What's a bikes main selling point?

JGTR

Herdwick wrote:

JGTR wrote:

So why aren't all bike the same generic colour then?

Because will put a lot of people off of the sport, it has nothing to do with functionality, in fact if it where the same colour would be cheaper

Exactly, colour, how it looks, marketing and other things that do not directly affect the performance all play a significant part in the sale of a bike.

supersonic

JGTR wrote:

Herdwick wrote:

JGTR wrote:

So why aren't all bike the same generic colour then?

Because will put a lot of people off of the sport, it has nothing to do with functionality, in fact if it where the same colour would be cheaper

Exactly, colour, how it looks, marketing and other things that do not directly affect the performance all play a significant part in the sale of a bike.

For some, it depends on the buyer - plenty here don't care for it, others do. There is no doubt though a market concerning looks, so manufacturers will play to that. I'd prefer all my alloy frames raw alloy - cheaper, and lighter.

rockmonkeysc

supersonic wrote:

I'd prefer all my alloy frames raw alloy - cheaper, and lighter.

The Intense M9 was over 100g lighter in raw than painted!

supersonic

Just goes to show. Manufacturers will go to huge lengths to point out their new frames with grams shaved off places here and there, yet not painting it can save a relatively substantial amount. I've seen more than that too - some frames that have a few thick coats then a lacquer can put on half a pound.

Herdwick

supersonic wrote:

I'd prefer all my alloy frames raw alloy - cheaper, and lighter.

Don't know raw, explain

Jonesinamilion

Herdwick wrote:

supersonic wrote:

I'd prefer all my alloy frames raw alloy - cheaper, and lighter.

Don't know raw, explain

Top bike, is that an optical illusion or is front wheel smaller than the rear?

If so, could you explain to an idiot like me why and what benefits...

Herdwick

no benefits at all , I notice too after posting it, it's the shot angle, both wheels are 26ers...

supersonic

I think that looks fantastic in raw! (not that I care about looks...)

I get that illusion with some pics too - however some bikes have been made with different wheel sizes.

Herdwick

the handle bar is a bit turned to the right so it creates that just a bit further back illusion, just checked my ''smartphone'' and notice the other shots,
The 456 shows some signs of rust at places, mostly at the down tube where the laquer is chipped and in the weld joints, another plus for raw frames, getting better by time while painted ones ageing like milk.
no worries about rust, I am sure my bones will shatter before the frame does

Crazyjenkins01

TBH at the moment it would be cost!
Looks are a big part but not a necessity, but the test ride advice is the winner I think. if it feels right, it is right.

lostboysaint

Fit and ride.

Even the fit can be tailored to some extent but if that alters the ride (which it often does) then it's not a good thing. It's all about how it rides, first and foremost, the rest can all be sorted to suit!

rockmonkeysc

Anodised frames are as good as raw. Anodising adds very little weight and gives a matt finish which can be very durable.

StinkinHippy

For first.. If I jump on a bike and feel fundamentally off balance then I won't buy it.

Then I have to admit it's an equal toss up between frame looks and supplied equipment. I know components can be replaced, but if I'm buying a bike I intend to ride it as supplied for as long as possible.

Brand isn't really a consideration for me.. I'll ride whatever name so long as I can enjoy it.