The value in CF bikes

Mikka
Posts: 417
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:20 pm
Location: Brisbane

The value in CF bikes

Postby Mikka » Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:37 am

Modern CF bikes are so friggin' fragile you need a velvet glove just to bump them ... I think they're a joke pulled on consumers by the manufacturers ... who just LOVE the regular sales ... There is $100 worth of CF and resin in your $6500 Cervelo frame .... and it breaks like an egg if you knock it.
I made this comment in another section ... Hopefully it's OK here ... How did I work out the cost of the CF and resin? It's alimentary, dear Watson. Go to Weightweenies ... and check the frame weights of the CF bikes. The lighter Cervelo R3's come in under 900g. There are other CF bikes around 1300g frameweight. For ease of maths, lets use 1000g.

A quality lamination will have above 50% fibre to total weight ratio. Under 50% and the properties of the resin start to dictate the laminate .. which is BAD .. because the resin has a tensile strength of approx 8000 psi, while the fibre is over 150 000 psi ultimate. Over 66% is too dry, and the laminate will split like a tree without enough sap. Let's assume these fabricators are good .. and they get 60% fibre to weight ratio.

So, for a 1000g frame, there is 600g CF and 400g resin. Looking at the weaves, I'd guesstimate that the cloth is 300gram/metre. 200g/m might be a bit thin, so they'd need extra layers to build up thickness. More work. At 300g/m, that gives us 2 sq metres of CF cloth. Price varies with quality, country of origin, properties of the fibres etc. CF is hugely variable. But for now, we'll assume the factory are paying a respectable $30/m for a high quality cloth. The price of resin could range from $4/kg up to $20/kg... depending on what's used. Let's assume they used $20/kg resin. 400g will cost $8. That gives us $68 in CF and resin to build a frame.

In the real world, the manufacturer is buying CF by the container load, and resin also by the container load. They may be mixing the resin inhouse to get the properties they desire. So it's entirely possible that the CF is costing them $18/m and the resin costs $10/kg for high end goop .. or $4 a kg for low end goop.

I'd guesstimate the manufacturer is making that frame for $65. S/he's selling the frame to Cervelo or similar firm for $650 .. which gives him a 1000% profit margin .. on the materials. Cervelo need to make a profit, and they need to cover their overheads, promotion, sponsorship, warrtanty claims, R & D for the previous frames, R & D for the future frames, and the cost of the tooling. I'd guess they make about $650 profit/ frame, and set aside $650 to cover their costs.

So they sell this frame to an importer for around $2000 .. which gives them the profit they need, covers their costs, and pays the manufacturer. The importer needs to cover costs and make a profit. S/he sells the frame to the retailer for around $4000. The retail adds his/her margin, and the frame sells for around $6500.

And that is how $65 worth of CF and resin ... ends up retailing for $6500. People are paying the retailer, and the importer around $4500. Cervelo is getting $2000, which covers the frame, overheads, and profit. As times get tough .. if Cervelo are smart .. they might sell DIRECT to cyclists. They could sell their frames for $3000 deliver to ANY major population centre in the world .. and EVERYBODY would win, including them.

User avatar
vitualis
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:15 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Postby vitualis » Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:53 am

I think that it is widely established that the cost of manufacture of a bicycle frame, especially one that is mostly created in an automated process is very low. High end CF frames are a luxury item and you pay for it.

If you are willing to go to Taiwan and buy unbranded frames from the frame manufacturers you can probably get a stupendously good discount. However, you are not going to get any warranty whatsoever and there will be no "bling" factor.

I think that the objection that sogood had about your post is your talk about the fragility of CF frames. I agree with him... they are not fragile. They are not as resistant to damage to a much heavier steel or aluminium alloy frame but they are not going to be falling to bits, even with the usual abuse from a mostly careless recreational rider. Furthermore, if you buy a steel or aluminium alloy frame that starts to approach the weight of a CF frame, they loose much of the resistance to damage that their heavier versions have.

Regards.
Michael Tam
Photos: Michael's bicycle obsession
2009 Pegoretti Responsorium Ciavete Custom :: 1982/3 Colnago Super :: 2006 Cannondale Six13 Pro :: Late 1980s Repco Superlite

User avatar
sogood
Posts: 17168
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby sogood » Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:59 am

Computer softwares are nothing but arrangements of magnetic particles on my HD or little pits on plastic DVD/CDs. How dare they charge four figure $$$$s on them!!!

At least a CF frame is not virtual and I can touch and feel it.

