# Why are bicycles so expensive??



## chauzie (Mar 8, 2010)

I don't believe aluminum or carbon are expensive material. Both materials are readily available. The process of manipulating aluminum can't be more expensive in bicycle than in say a motorcycle or a car. Carbon weaving these days are done in Taiwan (and probably moving to China now) and the process has become automated too (gone are the days where a boutique shop with 5 employees are weaving and layering up carbon).

So what does a $6000-$7000 mountain bike can do that a $3000 Kawasaki dirt bike (or any dirt bike) can't do? What technology exist in the mbt that is vastly superior to the dirt bike?

Same goes for a carbon road bike? What warrant a $7000-$8000 road bike??? Is it the design? I don't think so. Bicycle designs even in a $8000 road bike is still consisted of 2 triangles in rigid fashion.

For $7000, one can get a 600cc race rocket replica from Yamaha or Honda packed with so much high tech that it makes me wonder why a bicycle can also cost this much.

IMO, a top-of-line bicycle should not be anymore than $2000 max. Somewhere along the line, some got greedy! 

But what's your opinion on the high prices? Or maybe you think they're not high enough. Let's hears them.


----------



## alexrex20 (Dec 20, 2005)

in terms of raw materials, nothing is worth what we pay for it.

what we're paying for is the design, R&D, testing, manufacturing, and overhead for a company to do all the work for us.

do you really think a $200,000 Ferrari has an extra $170k worth of materials compared to a Honda Accord?


----------



## mtnbiketodd (Sep 19, 2005)

I have to assume the number of bikes sold at these prices are few therefore the % of R/D that each bike has to cover is high.


----------



## Blue&Yellow (Jul 14, 2010)

A top level carbon frame is essentially space grade engineering with full cad/cam fem stress testing, prototypes and a delicate manufacturing process. Same goes with components; as manufacturing tollerances and materials improve but volumes go down things are going to get expensive. Trust me when I say that a full XTR component group actually is dirt cheap!

A motorcycle may be faster, stronger, use more materials BUT it's all manufactured to lower tollerances. Tollerances is the key issue, as tollerances, weight and volumes goes down prices goes up.


----------



## trboxman (Jul 7, 2010)

riiight...machining an engine is so much easier than making a bike....


----------



## Biohazard74 (Jul 16, 2009)

Bikes ARE cheap. Walmart has some of the best prices for bicycles. You should go buy one there


----------



## Cobretti (May 23, 2005)

Blue&Yellow said:


> A motorcycle may be faster, stronger, use more materials BUT it's all manufactured to lower tollerances. Tollerances is the key issue, as tollerances, weight and volumes goes down prices goes up.


I agree, it's all about tolerances. And ball bearings. They have a lot to do with it too. :thumbsup:


----------



## alexrex20 (Dec 20, 2005)

trboxman said:


> riiight...machining an engine is so much easier than making a bike....


that's exactly my point. i'm sorry that you missed it in your sad attempt to counter my post. machining an engine would fall under "design, R&D, and manufacturing" and that's exactly why Ferrari can charge $200k+ for a car and still have their entire production sold out before the car even hits the showroom. that's also why i can charge $160/hr just to _assemble_ and engine; i don't do any machining or fabrication.


----------



## alexrex20 (Dec 20, 2005)

Cobretti said:


> I agree, it's all about tolerances. And ball bearings. They have a lot to do with it too. :thumbsup:


actually, the more important, higher load items on a vehicle (engine, wheels, transmission, etc.) use bushings and roller bearings. ball bearings are typically only used on pulleys.


----------



## trboxman (Jul 7, 2010)

alexrex20 said:


> that's exactly my point. i'm sorry that you missed it in your sad attempt to counter my post. machining an engine would fall under "design, R&D, and manufacturing" and that's exactly why Ferrari can charge $200k+ for a car and still have their entire production sold out before the car even hits the showroom. that's also why i can charge $160/hr just to _assemble_ and engine; i don't do any machining or fabrication.


Newsflash. I wasn't replying to you, dimbulb, I was replying to the guy making a pitch for high tolerances in bicycle mfg accounting for greater costs than is seen in motor cycles.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

chauzie said:


> So what does a $6000-$7000 mountain bike can do that a $3000 Kawasaki dirt bike (or any dirt bike) can't do?


