*sigh*
Cost theory of EBikes by weight.
- Thread starter Waynemarlow
- Start date
Rahr85
E*POWAH Master
Going back entirely to the first post. Apart from a few specific "boutique" bike brands i can't say that i think that the emtb's in particular are excessively expensive for what they are.
When you factor in the cost of components and the overheads that any sort of decent sized company have along with distributor costs and the end cost for the retailer it seems reasonable to me. When i was comparing the spec between the bike i originally ordered and the bike i ended up with, the difference in price between the two was almost entirely made up in the cost of the suspension alone. Of course the bike manufacturers get parts at a lower cost than the end user but if you were to go the route of doing it yourself i don't see how it could reasonably be done any cheaper, nevermind the added hassle of having to warranty individual items from their relevant point of sale/support network.
Yes my bike is heavy, there are times when something lighter would be nice but i also think it is quite delusional to think it is posible to have a master of all trades approach as almost every decision on what the bike can do is some compromise between grip/weight/power/geometry. If i was fitter i could be riding something similar to my friends who spent similar money on normal carbon bikes but my choice was to be able to things i would otherwise not be able to do. I don't really intend to be doing 3+ hour slogs through mountains etc. I've learned how to manage the battery and don't mind the odd bit of pedalling in eco/off. The weight is one of the compromises but i'm willing to make that. For any super lightweight EMTB there will be something like a yeti which is 4-5kg lighter for the same money. Horses for courses.
edit: also forgot the less important point that weight saving in the drivetrain doesn't seem particularly wise unless cost of replacing parts is of no interest (or you run a smaller range cassette). But generally the weight savings in this area are particularly bad in terms of weight lost per £ spent.
In almost every area that can be considered a hobby there is a sort of enthusiast baseline where performance is good for what is still a lot of money and almost always some sort of "halo" product that is aimed at people where cost is no object. The goalposts for this change in relative terms.
Take Nvidia GPU's. the rtx 3090 costs almost 200% of the 3080 but gives on average about 115% of the performance. People still buy it because it's the "best" that can currently be bought.
When you factor in the cost of components and the overheads that any sort of decent sized company have along with distributor costs and the end cost for the retailer it seems reasonable to me. When i was comparing the spec between the bike i originally ordered and the bike i ended up with, the difference in price between the two was almost entirely made up in the cost of the suspension alone. Of course the bike manufacturers get parts at a lower cost than the end user but if you were to go the route of doing it yourself i don't see how it could reasonably be done any cheaper, nevermind the added hassle of having to warranty individual items from their relevant point of sale/support network.
Yes my bike is heavy, there are times when something lighter would be nice but i also think it is quite delusional to think it is posible to have a master of all trades approach as almost every decision on what the bike can do is some compromise between grip/weight/power/geometry. If i was fitter i could be riding something similar to my friends who spent similar money on normal carbon bikes but my choice was to be able to things i would otherwise not be able to do. I don't really intend to be doing 3+ hour slogs through mountains etc. I've learned how to manage the battery and don't mind the odd bit of pedalling in eco/off. The weight is one of the compromises but i'm willing to make that. For any super lightweight EMTB there will be something like a yeti which is 4-5kg lighter for the same money. Horses for courses.
edit: also forgot the less important point that weight saving in the drivetrain doesn't seem particularly wise unless cost of replacing parts is of no interest (or you run a smaller range cassette). But generally the weight savings in this area are particularly bad in terms of weight lost per £ spent.
In almost every area that can be considered a hobby there is a sort of enthusiast baseline where performance is good for what is still a lot of money and almost always some sort of "halo" product that is aimed at people where cost is no object. The goalposts for this change in relative terms.
Take Nvidia GPU's. the rtx 3090 costs almost 200% of the 3080 but gives on average about 115% of the performance. People still buy it because it's the "best" that can currently be bought.
Last edited:
People who whine about their shitty decision-making skills... what a headache. Friggen moto bringing this troll bait in here...
Some wonder if an increase of 10mm of travel or 2mm of stanchion diameter would be excessive for their needs, not wanting the weight penalty of something they don't necessarily need. Here we have a person who willingly is ignorant of how excessive a moto might be compared to an e-mtb.
This is more an argument of your own financial issues. You're clamping yourself to a certain price range, and have to decide among multiple desires. Your question is more like, how much can I get out of spending $5000: high-end emtb, whatever $5000 can buy in moto terms, or put it towards something else more useful. You can't see what a high-end emtb can get you, and you're crying at your own ignorance, and it comes across as some conspiracy theory that the industry is price gouging.
How much would you pay extra to drop a moto's weight to the weight of an emtb? How much performance would you sacrifice to get to this weight? How much value would the privilege of being treated like a pedal-powered bike be worth to you?
Some wonder if an increase of 10mm of travel or 2mm of stanchion diameter would be excessive for their needs, not wanting the weight penalty of something they don't necessarily need. Here we have a person who willingly is ignorant of how excessive a moto might be compared to an e-mtb.
This is more an argument of your own financial issues. You're clamping yourself to a certain price range, and have to decide among multiple desires. Your question is more like, how much can I get out of spending $5000: high-end emtb, whatever $5000 can buy in moto terms, or put it towards something else more useful. You can't see what a high-end emtb can get you, and you're crying at your own ignorance, and it comes across as some conspiracy theory that the industry is price gouging.
How much would you pay extra to drop a moto's weight to the weight of an emtb? How much performance would you sacrifice to get to this weight? How much value would the privilege of being treated like a pedal-powered bike be worth to you?
>moto<
Active member
Has Gary logged into his alt account?
I apologise if I upset you guys, I suppose I was trolling. I mean, I know perfectly well that on any given forum, you get the single minded chest beaters who pass off a myriad of unsubstantiated facts, as actual facts, and then feel like they can lord it over the guys that 'just don't know better'. Tyring to post an opinion on an internet forum was obviously a reckless thing to do.
You'll notice I stopped posting in this thread earlier, not because I'm upset or precious, quite the contrary. My old man used to tell me "never argue with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience" ? I'm not calling Gary, Varaxis or anyone else in this thread an idiot, but you get where I'm going with it.
