What the hell happened to "normal" bicycles?

YeehaaMcgee

Tell you what, keep the bike, I'll have your weekly wage instead.

stubs

I work very hard for my wages. Facebook and porntube dont just watch themselves you know.

supersonic

http://www.winstanleysbikes.co.uk/produ ... tAodPHcAyw

YeehaaMcgee

Sonic, surely you have some kind of insight into this. Why can we not buy a bike, essentially the same as one that retailed for around £450 over 15 years ago, for next to nothing now? With the developments in manufacturing, those parts would cost pretty much nothing to build now, you could churn them out by the shedload.

supersonic

You can - but are few and far between. The reason is they don't sell. The average joe who walks into Halfords on the like sees full suspension and disc brakes for £100-£200 on BSOs, and this makes up a huge proportion of sales in the UK. Looks have a lot more to do with the minds of consumers than actual performance.

£450 in 1998 would probably score you a 7 or 8 speed drivetrain, totally shite fork (though were many rigid ones too), V brakes, steel frame (though alloy were just about coming out mainstream in the lower/mid price range), unsealed hubs, square taper BBs, plastic tyres and so on. Pretty much the same as this:

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/rockrider-51 ... 67116.html

or this:

http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stor ... yId_165499

Though that gets cheap discs.

YeehaaMcgee

Can't remember the tyres, but the spec was mainly Shimano STX-RC and LX, 8 speed, the hubs are original STX ones, the cranks were LX, rigid fork, aluminium frame, V-brakes.
Basically, a better bike than most entry level MTBs these days.

supersonic

It's the big brands that are taking the piss most with entry level HTs. But the Decathlon stuff is pretty good, their £450 Rockrider 8.0 has a good frame, light wheels, 27 speed, hydraulic fork and brakes. Similarly Carrera and Voodoo, and of course NOS from Pauls Cyles.

The Rookie

I agree with SS here, it's the lure of the 'useless spec' that is killing the vaue bikes we could have. For the same money as a 'one step up from the worst' FS we could have rigids (ally frame, steel fork) with V's and moderately decent components.

With an extra £40-60 this could be turned into a worthwhile bike along the lines you want, but 95% of people would then go for the one with 'suspension'.
http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stor ... yId_165499

YeehaaMcgee

The Rookie wrote:

I agree with SS here,

I'm not disagreeing with him, I'm just annoyed at things. Which is my usual state, really.

97th choice

I hear the vw beetle, Lada riva and Morris Oxford are still being made, you could get one of those cheap enough too.

YeehaaMcgee

97th choice wrote:

I hear the vw beetle, Lada riva and Morris Oxford are still being made, you could get one of those cheap enough too.

I don't want one of those though. I was trying to find a bargaineous bicycle for a friend.

97th choice

Sorry, thought you were having a rant on a forum, because things ain't like they used to be when you were young.

But, I'd still go for the carrera subway, or SS's alternative.

YeehaaMcgee

97th choice wrote:

SS's alternative.

What, Nicklouse?
I don't think Nick wants to be ridden by my mate.

97th choice

You never know.

mattshrops

not really following the logic..

12.5 gm golden Virginia approx. 45p in '95 -Now £5-6 pounds??(don't actually smoke now)
AND it was half an ounce back then..

Pint of bitter approx. 50p - Now £3 ish

Average car £...

Average house £..

You get the idea. BUT a £450 bike in 95 should now cost £200????
More like £1500 -(Thinks XTC composite hardtail 29er.or some such)

YeehaaMcgee

I mean if they'd kept manufacturing the parts, rather than introducing newer budget bits, that cost more and don;t perform as well.

Clank

mattshrops wrote:

Average car £...

But like bikes, look at all the extra gubbins that your car now comes stacked with.

However, I can go and buy an unloaded Dacia for half the price of a Fiesta.

Which is marginally less than the '95 plate Fiesta sold for, only with slightly more technology packed into it (man, have engines moved on since the 90's).