A $6,000-$7,000 mountain bike can seat someone older than 9 years old. A $3,499 Kawasaki dirt bike isn't intended to do that:

http://www.kawasaki.com/Products/Product-Specifications.aspx?scid=8&id=461



> For $7000, one can get a 600cc race rocket replica from Yamaha or Honda...


I'm not sure what a "600cc race rocket replica" is, but it sounds like you're talking about a first-tier 600cc Supersport, which costs more like $11,000:

http://www.yamaha-motor.com/sport/products/modelspecs/8/0/specs.aspx

http://powersports.honda.com/2010/cbr600rr.aspx


----------



## alexrex20 (Dec 20, 2005)

for $7k you can easily get a lightly used R6 or CBR600


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

If I wanted a dirt bike, it would have to be something like a KTM 450 EXC. As an Off-Road only bike it would cost me 9 390 €. Some more for a street legal one.

Annual liability insurance for street use (compulsory, covers damage to the other guy, in an accident) would be about 900 €, minus any bonuses for previous incident free operation of my vehicles.

I think my bicycles are cheap. And operating them is really cheap.


----------



## fightnut (Jul 5, 2007)

alexrex20, I agree with you. When you consider all that goes into a $7,000 sportbike, it's ridiculous that a bicycle should cost the same.

But then again, I would never own a $7,000 bicycle anyway, and have to chuckle at the people that do.


----------



## Blue&Yellow (Jul 14, 2010)

perttime said:


> I think my bicycles are cheap. And operating them is really cheap.


I agree! Even if you buy a really expensive mtb it's still a cheap hobby compared to motorcycles, cars, boats etc.


----------



## wave180 (May 19, 2010)

Because people will still buy them even they're expensive-as long as they're satisfied (and have the money). Unfortunately, not in my case.


----------



## DParks (Oct 3, 2009)

I have had motorcycles and bikes. I've never gotten hurt on a motorcycle like I have on a bike, and that includes after I had a get off and totaled my 2005 R6 (picked up the pieces and pushed it 2 blocks home). 

As for R&D. There is plenty of R&D done on both motos and bikes. To say that R&D isn't as much for motorcycles as it is in bikes is a stretch. It is a vehicle made to attain speeds of 160mph while weighing less than 400 pounds with a motor that will spin up to 16,500rpm. They do have tolerances. Not exactly a product built by a moron or just put together by eye. 

The difference is that there are lots of $7K motorcycles sold every year. It would really be more like $8.5K to $9K for a 600cc. There aren't nearly as many $6-7K bicycles sold. On top of that there are really only about 5 or 6 mainstream motorcycle manufacturers so they each have about 15% of the market. There are more bicycle manufacturers that are making that price of bicycle so they are getting less of the market share, which will require a higher price to maintain their R&D.

Motorcycle manufacturers also have the benefit of getting some of the costs to maintain the bikes as well as replacement parts (Cause almost all of them get wrecked).


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

DParks said:


> ...It is a vehicle made to attain speeds of 160mph while weighing less than 400 pounds with a motor that will spin up to 16,500rpm.


Which vehicle is that? There are no 600s that will go up to 16,500 rpm.



> It would really be more like $8.5K to $9K for a 600cc.


I've already posted the links above. A new first-tier 600 is more like $11,000.


----------



## Uncle Six Pack (Aug 29, 2004)

chauzie said:


> I don't believe aluminum or carbon are expensive material. Both materials are readily available. The process of manipulating aluminum can't be more expensive in bicycle than in say a motorcycle or a car. Carbon weaving these days are done in Taiwan (and probably moving to China now) and the process has become automated too (gone are the days where a boutique shop with 5 employees are weaving and layering up carbon).
> 
> So what does a $6000-$7000 mountain bike can do that a $3000 Kawasaki dirt bike (or any dirt bike) can't do? What technology exist in the mbt that is vastly superior to the dirt bike?
> 
> ...


This is funny.... most items we buy are overpriced.... feeding huge amounts of CEO salaries and taxes that go to a gluttonous federal budget.... but anyways.... just saying that consumers need to be more cautious these days than ever before.

It sounds like you are comparing today's premium bicycle prices to motorcycle and dirtbike prices from 15 years ago. AVERAGE (or MEDIAN, whatever you want) new bike prices compared to EQUIVALENT prices on motorcycles, dirtbikes, quads, boats, snowmobiles, etc is gonna put bicycle prices way lower. Throw in maintenance, registration, etc....