On another note, my quote above might not be here long, the last time I used an offensive word like 'stupid' it was moderated. Gary must just be lucky I suppose
Anyway, I'm off to the Holden forum to post a picture of Allan Moffat.
TheRealPoMo
Active member
Lol... I'd suggest putting him on ignore, but it's not 100% effective. I did and I still see his trolls when others quote them in response.
...only works if EVERYONE ignores him.
Interesting how its mostly us Australian's that find it particularly galling.
Or maybe it's in our nature to call it out.
...only works if EVERYONE ignores him.
Interesting how its mostly us Australian's that find it particularly galling.
Or maybe it's in our nature to call it out.
I don’t think you upset anyone else motorcycle and cycling go together for lots of riders , and ebike sits right between the two ,Has Gary logged into his alt account?
I apologise if I upset you guys, I suppose I was trolling. I mean, I know perfectly well that on any given forum, you get the single minded chest beaters who pass off a myriad of unsubstantiated facts, as actual facts, and then feel like they can lord it over the guys that 'just don't know better'. Tyring to post an opinion on an internet forum was obviously a reckless thing to do.
You'll notice I stopped posting in this thread earlier, not because I'm upset or precious, quite the contrary. My old man used to tell me "never argue with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience" ? I'm not calling Gary, Varaxis or anyone else in this thread an idiot, but you get where I'm going with it.
On another note, my quote above might not be here long, the last time I used an offensive word like 'stupid' it was moderated. Gary must just be lucky I suppose
Anyway, I'm off to the Holden forum to post a picture of Allan Moffat.
many riders ride both often using one or the other to train and lots of the best riders come from a motorcycle discipline , trials mx bmx enduro almost any 2 wheel sport all feeds into the same
The cost difference or lack of is also an interesting subject I often hear mentioned by those who understand all sides of the sports . Don’t be put off by the odd troll that just want to spoil a great forum
You'll always get comparisons with Mx/enduro with emtb because well, it's off road and has a motor. Relevant or not, as said above many folk will always compare as they come from these backgrounds so its natural for them, based on their experiences.
In regards to the cost / value of an emtb, on initial impression yes i'd say they are very expensive for what they are. Then you look into it and components etc then maybe they represent better value than first thought. Rob's 'cheeb' wasn't exactly cheap (but you'd expect it to be based on the cheep Chinese stereotypes etc) and he's cut out a lot of the supply chain so an emtb coming in at 5-6k isn't surprising from a LBS who have overheads to pay and i'm guessing pre determined margins based on RRP and direct purchase costs from the manufactures.
Then spec one up with some bling and it's easy to see that costs can rapidly get to 10k. Although I don't think the consumer always gets the full benefit of the omission of the lesser spec components.
But either way as said you really are getting the best money can buy and very close to what the pro's are on.
Next to a £15k superbike with the tech on them these days and 200+ bhp yes the eeb does seem very expensive. But a 15k road bike is a mile away from even club racers bike at £20-25k+, a bsb superstock bike at say 25-40k build or a full on superbike at 100k+. Although we aren't comparing this as its pointless right
It's all about perception. A £15k rolex tells the time the same as an apple watch. It's up to the purchaser to determine what value they put on it and if they want part with the cash....
My view, the 5.5k I paid for my levo (before tax offsets) seems crazy high to some people for a 'pushbike' but the use and enjoyment I get out of it is worth every penny.
You can only make your own mind up on the value of something. Cost is something completely different.
If its your passion and you can afford it. Fcuk what anyone else thinks!
In regards to the cost / value of an emtb, on initial impression yes i'd say they are very expensive for what they are. Then you look into it and components etc then maybe they represent better value than first thought. Rob's 'cheeb' wasn't exactly cheap (but you'd expect it to be based on the cheep Chinese stereotypes etc) and he's cut out a lot of the supply chain so an emtb coming in at 5-6k isn't surprising from a LBS who have overheads to pay and i'm guessing pre determined margins based on RRP and direct purchase costs from the manufactures.
Then spec one up with some bling and it's easy to see that costs can rapidly get to 10k. Although I don't think the consumer always gets the full benefit of the omission of the lesser spec components.
But either way as said you really are getting the best money can buy and very close to what the pro's are on.
Next to a £15k superbike with the tech on them these days and 200+ bhp yes the eeb does seem very expensive. But a 15k road bike is a mile away from even club racers bike at £20-25k+, a bsb superstock bike at say 25-40k build or a full on superbike at 100k+. Although we aren't comparing this as its pointless right
It's all about perception. A £15k rolex tells the time the same as an apple watch. It's up to the purchaser to determine what value they put on it and if they want part with the cash....
My view, the 5.5k I paid for my levo (before tax offsets
) seems crazy high to some people for a 'pushbike' but the use and enjoyment I get out of it is worth every penny.You can only make your own mind up on the value of something. Cost is something completely different.
If its your passion and you can afford it. Fcuk what anyone else thinks!
>moto<
Active member
Hey Gary, I just saw some data that suggests KTM sold 280,000 bikes last year. Giant bicycles sold 6.6 million.
This is the point I was making and what I think is lost on a number of people. It's not about comparing a top superbike to a top MTB. To guage representative value you can compare anything in a similar price bracket, and my point is that in just about any metric you can measure, an MTB doens't represent good value for money.
When you look at the engineering, technology and materials you are buying for a 15k motorbike, they far exceed that of a 15K MTB. Hence the disparity in relative value.
I said before, I know it's not retail stores making fat coin, I think it's almost every area of the bike. Drivetrains from Shimano and SRAM are crazy expensive for what they are. They don't use uber expensive materials, cutting edge technology or anything *really* special. They are made in China, en masse and have reason to be that expensive. The fork and shock are also overpriced.
This is the point I was making and what I think is lost on a number of people. It's not about comparing a top superbike to a top MTB. To guage representative value you can compare anything in a similar price bracket, and my point is that in just about any metric you can measure, an MTB doens't represent good value for money.
