Look whats just been invented šŸ˜‰

They're already more expensive than any car I ever owned :rolleyes:
Average new bike cost is around £350, according to the industry.

https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/how-much-money-can-you-save-cycling

Yes indeed. £350. New. Average.

How many bikes are RBers looking for from this rrp point?

As you can imagine, online sales dominate - there's not much point selling a bike at this price or below to be used year round in all weathers. Warranty is likely to exceed margin.

Average new car is £33000.
Used is £16000

https://plc.autotrader.co.uk/news-views/press-releases/retail-price-index-april-2025/

The spread of values will basically be a bell curve, with there being a proportion of cycles over 10k, and some new cars under that.

My bikes always used to be worth more than my car, but recent decline in classic values, and the introduction of LEZ in Bristol means that its sadly no longer the case.😪
 
Last edited:
Yeah, exactly, people on this forum are enthusiasts. Some want to keep old bikes going, and some will be happy spending £500 on some rare tyres to complete their build, but I would suggest that in the middle are many people who are all still willing to pay too much for some old stuff so they can build up a bike, regardless of whether it's £500 for some tyres (which is an edge case no matter how you look at it). In contrast averages are based on everyone, including those who really don't care about bikes and to whom they are simply a method of getting from A to B. Conversations on here around cars (with a few exceptions) have led me to suspect that most people see cars as 'from A to B' at best and nothing more, so comparing high end new bikes to average used cars isn't exactly comparing apples to apples, even if the value for money element of the argument is still very valid. A boggo family car is mass produced, doesn't have performance, and if you try to drive it hard everywhere you'll kill the thing pretty quickly. It's the same with MX bikes that people always use as a comparison. Yes, you can get one for less than a high end bike but that high end bike is race spec, basically, the MX bike won't be. People say 'oh my car tyres are cheaper than that bike tyre', and while I agree that bike tyres are ridiculous in cost these days, the rear tyres on my car are c£200 each discounted, whereas a discounted Conti DH tyre is about £60. If we start talking about race tyres for cars you're then into way more than that.

Going to the point about standards; 100%. Then again most cars are almost entirely proprietary with only consumables like tyres, batteries and bulbs being a true standard across the gamut. Move away from that and while some family parts are transferrable, they're the exception rather than the rule. At least bikes have some form of standards, even if many of them are niche, poorly implemented, patented, or utilised by a single manufacturer. Where the car industry differs though is that spares are usually easily available until cars are well over 20 years old unless very low volume. You try getting spares off the shelf for a bike made even ten years ago...
 
The customers for super high value new bikes,
(Often termed "dentist bikes" in the trade) are
90% mammalian
and 10% racer

Like modern Land Rovers, the supposed target audience is not the real one.

Is there a name for this marketing style?
 
I can't imagine any circumstance where it's more enjoyable riding one!

I have ridden one, it was even less fun than building the eccentric wheels for it🤣

either you're A Clown
Or you look like one.
ah, but you didn't have the aftermarket phallic seat option. noting that this option is not enjoyed by all and you may fall outside the intended market.
 
1930-S-Frame-Suspension-Spring-frame-Bicycle-10.jpg


1930-Spring-S-Frame-22.jpg

(all credits to https://onlinebicyclemuseum.co.uk/1930-s-frame-suspension-springframe-bicycle/)
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top