Bikes and Moto-bikes - why do they cost… the same?

clarkenstein

clarkenstein

JORBA Board Member/Chapter Leader
JORBA.ORG
Interesting watch below. Explores some of the info behind the scenes on what a bike costs and what a moto costs. Something that has always bugged me.

I think it really boils down to what a group is willing to pay, but it’s pretty interesting.

The point made about the customization available of what we get in the bike world is definitely not available in the moto world.

Having a foot in both places, it is interesting since two of my motorcycles cost less than my mountain bike.

 
It's because we're stupid and pay it. We could stop the arms race by refusing to buy overly expensive stuff thinking paying more means getting something better. In MTB, after mid level pricing, the increase in performance drops significantly for the increase in price. Most of us know this, but our egos tell us to ignore it. So grow up, stop paying these prices, and they will go back down.
 
clarkenstein said:
what a group is willing to pay
Click to expand...

this is everything,

Ooh, two microeconomics subjects in the same day! 🍆🍆🍆

mtbiker87 said:
It's because we're stupid and pay it. We could stop the arms race by refusing to buy overly expensive stuff thinking paying more means getting something better. In MTB, after mid level pricing, the increase in performance drops significantly for the increase in price. Most of us know this, but our egos tell us to ignore it. So grow up, stop paying these prices, and they will go back down.
Click to expand...

The supplier would still have a portfolio of bikes at different price points - consider the Black Series stuff - large incremental price for small incremental improvement,
but some are willing to pay, and it might not be about the improvement! just about others seeing it. @Steve Vai has mentioned moving +$10k bikes so someone could do the 5 boro tour that weekend.... so it ain't about the bike
 
Last edited:
Because the mountain bike industry is fucktarded. The other thing is why are components like mountain bike suspension ok to suck, break and fail and it's considered ok. I rarely see motorcycle suspension fail nearly as much as mountain bike suspension parts. WTF?
 
FatTaco said:
Because the mountain bike industry is fucktarded. The other thing is why are components like mountain bike suspension ok to suck, break and fail and it's considered ok. I rarely see motorcycle suspension fail nearly as much as mountain bike suspension parts. WTF?
Click to expand...


I think here it’s the fun game of weight savings. We are really conscious of saving weight and that sells too. So i venture to guess that if it’s light, it’s gonna break.
 
FatTaco said:
Because the mountain bike industry is fucktarded. The other thing is why are components like mountain bike suspension ok to suck, break and fail and it's considered ok. I rarely see motorcycle suspension fail nearly as much as mountain bike suspension parts. WTF?
Click to expand...
And they carry less than half the weight, are made be many of the same manufacturers, and see much less abuse compared to,say, an off the floor motocross or trail/Enduro motorcycle.
 
Patrick said:
this is everything,

Ooh, two microeconomics subjects in the same day! 🍆🍆🍆



The supplier would still have a portfolio of bikes at different price points - consider the Black Series stuff - large incremental price for small incremental improvement,
but some are willing to pay, and it might not be about the improvement! just about others seeing it. @Steve Vai has mentioned moving +$10k bikes so someone could do the 5 boro tour that weekend.... so it ain't about the bike
Click to expand...
That's exactly my point. Pricing is somewhat based on who's buying and why. There is always going to be that element in every sport or hobby that feels the need to impress everyone with the newest, most expensive equipment, regardless of their ability to utilize it. It's just unfortunately human nature, and even more unfortunate that such behavior effects said sport or hobby in mostly negative ways. The only way to negate that, is for everyone else not to follow that example. If the market for the highest end products stops being profitable, they either stop making said product, or adjust the pricing accordingly. Take DH bikes as an example. But good luck with that, as there are still to many people who'd rather look cool, than buy what actually suits their needs.
 
mtbiker87 said:
That's exactly my point. Pricing is somewhat based on who's buying and why. There is always going to be that element in every sport or hobby that feels the need to impress everyone with the newest, most expensive equipment, regardless of their ability to utilize it. It's just unfortunately human nature, and even more unfortunate that such behavior effects said sport or hobby in mostly negative ways. The only way to negate that, is for everyone else not to follow that example. If the market for the highest end products stops being profitable, they either stop making said product, or adjust the pricing accordingly. Take DH bikes as an example. But good luck with that, as there are still to many people who'd rather look cool, than buy what actually suits their needs.
Click to expand...

Anyone rolling a $6k 12sp XC/trail bike with flat pedals.
 
Last edited:
Charge what he market will bear.

relate it to skating and bmx. A skateboard deck in 1988 was $50. In 2023, $55-$65, because the market is kids. Same with bmx, American made steel frame, $400-$450 in late 90’s, now $520. Market: kids.