That's it, I rest my case. :P
Bianchi, Ridley, Tern, Montague and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.

Mikka
Posts: 417
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:20 pm
Location: Brisbane

Postby Mikka » Sat Dec 13, 2008 12:41 pm

vitualis wrote:I think that the objection that sogood had about your post is your talk about the fragility of CF frames. I agree with him... they are not fragile.
An inspection of the tailplane of a Boeing airliner revealed fracturing of the Carbon Fibre skin. Close examination showed it was due to impact. As people take airline safety seriously ... engineers worked backwards to determine what was the cause. They discovered that a mechanic had dropped his SPANNER accidently, while working on the rudder. This was sufficient to cause serious fracturing in the laminate of the horizontal stabiliser. Since then, there are directives regarding the places a mechanic can stand .. to ensure they don't drop anything in a vulnerable spot ... and special tools that have rubber coatings are used ... to reduce the likelihood of fracturing if they're dropped. Bike frames have a lot less structural integrity. Yes, a CF bike frame is fragile.

In addition .. you will NEVER see a black composite aircraft. Why? Because the resin goes soft when it gets hot. Tests have shown that a black object in direct sunlight, with an ambient temperature of 30 degrees .... will heat to over 100 degrees centigrade. Most resins have a Heat Distortion Temperature of around 80 degrees centigrade. There are SOME that go higher, and perhaps they use these on the bike frames. However ... that lovely CF finish isn't there to keep engineers happy..... :roll: Just gotta drool over the bling factor .....

User avatar
sogood
Posts: 17168
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby sogood » Sat Dec 13, 2008 12:52 pm

Gosh, we have a CF expert here.

The simple fact that there are failures on aircrafts with CF components only mean that there's a significant amount of knowledge involved in designing these materials, an evolving process. And the benefits of these material far outweigh the negatives. And guess what? Steel is not used for modern aircraft panels. Wonder why? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Using Mikka's subjective standard, then I'd say that steel frames are flaky. Put a steel and a CF frame in a pool of salty water for a year. Gosh! Where has that shinny steel frame gone?
Bianchi, Ridley, Tern, Montague and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.

Nobody
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Postby Nobody » Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:00 pm

NOT WORTH IT
Last edited by Nobody on Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Nobody
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Postby Nobody » Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:08 pm

NOT WORTH IT
Last edited by Nobody on Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

h3ndry
Posts: 432
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Melbourne

Postby h3ndry » Sat Dec 13, 2008 2:05 pm

Everyone raises good points; unfortunately I don't know more about either material or bike construction and usage to say more about CF bikes.

Mikka, the main flaw in your argument is that you approach the concept of value from a component and material perspective, rather than a usage one. To use the same logic, a Krispy Kreme donut should cost approximately $0.08. But I don't buy a Krispy Kreme donut as a bit of flour, yeast and sugar, I buy it as a mid afternoon sugar hit pick me up. I have placed a value on it beyond it's crude material worth.

In the same way, a cyclist doesn't see a few hundred dollars worth of CF and a massive mark up. He sees a bike which is significantly lighter than other material competitors, fully specced and in most ways what a professional cyclist would use. The cyclist places a higher value on this (especially if prone to upgraditis) than anyone else does.

Specifically, I agree with you. For the vast majority, where competition and cutting edge requirements are absent, a carbon fibre bike is excessive. They have significant mark ups, and in my opinion (which may count for nothing) offer very little bang for buck to the AVERAGE rider. They are a luxury good, priced as such and I will never buy one, just as I will never buy a high end Mercedes or BMW. But to reduce the inherent 'value' in all products to a material base level is to ignore the practical usage value we place on items and products everyday.
Do or do not. There is no try

User avatar
sogood
Posts: 17168
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby sogood » Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:07 pm

Nobody wrote:Leave a CF and steel frame out in the sun for a year. Which do you think would be safer to ride? :P
Errr... Both are safe.

But if it's the tropics or anywhere away from Gobi/Sahara/Sierra deserts where there's rain, then I'd take the CF and leave the rust bucket where it rests. :lol: :lol: :P
Bianchi, Ridley, Tern, Montague and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.

User avatar
sogood
Posts: 17168
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby sogood » Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:17 pm

Nobody wrote:How much weight do you really save going CF from aluminium? Is it really worth the $$$ if you are not a pro?
How much weight do you really save? You don't know the answer? :shock:

Is it really worth it? Are diamond wedding rings worth it? What's wrong with zirconium or even glass? Looks good to me. :P

Amateurs buy expensive bikes for the fact that some have the disposable cash, for some that it makes them feel good, for some that gives them a big ego boost. And similar argument can be leveraged against custom steel bike buyers (some are even more expensive than CF) and owners of multiple bikes.