The real answer is that somewhere between actual need and perceived need there is this thing called demand... if there were no demand for premium bikes, then the big companies wouldn't be able to build and sell them. Seriously, though, look around and tell me how many $6000 bikes you see over the course of a month compared to how many $2000 bikes and $1000 bikes.... REAL BIKES, being used locally.... not ones you read about or see on the showroom floor.

Personally, my nice bike purchases have been new leftovers or very nice used bikes... both very wise buying strategies if you want to get something nice for a lot less money. Me buying a mountain bike for over $6000? That would be ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. Just like I wouldn't go out and buy a brand new 1000cc sportbike tomorrow either.


----------



## ljsmith (Oct 26, 2007)

mtnbiketodd said:


> I have to assume the number of bikes sold at these prices are few therefore the % of R/D that each bike has to cover is high.


^^^ This is the main reason. If you take an economics class they call it "economies of scale". The more of an item I produce the more I can spread out the R&D and tooling costs. A lot more motorcycles are built and sold, so the development costs are spread out over more units. The second reason is marketing. It isn't enough to design the best bike out there, you have to convince people that it is the best. So companies spend tons of money on race teams and advertisements to get you to buy their bikes. All that cost is passed on to the consumer. The third reason is that bike companies have realized that people are more willing now, more than in the past, to spend on bikes and are willing to build mega bucks bikes because people are going to buy them. To be honest I think a lot of this has to do with Lance Armstrong and his popularity increasing the number of wannabe types who are willing to spend huge amounts on bikes to be like their hero. When I started biking in 1985, the average person did not spend a lot on a bike. Back then only racers were riding the real expensive stuff. Now even the weekend warriors are riding $4000 bikes.


----------



## Bikin' Bric (Sep 7, 2003)

chauzie said:


> I don't believe aluminum or carbon are expensive material. Both materials are readily available. The process of manipulating aluminum can't be more expensive in bicycle than in say a motorcycle or a car. Carbon weaving these days are done in Taiwan (and probably moving to China now) and the process has become automated too (gone are the days where a boutique shop with 5 employees are weaving and layering up carbon).
> 
> So what does a $6000-$7000 mountain bike can do that a $3000 Kawasaki dirt bike (or any dirt bike) can't do? What technology exist in the mbt that is vastly superior to the dirt bike?
> 
> ...


The $7000 bicycle is usually kitted out with the top of the line gear, no holds barred. A $7000 dirtbike is showroom stock and considered entry level compared to the bikes the pros ride. Check out all the bling and engine work on the top Moto-X racers bikes. I'd say the top of the line MTB is a deal at $7000 compared to the top of the line Moto-X bikes at $15,000.


----------



## jimbowho (Dec 16, 2009)

I ride an old Klunker that fits me perfect. Saved a lot of money.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Bikes are cheap. $1500 gets you a wicked bike. You can get a bike that can be ridden on 99% of all trails with anybody.

Most of us ride way more bike then what we need. I am guilty of it I have a $7000 carbon bike and it is wicked. But I could also ride a $1500 bike an be just fine. I could even race it and be just fine. Sure I might be a minute or two slower but I could also just cut back on the ice cream.

But my $7000 bike has won a world cup (my wife raced it to a win at Bromont). How much do you think James Stewart's race bike is to buy?


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

*Too much bike*



LMN}Most of us ride way more bike then what we need. [/QUOTE said:


> My bike is a better ride than I am a rider.


----------



## Steeljaws (May 2, 2010)

Too much BS goin' on...WTF spends $7K on a bicycle??? I can certainly afford to do it more times then I care to divulge, but Jesus, one has to be out of his mind to spend money like that.


----------



## DParks (Oct 3, 2009)

RIS said:


> Which vehicle is that? There are no 600s that will go up to 16,500 rpm.


Sorry. 15,500 RPM.

And when I bought my '04 R6 I paid $8500. Now that I look it is amazing how the prices have climbed.


----------



## DParks (Oct 3, 2009)

Steeljaws said:


> WTF spends $7K on a bicycle???


I agree. That is an awful lot of money to drop on a bicycle. I think it may become a status symbol at that point. I guess they can't all be racers buying them. But apparently there are enough people doing it that support the manufacturers building them.

I guess if you can afford it then more power to you. To each their own.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Steeljaws said:


> Too much BS goin' on...WTF spends $7K on a bicycle??? I can certainly afford to do it more times then I care to divulge, but Jesus, one has to be out of his mind to spend money like that.