When you look at the engineering, technology and materials you are buying for a 15k motorbike, they far exceed that of a 15K MTB. Hence the disparity in relative value.
I said before, I know it's not retail stores making fat coin, I think it's almost every area of the bike. Drivetrains from Shimano and SRAM are crazy expensive for what they are. They don't use uber expensive materials, cutting edge technology or anything *really* special. They are made in China, en masse and have reason to be that expensive. The fork and shock are also overpriced.
@>moto< you hit the nail on the head in terms of perceived value, however I would argue that this can only be relevant to the individual, and applied within each sector. I work in an industry where people regularly pay the equivalent of a Lambo for the wardrobes in their bedroom, which makes no sense when you compare it to what you could get for the money, but does make sense when you witness first hand the time, skills and materials involved - the concept of someone paying that kind of money for a pice of furniture is a different matter, as is the fact that most people think any bike costing over 500 quid is crazy - its all relative to the end users perception of value for the good they are buying. You can only compare a motorbike to a motorbike, and an MTB to an MTB etc to make a decent value judgement.
Economies of scale come into play when you talk about crossover of components - if you look at a high end MTB it will have no components in common with its lower end sibling, whereas a high end motorbike will be based off a very similar platform to its lesser sibling.
Take the car industry, who are the masters of maximising use of platforms and parts across multiple ranges, the percentage of parts difference between a standard VW Golf and a Golf GTI will be pretty minimal compared to the same calculation of say a base aluminium Trek Rail and a high end Carbon one, which may share under 10% of the same kit, which is probably the headset and the plastic pedals they throw in at purchase.
One thing many people forget is the engineering of a full suspension MTB is actually trickier than that of a Motorbike, since you have to factor in peddling and the human input into how the suspension operates, which you dont have to on a motorbike. This is one of the reasons why in the MTB industry there has been constant costly redesign and redevelopment of bikes to try and reach an ideal suspension platform.
I dont think @Gary is being a troll, he's just making a perfectly valid point, and then people are disagreeing, and its all got a bit heated on both sides - it seems to me that often the mere fact he is making a point leads to a reaction, irrelevant of the fact he might be right.
Even if the manner in which he is making them might get out of hand, but then the rest of you follow suit, meaning as usual it all gets out of hand, and the seriousness with which anyone can take someones point of view is obscured by the subsequent responses.
Rather than shut down the thread, shall we try and return to civil discourse?
This argument has been done to death on here, and many different bike forums - The reality is you are talking about two different industries, that just happen to share the fact they use two wheels, which have very different manufacturing techniques, material usage, and economies of scale.
Motorbikes are actually pretty simple machines, based off technologies developed over many years, where as in MTB we are constantly reinventing the wheel so to speak, and it only really in the last few years IMO that we have reached a point where MTB design, motorised or not, has settled into a sweet spot that really works and is likely to have any further radical changes for the foreseeable future - this has meant constant whole redesigns of bikes, retooling of factories, and resulting redesign of components to work with the new bikes. The bike industry has for years been working off annual wholesale redesigns of bikes at the upper end, which is a crazy business model if you think about it, and is now something we seem to be moving away from.
Also motorbikes tend to have a lot more in house components, whereas the majority of these on a bicycle are bought in from 3rd parties, and you can see the effect of this in the real world right now with supply chains stretched and bike prices going up due to the effects of covid.
Luckily the internet outside of bike forums can be a very useful research tool, and there have been quite a few informed articles o the subject down the years!
These articles shed some light on the question:
www.mbr.co.uk
mbaction.com
www.gearpatrol.com
Economies of scale come into play when you talk about crossover of components - if you look at a high end MTB it will have no components in common with its lower end sibling, whereas a high end motorbike will be based off a very similar platform to its lesser sibling.
Take the car industry, who are the masters of maximising use of platforms and parts across multiple ranges, the percentage of parts difference between a standard VW Golf and a Golf GTI will be pretty minimal compared to the same calculation of say a base aluminium Trek Rail and a high end Carbon one, which may share under 10% of the same kit, which is probably the headset and the plastic pedals they throw in at purchase.
One thing many people forget is the engineering of a full suspension MTB is actually trickier than that of a Motorbike, since you have to factor in peddling and the human input into how the suspension operates, which you dont have to on a motorbike. This is one of the reasons why in the MTB industry there has been constant costly redesign and redevelopment of bikes to try and reach an ideal suspension platform.
I dont think @Gary is being a troll, he's just making a perfectly valid point, and then people are disagreeing, and its all got a bit heated on both sides - it seems to me that often the mere fact he is making a point leads to a reaction, irrelevant of the fact he might be right.
Even if the manner in which he is making them might get out of hand, but then the rest of you follow suit, meaning as usual it all gets out of hand, and the seriousness with which anyone can take someones point of view is obscured by the subsequent responses.
Rather than shut down the thread, shall we try and return to civil discourse?
This argument has been done to death on here, and many different bike forums - The reality is you are talking about two different industries, that just happen to share the fact they use two wheels, which have very different manufacturing techniques, material usage, and economies of scale.
Motorbikes are actually pretty simple machines, based off technologies developed over many years, where as in MTB we are constantly reinventing the wheel so to speak, and it only really in the last few years IMO that we have reached a point where MTB design, motorised or not, has settled into a sweet spot that really works and is likely to have any further radical changes for the foreseeable future - this has meant constant whole redesigns of bikes, retooling of factories, and resulting redesign of components to work with the new bikes. The bike industry has for years been working off annual wholesale redesigns of bikes at the upper end, which is a crazy business model if you think about it, and is now something we seem to be moving away from.
Also motorbikes tend to have a lot more in house components, whereas the majority of these on a bicycle are bought in from 3rd parties, and you can see the effect of this in the real world right now with supply chains stretched and bike prices going up due to the effects of covid.
Luckily the internet outside of bike forums can be a very useful research tool, and there have been quite a few informed articles o the subject down the years!