Is it worth it? Yes for some and no for others. And amazingly, market forces have spoken and CF is well entrenched as one of three major bike frame materials.
Bianchi, Ridley, Tern, Montague and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.

User avatar
Bnej
Posts: 2880
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:43 pm
Location: Katoomba, NSW

Postby Bnej » Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:51 pm

The O.P is faulty.

Materials cost is one of the least expensive parts of any manufacturing industry.

Labour, plant & equipment, design, engineering, etc are much more.

To put it another way, go buy your $65 worth of resin and carbon fibre. Now try to put wheels on it and ride it. It should be easy, right?

I write computer software for a living. It costs ZERO in *materials* to make a computer program, and yet here I am selling software for thousands of dollars - how much of a rip off merchant am I!

User avatar
vitualis
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:15 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Postby vitualis » Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:57 pm

The aircraft analogy on the use of CF though commonly posted is very very faulty. Bikes are not planes.

If anything, the proof of the safety of CF as a material for bicycles is in its history. CF has been used for bikes for 2 decades now. All bikes in the recent years at professional level road competition are built with CF. IMHO, safety of the material is no concern at all.

With regards to the resistance of CF to accidental damage, I fully agree that the average CF frame is not as tough as the average steel or aluminium alloy frame. However, it is not "an eggshell" and you do not have to handle it with "velvet globes". Just treat the bike sensibly (i.e., don't drop it and don't drop hard heavy metal objects on the tubes) and it will last as long as you want to ride it.

Furthermore focusing only on the weight of CF frames is somewhat missing the point. Even lower end CF frames ride nice, especially when compared to the average aluminium alloy frame. Yes, you can make an aluminium alloy frame with any sort of ride characteristics but unless you're building your own frame, you have to make do with what you can buy at your LBS.

Is a CF frame WORTH the price premium over an aluminium alloy frame? That really depends on how much disposable cash you have and how much you love cycling. You could ask the same question on whether a new bike is WORTH the price premium over second hand. Or DA/Ultegra/105 over Tiagra/Sora/2200. Etc.

Before someone blows me off as just another CF fanboy, two of my bikes are steel and one is Alu-CF mix... and I'm going to be selling my Alu-CF frame soon and moving the groupset over to a high-end steel bike.

Regards.
Michael Tam
Photos: Michael's bicycle obsession
2009 Pegoretti Responsorium Ciavete Custom :: 1982/3 Colnago Super :: 2006 Cannondale Six13 Pro :: Late 1980s Repco Superlite

User avatar
sogood
Posts: 17168
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby sogood » Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:59 pm

Bnej wrote:how much of a rip off merchant am I!
Bnej, I always thought you were a rip off artist. Looks like my instinct was right. :wink:
Bianchi, Ridley, Tern, Montague and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.

User avatar
aeroslave
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 am

To each their own preference

Postby aeroslave » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Carbon bad,..steel good

Steel bad....Titanium good

Titanium bad.....aluminum good

aluminum bad...carbon good so forth and so on.............ad infinitum....


Guys...to each their own preference. People will buy things based on what perception of value they put on an object. To say that one material is inferior to the other is just not right for they all have advantages and disadvantages depending on their properties.

It now depends on the buyer/end user what bike material they prefer. Is carbon a fad? will it break suddenly? is it durable enough? is it durable at all?

Lets talk about this after 20 years as its still a very young material used in bikes. It has only been used for less than 20 years....give it a bit more time and maybe we can get a more definite example. Its too early to debate about this he he he he...

User avatar
sogood
Posts: 17168
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby sogood » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:02 pm

How many rolls of Alu foil would I need to buy to make my super stiff rear triangle alloy racing frame? I think there's a discount in Coles this weekend. Should I also pick up a few alu coke cans for structural reinforcement? :lol:
Bianchi, Ridley, Tern, Montague and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.

User avatar
toolonglegs
Posts: 15463
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Postby toolonglegs » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:21 pm

ImageImageImage
Hitting apple/v 3 times after a very difficult apple/c ....who do I invoice for my time...I charge up to $10k per hour :roll:

User avatar
twizzle
Posts: 6402
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Highlands of Wales.