Well I certainly wouldn't spend that much. I get them second hand from my wife who gets them from free.

I can also tell you having owned a couple of 7K bikes that they are certainly not worth the money.


----------



## trboxman (Jul 7, 2010)

Steeljaws said:


> Too much BS goin' on...WTF spends $7K on a bicycle??? I can certainly afford to do it more times then I care to divulge, but Jesus, one has to be out of his mind to spend money like that.


PT Barnum had the answer....


----------



## Biohazard74 (Jul 16, 2009)

Steeljaws said:


> Too much BS goin' on...WTF spends $7K on a bicycle??? I can certainly afford to do it more times then I care to divulge, but Jesus, one has to be out of his mind to spend money like that.


I'm not a pro. But I love mountain biking so much that if I could spend that on a bike I definately would. If I could ride the best bike I could I certainly would. I think most of the people that complain and call others crazy for spending that kind of cash are usually the ones that can't afford to themselves. I know I can't afford it. But I'm a realist and know that if I could, I definately would.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

DParks said:


> Sorry. 15,500 RPM.
> 
> And when I bought my '04 R6 I paid $8500. Now that I look it is amazing how the prices have climbed.


So are you spending $7,000 on a 7 year old bicycle to match, or what?


----------



## metaljim (Apr 22, 2009)

How much do grammar lessons cost?


----------



## Chris Clutton (Nov 8, 2006)

chauzie said:


> So what does a $6000-$7000 mountain bike can do that a $3000 Kawasaki dirt bike (or any dirt bike) can't do? What technology exist in the mbt that is vastly superior to the dirt bike?.


It is all about what you are willing to pay. If you think prices are unreasnable just have fun with junk like I do!

Enjoy!

Chris


----------



## scrubbingbubbles (Jun 24, 2010)

metaljim said:


> How much do grammar lessons cost?


http://www.hookedonphonics.com/


----------



## jollybeggar (Feb 2, 2004)

Bicycles have a huge mark up. They are over priced. Bling is a an addiction and cyclist aren't immune. I have just as much fun on my Haro Mary SS as I do on my Trance XO, but I still want the XO. Form follows function, we should buy the bike which will do the thing we need done, but we are constantly bombarded with newer, bigger, faster, better until we are convinced we need it. I want the lastest new thing but thankfully I'm too poor to buy the new thing. I just wish people just starting out in the sport could get a really good bike for less cash. Maybe bike companies should give big discounts to first time buyers just to get them hooked.


----------



## DSFA (Oct 22, 2007)

jollybeggar said:


> Bicycles have a huge mark up. They are over priced. Bling is a an addiction and cyclist aren't immune. I have just as much fun on my Haro Mary SS as I do on my Trance XO, but I still want the XO. Form follows function, we should buy the bike which will do the thing we need done, but we are constantly bombarded with newer, bigger, faster, better until we are convinced we need it. I want the lastest new thing but thankfully I'm too poor to buy the new thing. I just wish people just starting out in the sport could get a really good bike for less cash. Maybe bike companies should give big discounts to first time buyers just to get them hooked.


Bikes have a huge markup? That ought to get a laugh from anyone who owns or works in a LBS. 
They are overpriced? That would be up the buyer, wouldn't it? I personally wouldn't buy any bike that's worth over a couple of grand. And the most I've spent is on my wife's road bike at $1700, which was almost cost.

I used to manage a LBS and there are very few people who are getting rich off selling bikes and accessories.
I once had a girl come in who worked at a store in the local mall and she was telling me about the markups there, damnnnn :eekster: Ya ever see an item for sale at 70-80% off and wonder how the store stays in business? Because they are still making money at that discount.


----------



## 907guitaristbikerguy (Jul 21, 2010)

yeah... i don't hear people complaining about how overpriced clothes are.

can anyone think of other common products that are WAY overpriced, but get no attention?

like fountain drinks.
except mcdonalds now has any size fountain drink for a dollar, just like holiday has had for--hmm... a while, now.


----------



## ctxcrossx (Jan 13, 2004)

DSFA said:


> Bikes have a huge markup? That ought to get a laugh from anyone who owns or works in a LBS.
> They are overpriced? That would be up the buyer, wouldn't it? I personally wouldn't buy any bike that's worth over a couple of grand. And the most I've spent is on my wife's road bike at $1700, which was almost cost.
> 
> I used to manage a LBS and there are very few people who are getting rich off selling bikes and accessories.
> I once had a girl come in who worked at a store in the local mall and she was telling me about the markups there, damnnnn :eekster: Ya ever see an item for sale at 70-80% off and wonder how the store stays in business? Because they are still making money at that discount.