These articles shed some light on the question:
Why mountain bikes cost as much as motorbikes - MBR
It's a popular comment under many a new mountain bike story: "you could buy a motorbike for that!" But is this true? If so, why are they so costly?
www.mbr.co.uk
Moto vs. MTB. Which is More Affordable? - Mountain Bike Action Magazine
Explaining those insanely high sticker prices
mbaction.com
Why Are Good Bikes so Expensive? | Gear Patrol
High-end road and mountain bikes can cost as much as — or more than — a decent used car. But why?
www.gearpatrol.com
>moto<
Active member
The value of *insert anything* is relative to other things of a given value. $10 is relative to $20 no matter who you are. Sure, you might have lot more $20's than me and the worth of each one becomes less, but the value is the same.
Regarding your quote above, honestly, I can't fathom how you believe this. When you open the throttle on a 60hp dirtbike, what does it do to the suspension? What happens when you part throttle? Please take the time to look at the suspension of an enduro dirtbike compared to an MTB. MTB's have just been adding features dirtbikes have had for years. Worse still, it's not even that difficult to understand.
I appreciate you posting some links, but reading articles justifying why MTB's are so expensive in a MTB publication is like believing now is a good time to buy a house because a real estate agent told me so.
Lastly, I ignored your previous comments about the higher costs associated with lower volume production. Sure, that's a thing. However, there are boutique brands in many product lines that compete, or better, mainstream brand pricing (look at Beta enduro bikes Vs KTM). Then there is also mainstream brands like Giant who pump out 6.6 million bicycles a year, why are they so expensive? They are made in China and Taiwan.
Last edited:
@>moto< Your post only proves that you really do have some conspiracy theory claims about price gouging, not recognizing the costs involved in creating such quality that's optimized for human power output. There are $150 10spd drivetrains that even I currently run for budget purposes. There are $100-200 suspension forks that millions of people likely get along fine with. Why are you so focused on the top of the line? An alternative is to attach an add-on motor kit to a cheap bike, if you really can't rationalize the cost of high-end stuff.
Yamaha and other auto brands have tried to get in. Can they really compete if they're sourcing parts from Shimano, Fox, RockShox? These parts set a standard in not only performance but familiarity. How can auto brands compete other than to develop everything themselves? I don't like to speculate, since certain people seem to get it mixed up with fact, so I won't go deep trying to answer this. I can at least say that production lines for electric motor vehicles seem to be a lot different than those for ICE vehicles.
EVERYONE here who has gone bike shopping has experienced the price shock. People are shocked even at the entry-level, relating to the $200 bikes at Walmart. The difference in quality is undeniable though, from toys and replicas to real mtn bikes that you can fully let loose on. They likely searched for the value options, and tried to ask the forum's crystal ball confirmation or for magic bullet technology. They often were simply demanding things that require them to increase their budget. You moto fans are basically doing the same thing but relate to the cost of moto bikes. Sounds like you had to deal with a lot to even rationalize owning a moto.
The argument is not new. It's a personal issue. To mature people who have settled the issue without drama, it's not very complicated. They simply show interest in trying something, then they find something they really want and compare others to it. It weighs on their mind long enough for them to rationalize the purchase. They research enough to ensure they don't waste money, and their choices get trimmed down to 1) save up and buy what they want, 2) buy a cheap alternative and experience things sooner, 3) don't buy, perhaps waiting for the competition to advance or hope for a discount.
I'm sure people here have waited years, choosing option 3. Maybe reading posts of people talking about how they love their experience on their emtb purchases with no regrets might've changed peoples' minds. You basically added option 4) imagining that there's no reason for prices to be this high and call people stupid for trying to talk sense. WTF.
Mature people who are strapped for cash would likely love better, but they make do with what they can afford. There are people who are convinced that they're fine on Giant Talon or Fathom hardtails. If they had more disposable income, they would've been open to learning more about what's better.
Who's not hoping for lower prices and tech breakthroughs that improve performance for a little extra cost? The reality is that we can only choose from what's presently available. If prices would drop by entertaining your conspiracy theory, I'd love to do it, but it's already been discussed many times and I'm even regretting the time I spend replying, expecting no good to come out of it.
Yamaha and other auto brands have tried to get in. Can they really compete if they're sourcing parts from Shimano, Fox, RockShox? These parts set a standard in not only performance but familiarity. How can auto brands compete other than to develop everything themselves? I don't like to speculate, since certain people seem to get it mixed up with fact, so I won't go deep trying to answer this. I can at least say that production lines for electric motor vehicles seem to be a lot different than those for ICE vehicles.
EVERYONE here who has gone bike shopping has experienced the price shock. People are shocked even at the entry-level, relating to the $200 bikes at Walmart. The difference in quality is undeniable though, from toys and replicas to real mtn bikes that you can fully let loose on. They likely searched for the value options, and tried to ask the forum's crystal ball confirmation or for magic bullet technology. They often were simply demanding things that require them to increase their budget. You moto fans are basically doing the same thing but relate to the cost of moto bikes. Sounds like you had to deal with a lot to even rationalize owning a moto.
The argument is not new. It's a personal issue. To mature people who have settled the issue without drama, it's not very complicated. They simply show interest in trying something, then they find something they really want and compare others to it. It weighs on their mind long enough for them to rationalize the purchase. They research enough to ensure they don't waste money, and their choices get trimmed down to 1) save up and buy what they want, 2) buy a cheap alternative and experience things sooner, 3) don't buy, perhaps waiting for the competition to advance or hope for a discount.
I'm sure people here have waited years, choosing option 3. Maybe reading posts of people talking about how they love their experience on their emtb purchases with no regrets might've changed peoples' minds. You basically added option 4) imagining that there's no reason for prices to be this high and call people stupid for trying to talk sense. WTF.
Mature people who are strapped for cash would likely love better, but they make do with what they can afford. There are people who are convinced that they're fine on Giant Talon or Fathom hardtails. If they had more disposable income, they would've been open to learning more about what's better.
Who's not hoping for lower prices and tech breakthroughs that improve performance for a little extra cost? The reality is that we can only choose from what's presently available. If prices would drop by entertaining your conspiracy theory, I'd love to do it, but it's already been discussed many times and I'm even regretting the time I spend replying, expecting no good to come out of it.
