little while ago I was totally convinced that they were exactly the same frames. I have now looked carefully at two pictures and it is quite clear that the r872 has a curved rear v the De Rosa's straight rear I am convinced that they share a common heritage as there are so many aspects that are identical (too many in my view to be coincidence).
I do think some of the huge difference in price is due to brand recognition and for some people that has a higher financial value than others. It is really down to an individual. Having looked at this I think if I were to choose I would go for the Ribble because there is so much I could add to it and stay under the price of the De Rosa (eg Ultegra DI2 and Ksyrium SLRs etc...).0