Well, it's true. It's just not getting marked up by the LBS. I've worked in several, and the LBS barely makes any money off the bikes, esp. top of the line. It doesn't mean they aren't marked up though. The companies are seeing the revenue, not you. Another difference is that many motorcycle companies have their hands in other areas. They will sometimes take a hit in one area and be covered by another part of their company. Bike companies only sell bikes. I'm not saying that this is the case here, but it could be in certain instances.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

I got my beater bike at a yard sale for $3.00 ( three dollars ) . Its a personal decision on how much to spend .


----------



## ae111black (Dec 27, 2008)

I agree with the op on certan parts I do agree that bikes are expensive I here it all the time " what did you spend on that bike? I could have gotten a used car for that" pure ignorance on most peoples part. Seriously I wouldn't want a used car for that cheap and trust it to keep my family safe! I wish I could get a FS trail bike for $200. Sheesh but that's not gonna happen!


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

chauzie said:


> I don't believe aluminum or carbon are expensive material. Both materials are readily available. The process of manipulating aluminum can't be more expensive in bicycle than in say a motorcycle or a car. Carbon weaving these days are done in Taiwan (and probably moving to China now) and the process has become automated too (gone are the days where a boutique shop with 5 employees are weaving and layering up carbon).
> 
> So what does a $6000-$7000 mountain bike can do that a $3000 Kawasaki dirt bike (or any dirt bike) can't do? What technology exist in the mbt that is vastly superior to the dirt bike?
> 
> ...


You are comparing some of the most expensive, top of the line, small batch, blinged out bikes to a rather average motorcycle. A $7000 bike can get you a bike close to one that world-class races are won on. That $7000 motorcycle is nice, but would you see people winning world championships races on one for even triple that amount. Ten times that amount?

Yes, it is probably stupid to drop $7K on a bike, but is is stupid to say that bikes are too expensive just because SOME are. Name one hobby that cannot get ridiculously expensive if you want the very best out there (Stereos, golf, skiing, cars, motorcycles, cameras......).

You CAN get a great bike for $2000.


----------



## alexrex20 (Dec 20, 2005)

kapusta said:


> You are comparing some of the most expensive, top of the line, small batch, blinged out bikes to a rather average motorcycle. A $7000 bike can get you a bike close to one that world-class races are won on. That $7000 motorcycle is nice, but would you see people winning world championships races on one for even triple that amount. Ten times that amount?


AMA Pro classes (Motocross, Superbike, SuperSport 600cc, etc.) use virtually stock showroom models that start at around $10k and can still be competitive.

MotoGP uses $150k+ motorcycles that are completely inaccessible by us mere mortals, so it would not be a just comparison with the $7k bicycle. they are one-off prototypes that are leased to the team (much like F1), and are not available for sale to the public.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

alexrex20 said:


> AMA Pro classes (Motocross, Superbike, SuperSport 600cc, etc.) use virtually stock showroom models that start at around $10k and can still be competitive.


A $1500 bike can be competitive as well.

MotoGP uses $150k+ motorcycles that are completely inaccessible by us mere mortals, so it would not be a just comparison with the $7k bicycle. they are one-off prototypes that are leased to the team (much like F1), and are not available for sale to the public.

Exactly my point. A world class bike is accessible to most people even if the really want it.

There are stupid expensive bikes, and there are stupid expensive motorcycles.

You have not given any argument that shows bikes are not like any other hobby I mentioned. Most people are served fine with affordable models, and stupid expensive ones are available for pro-level riders and those that simply want to spend a lot of money.


----------



## the-one1 (Aug 2, 2008)

What is expensive in one hobby is cheap compared to another.
Take another hobby of mine. Nitro R/C. If you deck out a 1/8 scale nitro with top of the line parts, you'll be pushing close to $2000+. And that's just the first run. Factor in the cost of fuel and tires, it all adds up really quick. Now, $2k for a "toy" is absurd in my books. But it's a passion.
But a bike, once you buy a $5-7K bike, there is usually no other cost as most trails are free and there is no fuel cost other than food. ~$50 for tires every 1-2 years depending on condition.
For a moto and car, there is fuel and tires to pay for.


----------



## DSFA (Oct 22, 2007)

ctxcrossx said:


> Well, it's true. It's just not getting marked up by the LBS. I've worked in several, and the LBS barely makes any money off the bikes, esp. top of the line. It doesn't mean they aren't marked up though. The companies are seeing the revenue, not you. Another difference is that many motorcycle companies have their hands in other areas. They will sometimes take a hit in one area and be covered by another part of their company. Bike companies only sell bikes. I'm not saying that this is the case here, but it could be in certain instances.


It's true in all manufacturing that there is markup between the manufacturer to the customer. A low estimate would be each time someone else handles the product it doubles in price.



ctxcrossx said:


> and the LBS barely makes any money off the bikes, esp. top of the line.


This, on the other hand is false in a manner of speaking. A LBS makes more money per bike on a high end unit than the low end. As a shop it would be better to sell one $2000 bike than 10 $200 just because you would save on setup costs, not to mention flooring costs.

As for the moto companies having other business interests, you're on the money, at least for the big 4 Japanese companies. Most of the Euro brands are pretty much _just_ motorcycle manufacturers. When looking at the Japanese brands realize that the motorcycle divisions are, in some cases, a much smaller part of their business than what most people think.


----------



## To be named later (Jul 22, 2010)

alexrex20 said:


> do you really think a $200,000 Ferrari has an extra $170k worth of materials compared to a Honda Accord?


Yes.

The Ferrari is going to have a super engine, race suspension, performance tires, various high performance stuff, definately not mass produced. You just don't stuff a V6 into a Ferrari. Accord is mass production.

Same thing goes with bikes. You can get the Accord version of a bike ($500?) but if you want the better equipment, performance, components, go with the Lexus equivalent bike 
(750 to $3K?) or if you are real particular, the high dollars you quote.

Having said that, Is $3K to $8K worth it for the Ferrari's of the bike world, I don't think so, but for sure a Ferrari has a helluva lot more than an Accord.


----------



## Mr. Doom (Sep 23, 2005)

*?*



jollybeggar said:


> Bicycles have a huge mark up. They are over priced. Bling is a an addiction and cyclist aren't immune. I have just as much fun on my Haro Mary SS as I do on my Trance XO, but I still want the XO. Form follows function, we should buy the bike which will do the thing we need done, but we are constantly bombarded with newer, bigger, faster, better until we are convinced we need it. I want the lastest new thing but thankfully I'm too poor to buy the new thing. I just wish people just starting out in the sport could get a really good bike for less cash. Maybe bike companies should give big discounts to first time buyers just to get them hooked.


The mark up on bikes is nothing compared to other stuff in retail. In fact it is less than some food items in the grocery store, (I have worked/ordered goods for bike shops and the grocery biz). 
Factor in assembly, warranty, free service and the three hours a customer takes of your time test riding every bike in the shop and it is a wonder the LBS can exist. If it was not for skilled mechanics who can fix hundreds of bikes a week many shops would not!

True It is expensive for the top of the line models and there is a diminishing return on your investment as the price goes up (XX/DuraAce) but Racing Motorcycles can reach over a $100,000 for the latest in technology also.


----------



## TwoHeadsBrewing (Aug 28, 2009)

I think the lower price for motorcycles is the number of units sold. High end road and mountain bikes are not sold nearly as much as mid-range motorcycles. At the number of units produced, R&D, tooling, and manufacturing costs are spread more evenly. 600cc sportbikes are a dime a dozen even in my small town of 90k people. However, the number of $6K mountain and road bikes probably number less than 100. The ratio is of expensive motorcycles (>$20k) is probably similar to expensive bikes (>$6k). Most people can have just as much fun on a motorcycle that costs $8k and a mountain bike that costs $2k.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

RIS said:


> A $6,000-$7,000 mountain bike can seat someone older than 9 years old. A $3,499 Kawasaki dirt bike isn't intended to do that:
> 
> http://www.kawasaki.com/Products/Product-Specifications.aspx?scid=8&id=461
> 
> ...


Jesus you are one misleading miserable eh ehhmm, you would make a wonderful politician.

http://www.kawasaki.com/Products/product-specifications.aspx?id=429

http://www.yamaha-motor.com/sport/products/modelhome/619/0/home.aspx

and if you want actual "race replica" 
Surf Ebay or stop in an actual store, and get 2 k knocked off the MSRP 
bikes are not moving for crap right now, Suzuki for instance did not import any new models for 2010 and will not import anymore SS models for 11
For example, ohhh looky here WTF is this?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2009...iewItem&pt=US_motorcycles&hash=item2a091ba0bc
Point being however with what hte op is stating is that bikes can cost as much as a motorcycle with far more engieneering and of course parts involved, this is true as we know ,less we divulge straight into the entire product line, but you do not want to go there, do you?