I still don't see the problem .. ok they're still expensive, but there's lots of choice if you don't want to be ripped off and just pay thousands for a name ..
More Downhill races have been won on 26" wheels than any other !! It's got them !!!! Removable battery, TWENTY ONE gears - you don't get that kind of choice with those crappy expensive ones, ADJUSTABLE HEIGHT !! Lights, mudguards - I struggle to understand why there's so many threads where people can't decide what bike to buy ! IT'S HERE PEOPLE !!!!
For the more adventurous but slightly tighter buyer, coming with a snazzy colour scheme and unstoppable 27.5" wheels. Panasonic battery, WALK Mode, Side stand ! It's the stuff of dreams .. OR would be, it was the stuff of too many dreams and is out of stock.
And finally .. this Full suspension Downhill racing go anywhere unstoppable mega machine .. Back to the trusted winning 26" wheels Made from "SUPER MAGNESIUM ALLOY" With - Integrated wheel !!!! - not one of these crappy bikes without integrated wheels. Back upto the best you can buy - 21 speed Shimano - You could sell 10 or 11 of them on an MTB forum and cover half the purchase cost. Once again equipped with a side stand for taking cool bike photo's, lights, round disk brakes. To top it Off, it even folds so you can negotiate the tightest of hairpin bends ! As long as they're left handers.
More Downhill races have been won on 26" wheels than any other !! It's got them !!!! Removable battery, TWENTY ONE gears - you don't get that kind of choice with those crappy expensive ones, ADJUSTABLE HEIGHT !! Lights, mudguards - I struggle to understand why there's so many threads where people can't decide what bike to buy ! IT'S HERE PEOPLE !!!!
For the more adventurous but slightly tighter buyer, coming with a snazzy colour scheme and unstoppable 27.5" wheels. Panasonic battery, WALK Mode, Side stand ! It's the stuff of dreams .. OR would be, it was the stuff of too many dreams and is out of stock.
And finally .. this Full suspension Downhill racing go anywhere unstoppable mega machine .. Back to the trusted winning 26" wheels Made from "SUPER MAGNESIUM ALLOY" With - Integrated wheel !!!! - not one of these crappy bikes without integrated wheels. Back upto the best you can buy - 21 speed Shimano - You could sell 10 or 11 of them on an MTB forum and cover half the purchase cost. Once again equipped with a side stand for taking cool bike photo's, lights, round disk brakes. To top it Off, it even folds so you can negotiate the tightest of hairpin bends ! As long as they're left handers.
The value to me of anything is relevant to the individual person - lets look at the definition of value:
"the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something"
This a subjective decision, and for me the concept of value is only applicable to my own thinking, and someone else perception of value is their business not mine.
That doesn't mean that I don't think an MTB is expensive compared to a motorbike, but thats not relevant to my view on the value of each, not my understanding of why its the case. Bikes are expensive, but there's a reason why.
You comment on suspension shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the issues that lay with suspension design on an MTB, again their are multiple articles about this which are interesting and informative.
Being motor powered vs human powered means you are talking about a completely different set of dynamics and variable effecting the suspension, and the design needs. An MTB's suspension has to perform well under more parameters than that of a motorbike.
A dirt bikes suspension system is relatively simple, with the majority of tuning defined by the shock set up - on an MTB the suspension design itself is far more complex, and exampled by the multiple different systems on the market place which look to solve the many issues.
The suspension on an MTB has to behave very differently going up a hill to going down a hill, and has to work well when pedalling and when not pedalling - A motorbike does not have to deal with pedal bob, does not have to deal with the gears being on a derailleur at the back of the swing arm and the multiple issues this causes with suspension design having to accommodate the resulting chain growth/movement. You have to take into account pedal kick back introduced by the suspension to the pedalling platform. The much lighter weight of an MTB also causes a lot of suspension design issues, anti squat, brake jack etc etc etc.
In short MTB suspension needs to be far more efficient than that on an motorbike, and as such is more complex, because there are times when you effectively want the suspension to do nothing, and times when you want it to do a lot, all the time whilst taking into account pedalling inputs. On a motorbike you have the ability to introduce instant power to the drivetrain to influence the rear suspension, on an MTB you do not. A motorbike is much heavier, meaning deflection isn't an issue like it is on bicycles, and the ratio of unsprung mass is far higher than on an MTB.
I would refer you to articles in bike magazines, but then i guess they are coming from a biased standpoint!
As an FYI I am as into Motorbikes as any other two wheel contraptions, with multiple Huskies, KTMs, and more having hit the dirt under me, and also multiple track bikes, and even a few hardtail chops thrown into the mix - I am no suspension expert but have spent enough time on both motorbikes and bikes, and enough money modifying them, to know the differences.
"the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something"
This a subjective decision, and for me the concept of value is only applicable to my own thinking, and someone else perception of value is their business not mine.
That doesn't mean that I don't think an MTB is expensive compared to a motorbike, but thats not relevant to my view on the value of each, not my understanding of why its the case. Bikes are expensive, but there's a reason why.
You comment on suspension shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the issues that lay with suspension design on an MTB, again their are multiple articles about this which are interesting and informative.
Being motor powered vs human powered means you are talking about a completely different set of dynamics and variable effecting the suspension, and the design needs. An MTB's suspension has to perform well under more parameters than that of a motorbike.
A dirt bikes suspension system is relatively simple, with the majority of tuning defined by the shock set up - on an MTB the suspension design itself is far more complex, and exampled by the multiple different systems on the market place which look to solve the many issues.
The suspension on an MTB has to behave very differently going up a hill to going down a hill, and has to work well when pedalling and when not pedalling - A motorbike does not have to deal with pedal bob, does not have to deal with the gears being on a derailleur at the back of the swing arm and the multiple issues this causes with suspension design having to accommodate the resulting chain growth/movement. You have to take into account pedal kick back introduced by the suspension to the pedalling platform. The much lighter weight of an MTB also causes a lot of suspension design issues, anti squat, brake jack etc etc etc.