Postby twizzle » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:42 pm

sogood wrote:How many rolls of Alu foil would I need to buy to make my super stiff rear triangle alloy racing frame? I think there's a discount in Coles this weekend. Should I also pick up a few alu coke cans for structural reinforcement? :lol:
Carbon is carbon... but aluminium isn't used for making bikes - in a pure form, anyway.

But Mikka's right - there's a lot of bling pricing in carbon bikes. If people bought what they needed instead of going for bragging rights, there would be a lot less carbon bikes on the market. Too many cashed up middle-age-crisis men who have to have 'the best' is what's driving the market. No-one in their right mind would pay six times the price for a (guesstimate) 15% weight reduction and a 'less harsh ride'.
I ride, therefore I am. But don't ride into harm's way.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...

User avatar
sogood
Posts: 17168
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby sogood » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:54 pm

twizzle wrote:Carbon is carbon... but aluminium isn't used for making bikes - in a pure form, anyway.

But Mikka's right - there's a lot of bling pricing in carbon bikes. If people bought what they needed instead of going for bragging rights, there would be a lot less carbon bikes on the market. Too many cashed up middle-age-crisis men who have to have 'the best' is what's driving the market. No-one in their right mind would pay six times the price for a (guesstimate) 15% weight reduction and a 'less harsh ride'.
Really? Are you saying that the CF bikes is fully composed of pure C atoms? Now, that's a real revelation! Oh wait, did someone mention resin somewhere earlier? Nay, carbon is carbon, who needs resin? :lol: :lol: :lol:

If people are willing to pay 10x the price of an alu alloy frame for rusty steel, what's wrong with CF with resin? :roll:

Maybe we should all just grow our own bamboos for that bling bling bamboo bike. But wait, bamboo is organic and contains C and is also fibrous... Carbon fibre?
Image
Last edited by sogood on Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:00 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Bianchi, Ridley, Tern, Montague and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.

User avatar
twizzle
Posts: 6402
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Highlands of Wales.

Postby twizzle » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:57 pm

Methinks someone had a bad day.
I ride, therefore I am. But don't ride into harm's way.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...

User avatar
Aushiker
Posts: 22396
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Walyalup land
Contact:

Postby Aushiker » Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:23 pm

sogood wrote:And similar argument can be leveraged against custom steel bike buyers (some are even more expensive than CF) and owners of multiple bikes.
The latest issue of Ride magazine (October/November/December 2008) has a test report on a Colnago Master X-Light (not custom) and it has a retail of $7,699 and it is not carbon and it is as you suggest more expensive than a lot of good quality carbon bikes.

Andrew

Nobody
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Postby Nobody » Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:28 pm

NOT WORTH IT
Last edited by Nobody on Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aushiker
Posts: 22396
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Walyalup land
Contact:

Postby Aushiker » Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:34 pm

twizzle wrote:Too many cashed up middle-age-crisis men who have to have 'the best' is what's driving the market. No-one in their right mind would pay six times the price for a (guesstimate) 15% weight reduction and a 'less harsh ride'.
Not jealous are you :wink:

Anne brought a carbon bike with rival groupset for ~$2,000. Chose it herself over a aluminium frame. Why? Liked the ride better and liked the groupset better and the sales person helped to :). Better buy? Yes. Why? Because she is more likely to ride it and she enjoys riding it.

Does it really matter if people buy "better" bikes? When I see these sorts of comments, Twizzle, it makes me wonder who has the issues. Why the hang-up about how others spend money? Does the buying of a carbon bike actually hurt you or someone else?

Andrew

Oh BTW, I have two aluminium bikes, one carbon one, one steel frame and one steel bike in the making and I have no hang-ups over which bike you ride. Might be jealous but if I would like one :)

Nobody
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: To each their own preference

Postby Nobody » Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:36 pm

NOT WORTH IT
Last edited by Nobody on Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aushiker
Posts: 22396
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Walyalup land
Contact:

Postby Aushiker » Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:37 pm

Nobody wrote: Windsurfers say you shouldn't leave your CF masts lying in the sun even for minutes,
So windsurfing all day in the sun is okay? What effect does the water/sun have on reducing the sun damage? Might be something to apply to my carbon fibre frame.

Andrew

User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 9653
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Success, WA
Contact:

Postby Kalgrm » Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:39 pm

I'd guess windsurfers have their masts wrapped in sails while in use.
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------
Music was better when ugly people were allowed to make it ....

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: antigee, Google Feedfetcher, Mr Purple, thamete