The basic price aspect of MTN bikes is supply and demand, they can charge high prices to people who are willing to pay for those prices. There is not any where near the engineering on a MTN bike as in a motorbike, not even close on any level, with that said Kawi, Yami, honda for example are mult tiered companies and motorcycles are only one aspect of what they do, thus cutting manufacturing costs. Anything handmade will cost more, as will anything made from a small company, that is not to say that again, it is not possible to lower the prices, I would love to see a boycott and have bike prices drop substantially.


----------



## chauzie (Mar 8, 2010)

Hey all. Very interesting takes from everyone.

I have an expensive mtb bike too, way too much, but I can afford it. The bike will out ride me for my life time too, but yet I know down the road I will be suckered in plunking down a chunk of income to yet buy another bike that can out ride the current bike! Yes I complain the high prices, but ya know what, at the end of the day, I'm giving back to the sport! Money talks and I put my money where my mouth is, even if I know I shouldn't. It's love for the sport and addiction to bling.

The reason I keep justifying to myself is that mtb biking at least keeps me in shape, improves my health (as long I don't break bones), and increase my stamina under the sheets (no kidding) ;-) So i guess it's all good.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Mr. Doom said:


> The mark up on bikes is nothing compared to other stuff in retail. In fact it is less than some food items in the grocery store, (I have worked/ordered goods for bike shops and the grocery biz).


 sure, generally speaking the cheaper an Item the higher the markup, that changes in nearly every aspect of sales except for a few exclusive ones such as custom made, there again, price is subject to what people will pay.



> Factor in assembly, warranty, free service and the three hours a customer takes of your time test riding every bike in the shop and it is a wonder the LBS can exist. If it was not for skilled mechanics who can fix hundreds of bikes a week many shops would not!


 Welcome to the world of business, however, the simple fact remains that most bike models sold are base models for a reason, should manufacturers lower prices more people would buy their product therefore more money for everyone involved in the process.



> True It is expensive for the top of the line models and there is a diminishing return on your investment as the price goes up (XX/DuraAce) but Racing Motorcycles can reach over a $100,000 for the latest in technology also.


LOL seriously comparing the two? One you have fuel, Computer technology, wiring up the wazooo, fluids changed after every race, huge teams, backup bikes, ect ect. A bike has well, peddles and suspension. No comparison on any level, none. BTW, a MotoGP bike runs well over a million per bike.


----------



## TwoHeadsBrewing (Aug 28, 2009)

chauzie said:


> Hey all. Very interesting takes from everyone.
> 
> I have an expensive mtb bike too, way too much, but I can afford it. The bike will out ride me for my life time too, but yet I know down the road I will be suckered in plunking down a chunk of income to yet buy another bike that can out ride the current bike! Yes I complain the high prices, but ya know what, at the end of the day, I'm giving back to the sport! Money talks and I put my money where my mouth is, even if I know I shouldn't. It's love for the sport and addiction to bling.
> 
> The reason I keep justifying to myself is that *mtb biking at least keeps me in shape, improves my health (as long I don't break bones), and increase my stamina under the sheets* (no kidding) ;-) So i guess it's all good.


That is no BS, and all good reasons to spend as much money as will keep you excited and on the trails!


----------



## Mr. Doom (Sep 23, 2005)

*+1 on that!*



kapusta said:


> A $1500 bike can be competitive as well.
> 
> MotoGP uses $150k+ motorcycles that are completely inaccessible by us mere mortals, so it would not be a just comparison with the $7k bicycle. they are one-off prototypes that are leased to the team (much like F1), and are not available for sale to the public.
> 
> ...