In short MTB suspension needs to be far more efficient than that on an motorbike, and as such is more complex, because there are times when you effectively want the suspension to do nothing, and times when you want it to do a lot, all the time whilst taking into account pedalling inputs. On a motorbike you have the ability to introduce instant power to the drivetrain to influence the rear suspension, on an MTB you do not. A motorbike is much heavier, meaning deflection isn't an issue like it is on bicycles, and the ratio of unsprung mass is far higher than on an MTB.
I would refer you to articles in bike magazines, but then i guess they are coming from a biased standpoint!
As an FYI I am as into Motorbikes as any other two wheel contraptions, with multiple Huskies, KTMs, and more having hit the dirt under me, and also multiple track bikes, and even a few hardtail chops thrown into the mix - I am no suspension expert but have spent enough time on both motorbikes and bikes, and enough money modifying them, to know the differences.
Last edited:
>moto<
Active member
Excellent, forget all the value BS, this is 100% the point I was making. Case closed, thank you.
Fundamentally disagree. Pull an mtb air shock to bits and dirtbike shock to bit's and see which one has more bits. It's a more complicated system for a reason and makes your average airshock with only pressure and 6 clicks of rebound adjustment look like a toy.
However, the original point around suspension complexity was tied into it's atttributed cost to the overall cost of the bike and, there can be no argueing that a dirtbike shock costs more to produce than a MTB shock...though I'm sure you'll find a way. It's bigger, requires more material, has more bits and even basic models have high and low speed compression and rebound damping circuits. You don't get that on an MTB shock until you're buying high end gear.
When you selective quote, you close the case for only yourself - as I said I look at the value of an MTB next to the value of another MTB, its irrelevant to me what an MTB, or a motorbikes, or a car's, or a house's value is to each other - perceived value is subjective so to try and define it unilaterally is a waste of time, so yes you are right in that for you its a relevant comparison of value, but I am right in that for me its not - no wrong answer other than the one that makes you happy, and if your happy, then I am happy for you! The fact I think a bike might be expensive compared to a motorbike, doesn't mean that I don't also think the bike in question might be good value.
With suspension you have both missed my point, and proven it - I am not talking about the shock itself, but the suspension design and kinematic - motorcycles have bigger and more complex shocks - as I said a motorcycles suspension is predominately defined by the shock set up, whereas a bicycles is by the inherent design of the suspension platform, and the shock is tuned/chosen to work with this.
I totally agree with you, bicycle shocks are far simpler than that on a motorbike, but the suspension designs and requirements are far more complex on an MTB. You simply cannot realistically replicate the tuneabiltiy and set up possibilities of a motorbike shock with an MTB shock for two main reasons - weight and friction - a motorcycle shock is heavier due to its complexity, and can have wider tolerance of friction as the bike itself weighs more and facilitates the action of the suspension inherently better than a low weight MTB. There are companies like EXT who are trying to combine their years of experience in both fields, but they are pretty much the outlier.
So my point was not at all about shock design, but about suspension design, because engineering a rear end that works well on an MTB is more complex, and has more variables than doing so on an motorbike - managing chain growth, chain line and pedal kick back alone are things that are not a factor on a motorbike - the complexity of the shock itself is not what I am talking about at all.
Put simply a motorbikes suspension has to be able to provide grip, dampening, and control - a bicycles has to do the same plus deal with peddling forces, both accommodating and not affecting them, whilst at the same time being as efficient as possible because a human doesn't have the power of a 6Ohp motor to overcome any resistance, and needs the suspension to minimise power loss as much as possible whilst climbing or peddling hard.
I am not trying to have an argument, merely saying that suspension design on a bike is more complex than that on an motorcycle, because there are more variables, and more constraints governing the design - you only have to look at the variety of different suspension designs within the MTB market all looking to solve the same issues to get an idea of that.
Hi mate.
How many models did that data tell you KTM sell? Whats their average price? And what is their cheapest model?
Giant bicycles sell thousands of different bike models averaging around £400-500 per sale. starting at just £125
Like I've said (repeatedly) different industries and because of this they're not really comparable.
It seems you only have an understanding of the bicycle not the motorcycle
if you take a look Into modern motorcycle suspension especially on long travel off road stuff. It’s dealing with almost identical problems that long travel bicycles suffer from , in fact lots of the ideas used in bike rear ends have come from motorcycle design , i
With braking forces and power forces inputting into the suspension in much the same way on both Motor and legs have the same forces just at different levels of torque as do braking forces preventing suspension movement
With the exception of one system a lot of that is taken care of with a linkage system that does quite similar things in both machines . You just don’t see the linkage system as clearly on a motorbike ,
you may think a motorbike is just heavy duty stuff , but manufacturers are in just a big a wieght war if not more than cycle manufacturers
if you talk about suspension manufacturers crossing over just look at ohlins , thier experience and tech direct from the motorcycle world is put into cycles .
Your right, there is a lot of crossover and similarity, and yes I am aware that a lot of the magic is tucked away on a motorbike, but it doesn't change the fact that there are more factors at play with an MTB than a motorbike, and thats the heart of my point, and thats as much about the restrictions of what you can viably make work in the real world on a bike as the constraints of working with human power, peddling and bicycle drivetrains. Effectively there are more parameters to take account of on a bike, especially a trail or enduro bike which is designed to go up as well as it goes down.
Anyway all performance suspension design in whatever field is a dark art! I am not saying that getting a motorbike suspension design and set up right isn't hideously complex, I went down that particular black hole on a Gixer track back with full Ohilns that ended up being fiddled with more than ridden in the quest for the perfect set up.
There is a lot of crossover between multiple brands who are involved in both sectors, most of the main players are, and as I said in my other post motorcycle shock tech is far more evolved and complex/capable that its MTB cousins, and the whole crossover between ideas from one field into the other is exciting in the possibilities.
Anyway all performance suspension design in whatever field is a dark art! I am not saying that getting a motorbike suspension design and set up right isn't hideously complex, I went down that particular black hole on a Gixer track back with full Ohilns that ended up being fiddled with more than ridden in the quest for the perfect set up.
There is a lot of crossover between multiple brands who are involved in both sectors, most of the main players are, and as I said in my other post motorcycle shock tech is far more evolved and complex/capable that its MTB cousins, and the whole crossover between ideas from one field into the other is exciting in the possibilities.
Rosemount
E*POWAH Elite
Bit of a difference there in performance Gary .
Motor cycle is designed to go as fast as possible and stop as fast as possible . E bike is restricted to 25 KMPH .
Tolerance and durability is not even comparable .
But isn't that the point, the comparison isn't comparable
I am not even sure whose comparing what anymore, f@@k knows how I ended top talking about motorcycle suspension design in a thread about bicycle weight saving
Any way bikes are rad, motorbikes are rad, ebikes are rad, they are all far to complicated and expensive but thank god Baron Karl von Drais some 200 years ago put one wheel in front of the other with a piece of wood connecting the two and set out down the cobbles on his newly invented fun machine with only a bit of leather padding to save his arse. Look at him, he couldn't give a shit about spring rates or shim stacks!
I am not even sure whose comparing what anymore, f@@k knows how I ended top talking about motorcycle suspension design in a thread about bicycle weight saving
Any way bikes are rad, motorbikes are rad, ebikes are rad, they are all far to complicated and expensive but thank god Baron Karl von Drais some 200 years ago put one wheel in front of the other with a piece of wood connecting the two and set out down the cobbles on his newly invented fun machine with only a bit of leather padding to save his arse. Look at him, he couldn't give a shit about spring rates or shim stacks!
So moto tech is based off bike tech after all?
>moto<
Active member
Ha, you guys! I'm tapping out.
Why Are Good Bikes so Expensive? | Gear Patrol
High-end road and mountain bikes can cost as much as — or more than — a decent used car. But why?
www.gearpatrol.com
This article was a very insightful read. The KTM MBR one too, regarding how these top-end race bikes are a thing since people can actually afford them, whereas KTM bikes on the showroom floor are base level. I just don't like how the industry guys are spinning it, suggesting they're on some Apple innovation cycle. I can't deny it. I just find it repulsive. SRAM is extremely guilty of it, and I avoid them (and Apple) for it. I wish they'd wait for a bigger "game-changer", before pushing such "innovation" out.
To be honest, I'm very hopeful that emtbs adopt a lot of moto tech. People on normal MTB forums are incredibly conservative. They're the ones demanding incremental improvements through materials and small design tweaks. They're the ones harshly criticizing things for looking different. They belly-ache over high weight. They're a certain kind of Luddite. They're here too, ogling the Orbea Rise or Levo SL and criticizing Chris Porter...
Tech is like what the mp3 and CD did to the vinyl record. It's like going from combustion to electric. It's not like what the space frame design (welded tubes in triangular/truss-like pattern) did for racing cars over stamped plates and beams--space frames required specialized and skilled hands-on labor the R&D needs to be validated for every reiteration. The bicycle already had a space frame. It's been elevated to an art form, with bike enthusiasts ogling over stacked dimes for welds. We're paying for art... one-piece monocoque was the next step engineering challenge, and it happened to become mainstream, despite fears of lower impact resistance. The marketing eventually sank in and got ppl to pay 50% more for the carbon version. People know they're idiots for paying this much to save weight that can be compared to a fresh heap of
... err, I mean eating fewer cookies.Those ebikes for sale on Amazon, that Zimmerman posted as examples, represent the reality of applying tech without art. Elevating the function and form raises the price. It'd be fairer to compare a Sur Ron X (Black Edition) with a Honda CFR250--it's a step in the electric-powered direction, to showcase the benefits like reduced maintenance/mess, reduced noise, and instant torque, but there's way more going on than that.
I have to admit that familiarity reigns, even for me. As much as I want to claim that I'm open-minded, I can't. I criticized designs like the Marin Mt Vision (and Wolfridge, and the Polygon version). Designs like the Tantrum rear suspension is intriguing, but it's easy to convince me to wait until it's more refined to be elegant before buying on. I'm used to the handling and utility of a mtb, able to get the saddle slammed low for letting loose, and raising it to pedal efficiently, and able to get the bike around gates and transport it normally. I want to still be able to ride with my ride crew but am hopelessly in love with the idea of owning only one bike. That's why I end up looking at bikes like the Whyte E180, Marin Alpine Trail E2, and the Forestal Siryon. I like the idea of using the space in front of the BB/motor for battery storage, to keep weight low and centered, to not compromise on handling. It's a mix of wanting function and form, but not wanting to pay for what's essentially bike jewelry. Wanting certain function and form severely constrains new designs to fit into familiar "standards". This is pretty much what has been slowing bike progress so much, IMO. For example, there was a lot of friction to even get people off of rims (and hubs) that were considered even narrow by roadie standards, as people considered rim weight to be over 2x more important than frame weight, despite running beefier enduro-inspired tires and adding a good measure of extra sealant...
Sorry, long-winded way of saying that I'm extremely impressed by moto tech, am envious, but at the same time hate how I was seemingly groomed into buying all this expensive push-bike/acoustic-bike stuff, based on the idea that it's some superbike like a Ducati Superleggera V4. I'd love for ebikes to be comparable, but fear that they'll become something totally different. I've posted basically the same argument before, and people essentially pointed me to the Sur Ron, which I passed on. My money's going towards a Marin Alpine Trail E2, because my current emtb is falling apart, and I don't have the patience to wait for Shimano's motor revision in which the integrated battery slides up the downtube in front of the motor like on the Whyte. Sorry for driving up the prices... I see it as something more my style, compared to a Honda Africa Twin or KTM Super Adventure, since it lets me access sweet singletrack that normally would be off-limits to motos while making the moto-legal stuff more enjoyable (especially those stupidly steep climbs that go straight up the hill).