Market for road and mtb; dentists
 
Last edited:
stb222 said:
Charge what he market will bear.

relate it to skating and bmx. A skateboard deck in 1988 was $50. In 2023, $55-$65, because the market is kids. Same with bmx, American made steel frame, $400-$450 in late 90’s, $520z. Market: kids.

Market for road and mtb; dentists
Click to expand...
Exactly !!! You can get a much better bang for your buck buying a BMX than a MTB or Road bike. As well as the fact that even older BMX riders are less than willing to spend exorbitant prices for a bike they know will end up hitting ground more often than not. While MTBers will have less concerns buying a 7k plus carbon super bike that will land the ground only slightly less often, and then get upset when it cracks, and the company won't warranty it. My Fit PK3 has probably the best price VS performance vs value of any of my bikes.
 
Last edited:
FatTaco said:
Because the mountain bike industry is fucktarded. The other thing is why are components like mountain bike suspension ok to suck, break and fail and it's considered ok. I rarely see motorcycle suspension fail nearly as much as mountain bike suspension parts. WTF?
Click to expand...
Fox makes a coil overshock for dirt modified race cars that costs less than $300, is completely user rebuildable, can be economically revealed by the user, and both performs, and is more reliable than some of thier most recent MTB offerings. While subjected to 400+ plus horsepower, 2500#+ vehicles, hitting bumps at close 100mph repeatedly during anywhere from a 30 to 100 lap event. And the economy of scale compared to mountain bikes is similar, if not lower. I know this because in a past life I worked at a retailer who sold them. So I call bullshit....total bullshit, on the industry.
 
clarkenstein said:
Without a doubt. Parts seem disposable in the MTB world. I need to update the suspension on one of my dirt bikes, but it’s going to last me years. A mtb needs a rebuild every season.
Click to expand...
I concur. Even with cars, I put these coilovers on one of my Jeeps five years ago - I have not touched them and they have 10,000 miles on them and 80+ days of hardcore four wheeling plus 20,000 miles on a trailer under a 5000lbs jeep with 450hp and they have had zero issues at the cost of top end suspension on a DH bike.

Plus they were controlling a 160lb tire/wheel at each end.

My DH bike’s suspension was toast after a seasons - especially air suspension. But air shocks for the buggy’s we build last years.
8E5173EF-9FD9-459C-95AC-FB65804173C6.jpeg
 
The devils in the details.

There’s a few main points why this is the case.

First, take a 10k motocross bike compared to a 10k enduro bicycle. That enduro bike will be (or very close to be) what a pro enduro rider will be riding. A factory works motocross bike that a pro would ride? Hard to say exactly, but probably multiple times more than 10k.

Second, materials and design. Granted dirt bikes are built to be light, but they can get away without going to the extreme that mountain bikes go to. Carbon design is always trying to be as light and stiff as possible. Moto uses aluminum and steel in their frames. And can afford to be more crude. Also mtb has been changing very quickly, while moto has been a slow progression from the 70’s. They haven’t had to reinvent the wheel every 5 years. So they’ve been able build upon decades of R&D.

I really think it’s apples and oranges.
 
Cost based pricing is for monopolies.

If a product cost $0.01 to manufacture, but people were willing to buy all you could make for $100 each, what would you charge?

There are other pricing strategies, initial release (early adopters) are willing to pay more. Right through the consumer who is happy with the discount when the newer model arrives.
 
Patrick said:
Cost based pricing is for monopolies.

If a product cost $0.01 to manufacture, but people were willing to buy all you could make for $100 each, what would you charge?

There are other pricing strategies, initial release (early adopters) are willing to pay more. Right through the consumer who is happy with the discount when the newer model arrives.
Click to expand...

The barriers to entry for motorcycles are far greater than a bicycle - especially if it is going to be street legal and comply with emissions standards. So if your gap of $0.01 vs purchase price of $100 were real, it would open up a good amount of entry for new companies.

I think part of the problem with the cycling world is they try to re-invent the wheel - so to speak -every few years. A lot of human powered - non assisted technology/change has really been in wheel size over the last ten years. Frankly it has been nauseating/confusing for the cyclist that is not totally geeked out in technology.

My uncles rim braked 1997 Ti Serotta Colorado still works great.

When I was a wrench in the 90’s we sold tons of Ti bikes, we used to stock 30+ frames from Litespeed, Merlin and Ibis to name a few and sold them to customers as “lifetime” bikes. I have not heard the term “lifetime” with anything in the cycling industry for over 15 years. Maybe for a warranty, but by the time you break a frame now the company replaces it with new technology, which means you usually need new wheels, seatpost, maybe a fork, possibly cranks - at this point your are more than 2/3rds to a new bike.

For an industry that is “green” it sure promotes consuming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom