JTK Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 This thread is purely about MTB as I have no idea about road bikes or bmx's etc But it is quite interesting to note that some bikes hold 2nd hand value better than others. One would imagine as cars also do the same that this should not really be all that interesting. But I find it strange given that the components on these bike are made by the same manufacturer, ie: Shimano, Sram, etc. The only different thing is the frame and that cannot be the reason? Why do we have this discrepancy in depreciation when it is pretty much the same bike. The only diffs is the manufacturer sticker. And they are little more than an assembly agent in the grand scheme of things? Is it the exclusivity of certain makes? Maybe the frames of the one is so much more superior to the other? Or the assembly skills? Cant be that though as we all put bikes together in our garages with much less QC oo and yes I understand that if a new fad comes out that the old will loose value because of. Not talking about that. As that will be across the board...
Kranswurm Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 This thread is purely about MTB as I have no idea about road bikes or bmx's etc But it is quite interesting to note that some bikes hold 2nd hand value better than others. One would imagine as cars also do the same that this should not really be all that interesting. But I find it strange given that the components on these bike are made by the same manufacturer, ie: Shimano, Sram, etc. The only different thing is the frame and that cannot be the reason? Why do we have this discrepancy in depreciation when it is pretty much the same bike. The only diffs is the manufacturer sticker. And they are little more than an assembly agent in the grand scheme of things? Is it the exclusivity of certain makes? Maybe the frames of the one is so much more superior to the other? Or the assembly skills? Cant be that though as we all put bikes together in our garages with much less QC oo and yes I understand that if a new fad comes out that the old will loose value because of. Not talking about that. As that will be across the board... Not for one minute do you believe all frames are the same.Imagine comparing my Santa Cruz to a piece of plumbing like a Giant
JTK Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) Not for one minute do you believe all frames are the same.Imagine comparing my Santa Cruz to a piece of plumbing like a Giant I did not compare frames as being the same. But the price diffs does not go along with the frame diffs. Lets take a Giant, Mongoose and a GT of the same price bracket with same components on. GT appears to loose value much quicker. Mongoose even more so. Why? That is my question... Edited July 13, 2012 by JTK
Smolly Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 Its because they don't just guess the geometry, types of alu/carbon, thickness of the material! Its called research, testing and technology! Do you think Tata and Porsche use the same technolgy and techniques for producing vehicles?
KiNgL Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 and merida ? they seem to hold value a bit better than compared to say a g1ant.
Guest Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 I did not compare frames as being the same. But the price diffs does not go along with the frame diffs. Lets take a Giant, Mongoose and a GT of the same price bracket with same components on. GT appears to loose value much quicker. Mongoose even more so. Why? That is my question... 1st - you pay for name...Cannonfail, Spez, those brands are for Fortuner drivers, and are more expensive frames.Giant, GT, Mongoose, Merida are more common and readily available frames from more shops in SA. You must "exclusivity" into account.... And then, material... I wont buy a carbon frame from Dunlop....And then geometry investment...TREK & GF 29er geometry has taken years to perfect, where new players like Titan just design 29er frames, but they havent invested nearly as much as Trek.
JTK Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) Its because they don't just guess the geometry, types of alu/carbon, thickness of the material! Its called research, testing and technology!Do you think Tata and Porsche use the same technolgy and techniques for producing vehicles?missing the point. Tata / Porche = not the same engine/ components etc. Bikes in the same new price bracket have the same components, give or take. Aplles with apples. Frame geo cant be the be all end all as if I have bad geo I copy the next guy's geo. Cant be the type of Alu as they all almost use the same. Cant be the welding as that is the same. What is it then? Edited July 13, 2012 by JTK
JTK Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 and merida ? they seem to hold value a bit better than compared to say a g1ant.my point exactly
Kranswurm Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 I did not compare frames as being the same. But the price diffs does not go along with the frame diffs. Lets take a Giant, Mongoose and a GT of the same price bracket with same components on. GT appears to loose value much quicker. Mongoose even more so. Why? That is my question... Because the ride and geometry are different.The build quality is different.etc etc Not that I would touch any of those 3 with a barge pole
Kranswurm Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 missing the point. Tata / Porche = not the same engine/ components etc. Bikes in the same new price bracket have the same components, give or take. Aplles with apples. Frame geo cant be the be all end all as if I have bad geo I copy the next guy's geo. Cant be the type of Alu as they all almost use the same. Cant be the welding as that is the same. What is it then? Stop harping on They are not the sameWelding is not the sameAnd Geometry is most def not the same
JTK Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 Because the ride and geometry are different.The build quality is different.etc etc Not that I would touch any of those 3 with a barge poleTo be honest. I think that is where answer lies... kevink 1
Guest Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 Because the ride and geometry are different.The build quality is different.etc etc Not that I would touch any of those 3 with a barge pole what's wrong with GT? Would love to hear. kevink 1
JTK Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 Stop harping onThey are not the sameWelding is not the sameAnd Geometry is most def not the same ok lets say that with bikes in the same price bracket with the same components one is flawed and the other less so. Why does the flawed one sell in the 1st place? Why are they not out of business? Surely if you buy one you are stupid when you can get another less flawed one with the same components for the same money? Or is it a case of I want to drive an Alpha/Jeep/etc and dont care about the resale?
Kranswurm Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 what's wrong with GT? Would love to hear. Nothing....but....its not quite a Santa Cruz is it?
Kranswurm Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 ok lets say that with bikes in the same price bracket with the same components one is flawed and the other less so. Why does the flawed one sell in the 1st place? Why are they not out of business? Surely if you buy one you are stupid when you can get another less flawed one with the same components for the same money? Or is it a case of I want to drive an Alpha/Jeep/etc and dont care about the resale? Very few even consider resale when they buy a bike
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now