In other words, I just need the bike to be light enough to pick up easily, which happens to be also light enough to pedal and handle for me. I understand why people set familiar numbers to things like price and weight, but I learned that those aren't really that important to me in the end. I shopped for "cheap", getting a $3600 ebike that weighed 50 lbs, but I stopped keeping track of money and weight as I tweaked it. I tried to make it lighter, but I bet it's back up to over 55 lbs by now after realizing that I need beefier parts. It prob cost me over $2500 extra to get it to this point too. My shitty decision-making skills "improved" from my experience, to be open to spending $6000 for a 55 lb bike that only goes 15-20 mph and makes whiny electric motor noises, as I more clearly know myself and what I want. I doubt that normal people would understand. In the end, I consider it a problem that'd be solved by voting with your money. I'm a prisoner of all the marketing and trendy hype (steepening your STA and increasing reach by 25mm is an innovation worth buying a new bike for /sarcasm), but am slowly becoming more true to myself.
Last edited:
Interesting article that. I like Fred’s honesty best.Why Are Good Bikes so Expensive? | Gear Patrol
High-end road and mountain bikes can cost as much as — or more than — a decent used car. But why?
This article was a very insightful read. The KTM MBR one too, regarding how these top-end race bikes are a thing since people can actually afford them, whereas KTM bikes on the showroom floor are base level. I just don't like how the industry guys are spinning it, suggesting they're on some Apple innovation cycle. I can't deny it. I just find it repulsive. SRAM is extremely guilty of it, and I avoid them (and Apple) for it. I wish they'd wait for something bigger
To be honest, I'm very hopeful that emtbs adopt a lot of moto tech. People on normal MTB forums are incredibly conservative. They're the ones demanding incremental improvements through materials and small design tweaks. They're the ones harshly criticizing things for looking different. They belly-ache over high weight. They're a certain kind of Luddite. They're here too, ogling the Orbea Rise or Levo SL and criticizing Chris Porter...
Tech is like what the mp3 and CD did to the vinyl record. It's like going from combustion to electric. It's not like what the space frame design (welded tubes in triangular/truss-like pattern) did for racing cars over stamped plates and beams--space frames required specialized and skilled hands-on labor the R&D needs to be validated for every reiteration. The bicycle already had a space frame. It's been elevated to an art form, with bike enthusiasts ogling over stacked dimes for welds. We're paying for art... one-piece monocoque was the next step engineering challenge, and it happened to become mainstream, despite fears of lower impact resistance. The marketing eventually sank in and got ppl to pay 50% more. People know they're idiots for paying this much to save weight that can be compared to a fresh heap of
Those ebikes for sale on Amazon, that Zimmerman posted as examples, represent the reality of applying tech without art. Elevating the function and form raises the price. It'd be fairer to compare a Sur Ron X (Black Edition) with a Honda CFR250 seems like a step in the electric-powered direction, to showcase the benefits like reduced maintenance/mess, reduced noise, and instant torque.
I have to admit that familiarity reigns, even for me. As much as I want to claim that I'm open-minded, I can't. I criticized designs like the Marin Mt Vision (and Wolfridge, and the Polygon version). Designs like the Tantrum rear suspension is intriguing, but it's easy to convince me to wait until it's more refined to be elegant before buying on. I'm used to the handling and utility of a mtb, able to get the saddle slammed low for letting loose, and raising it to pedal efficiently, and able to get the bike around gates and transport it normally. I want to still be able to ride with my ride crew but am hopelessly in love with the idea of owning only one bike. That's why I end up looking at bikes like the Whyte E180, Marin Alpine Trail E2, and the Forestal Siryon. I like the idea of using the space in front of the BB/motor for battery storage, to keep weight low and centered, to not compromise on handling. It's a mix of wanting function and form, but not wanting to pay for what's essentially bike jewelry.
Sorry, long-winded way of saying that I'm extremely impressed by moto tech, am envious, but at the same time hate how I was seemingly groomed into buying all this expensive push-bike/acoustic-bike stuff, based on the idea that it's some superbike like a Ducati Superleggera V4. I'd love for ebikes to be comparable, but fear that they become something totally different. I've posted basically the same argument before, and people essentially pointed to the Sur Ron, which I passed on. My money's going towards a Marin Alpine Trail E2, because my current emtb is falling apart, and I don't have the patience to wait for Shimano's motor revision in which the integrated battery slides up the downtube in front of the motor like on the Whyte. Sorry for driving up the prices... I see it as something more my style, compared to a Honda Africa Twin or KTM Super Adventure, since it lets me access sweet singletrack that normally would be off-limits to motos while making the moto-legal stuff more enjoyable (especially those stupidly steep climbs that go straight up the hill).
In other words, I just need the bike to be light enough to pick up easily, which happens to be also light enough to make it easier to pedal and handle for me. I understand why people set familiar numbers to things like price and weight, but I learned that those aren't really that important to me in the end. I shopped for "cheap", getting a $3600 ebike that weighed 50 lbs, but I stopped keeping track of money and weight as I tweaked it. I tried to make it lighter, but I bet it's back up to over 55 lbs by now after realizing that I need beefier parts. It prob cost me over $2500 extra to get it to this point too. My shitty decision-making skills "improved" from my experience, to be open to spending $6000 for a 55 lb bike that only goes 15-20 mph and makes whiny electric motor noises, as I more clearly know myself and what I want. I doubt that normal people would understand.
Fred says shopping mid-tier if you’re still going to buy from the big brands, is smarter. And he says that smaller companies and direct-to-consumer brands have been successful at what’s relatively cheap (meaning $2,000 to $4,000). “Unless you’re a competitive racer, you start to get really tiny gains above that, and at a certain level, it’s all pixie dust and ‘new-car’ smell.”
As for the other two they are just justifying their high prices with poor comparisons , especially specialised the ultimate pixie dust seller
EMTB Forums
Latest articles
-
Introducing the Forestal e-Cygnus - a downcountry and XC emtb
The new Forestal e-Cygnus is a slightly unusual emtb. It comes in two... -
2025 M1 Sporttechnik EN 8.0 review
The M1 EN is one of four M1 models built on the same frame. Well, it’s...