Which sorta proves Yeehaa's point.

YeehaaMcgee

I'm not really after proving a point, just kind of discussing, ranting, or shouting from a soap box. Something like that.
But, thanks!

97th choice

Don't panic, Clank's analogy is wrong.

YeehaaMcgee

Why? Surely thing what were once expensive items filter down and become commodities.

pesky_jones

Yeah I don't like that analogy, mattshrops had it right.

YeehaaMcgee

His is bang out of order though. Tobacco prices have gone through the roof because of huge taxation, house prices have been inflated artificially, and as for cars, well, Clank pretty much summed that up
but none of those are bikes.

The Rookie

Raw material prices have gone up, even an equivalent bike now is better than back then (weight primarily, and that is mostly down to an ally frame which costs more).

Fair to assume a £250 bike 20 years ago should reasonably be at least £500 now.

I do wich I could still get a Mars bar (old larger size) for 8p....but it won't happen!

YeehaaMcgee

What are you blathering on about, the bike that started this pondering has an aluminium frame!

markhewitt1978

The Rookie wrote:

Raw material prices have gone up, even an equivalent bike now is better than back then (weight primarily, and that is mostly down to an ally frame which costs more).

Fair to assume a £250 bike 20 years ago should reasonably be at least £500 now.

I do wich I could still get a Mars bar (old larger size) for 8p....but it won't happen!

Quite, bikes aren't like computers where you generally expect the price to go down.

Anyway to answer the original question, hybrids are now the 'normal' bikes, they are reasonable on the road and reasonable on the surfaces which pass for cycle provision. The Trek FX series for example is their best selling type of bike because it's suitable for everybody.

In general people don't really understand the cost of bicycles, I like many others thought I could get a cheap but reasonable bike for a couple of hundred quid. But you really can't. I ended up spending £350 on a bike which was well built but still base level.

97th choice

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Why? Surely thing what were once expensive items filter down and become commodities.

They do, but clank's analogy that a basic dacia uses the same technology as a 1995 ford fiesta doesn't hold up to scrutinity, if it did then the dacia would look like a 1995 fiesta. Develoment work and design on cars costs a fortune. even budget models

Woodmonkey

The Rookie wrote:

Fair to assume a £250 bike 20 years ago should reasonably be at least £500 now.

I do wich I could still get a Mars bar (old larger size) for 8p....but it won't happen!

Mars bars were a lot more than 8p 20 years ago.
Cd's were £12-£15 20 years ago, they are £8-£10 now not sure it's relevant, just saying like!

YeehaaMcgee

Exactly. Just saying "it's expected" is shite. That's not a reason, it's an acceptance of fate, blindly following the status quo, like unthinking sheep herder i to an abattoir.
Question things, use your noggins. Why should the cost of something rise over time, if you're making the same thing. Economies of scale should bring the costs lower and lower and lower.

pesky_jones

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Exactly. Just saying "it's expected" is shite. That's not a reason, it's an acceptance of fate, blindly following the status quo, like unthinking sheep herder i to an abattoir.
Question things, use your noggins. Why should the cost of something rise over time, if you're making the same thing. Economies of scale should bring the costs lower and lower and lower.

Pipe dreams. It's a nice thought but if the vast majority of consumers didnt do exactly what you have just described then it wouldnt happen. But they do, and we make it too easy.

Is it accepting fate to accept that we accept our fate? That's what I've done.

97th choice

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Exactly. Just saying "it's expected" is shite. That's not a reason, it's an acceptance of fate, blindly following the status quo, like unthinking sheep herder i to an abattoir.
Question things, use your noggins. Why should the cost of something rise over time, if you're making the same thing. Economies of scale should bring the costs lower and lower and lower.

Your design costs become less and less as your amortise them over a greater number but at some point your tooling and production costs will level out, or increase based on material costs. Your fixed costs will vary in line with inflation but as a percentage of total costs won't change too much as the design gets older.

All this ignores market forces though.