Anyone who thinks bicycles are too expensive needs to break a bone and visit the troll hospital where I am sure the markup on services is more reasonable. Then visit a lawyer for a really good deal.
:madman: :madman: :madman: :madman: 
People tip bartenders 1000 times more often than their bike mechanics for 1/1000 the service in this country so you know where our priorities are.:madmax: :madmax: :madmax:


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Mr. Doom said:


> Anyone who thinks bicycles are too expensive needs to break a bone visit the troll hospital where I am sure the markup on services is more reasonable. Then visit a lawyer for a really good deal.:madman: :madman: :madman: :madman: People tip bartenders 1000 times more often than their bike mechanics for 1/1000 the service in this country so you know where our priorities are.:madmax: :madmax: :madmax:


Huh, Interesting, I could have sworn cannondale entered the quad market offering a quad at a near comparable price to a bicycle, strange.

http://atv.off-road.com/atv/feature/cannondale-unveils-atv-lines-for-2002-29311.html

Even the more amazing thing which is also what killed this line, was the fact that cannondale made and designed their own engine. Pretty cool and did a damn good job on their first attempt, but, should have bought one until they became more established, which they would have been, oustanding quad.


----------



## chauzie (Mar 8, 2010)

Mr. Doom said:


> Anyone who thinks bicycles are too expensive needs to break a bone visit the troll hospital where I am sure the markup on services is more reasonable. Then visit a lawyer for a really good deal.:madman: :madman: :madman: :madman: *People tip bartenders 1000 times more often than their bike mechanics for 1/1000 the service in this country so you know where our priorities are*.:madmax: :madmax: :madmax:


Hmm never thought about it that way. You're right though, we readily tips the waitresses and bartenders much more than we do the mech tech at the LSB working for change. I know this guy who works out of his garage fixing & assembling bikes, and I always go to him. It's a win-win situation for me and him. I help him out, he gets the job done quick.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Blurr said:


> Huh, Interesting, I could have sworn cannondale* FAILED* the quad market offering a quad at a near comparable price to a bicycle, strange.
> 
> http://atv.off-road.com/atv/feature/cannondale-unveils-atv-lines-for-2002-29311.html
> 
> Even the more amazing thing which is also what killed this line, was the fact that cannondale made and designed their own engine. Pretty cool and did a damn good job on their first attempt, but, should have bought one until they became more established, which they would have been, oustanding quad.


Fixed.

Should have done more R&D.

Should have cost more.


----------



## trboxman (Jul 7, 2010)

I don't put bike mechanic in the same worker category as waitress or bartender. It's just not a job that I'll tip someone for doing.


----------



## the-one1 (Aug 2, 2008)

Blurr said:


> Huh, Interesting, I could have sworn cannondale entered the quad market offering a quad at a near comparable price to a bicycle, strange.
> 
> http://atv.off-road.com/atv/feature/cannondale-unveils-atv-lines-for-2002-29311.html
> 
> Even the more amazing thing which is also what killed this line, was the fact that cannondale made and designed their own engine. Pretty cool and did a damn good job on their first attempt, but, should have bought one until they became more established, which they would have been, oustanding quad.


Should have thrown a Lefty into the mix somewhere. That would've made the ATV sell.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

And besides economies of scale in terms of R&D and the number of bikes sold, the number of bicycle companies and manufacturers also has to be considered. We have how many major manufacturers? How many semi-large manufacturers? How many small manufacturers? You start adding these up and it is exponentially larger than the motorcycle industry. All of their R&D, production, and so on costs have to be supported by their products. If the industry was more condensed with only 5 or 6 manufacturers, then yes, the price could be quite a bit lower. That's not how the industry is though. There's also a lot more interchangability and compatability in the mtb industry, this is a lot costlier as well (rather than just crank out something optimized for production).


----------



## selector (Aug 27, 2009)

Nobody on the sales/mfg side got greedy - the consumer did. We're fools and we'll pay anything demanded of us. I'm in an elite group of fools myself...

We, the consumer, fuel the frenzy, the MFGs just accommodate.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Jayem said:


> And besides economies of scale in terms of R&D and the number of bikes sold, the number of bicycle companies and manufacturers also has to be considered. We have how many major manufacturers? How many semi-large manufacturers? How many small manufacturers? You start adding these up and it is exponentially larger than the motorcycle industry. All of their R&D, production, and so on costs have to be supported by their products. If the industry was more condensed with only 5 or 6 manufacturers, then yes, the price could be quite a bit lower. That's not how the industry is though. There's also a lot more interchangability and compatability in the mtb industry, this is a lot costlier as well (rather than just crank out something optimized for production).


You do realize that many bicycles are not made by the actual companies? :thumbsup:


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Jayem said:


> Fixed.
> 
> Should have done more R&D.


 You obviously have zero Idea what you are talking about ,the cannondale quad line was instantly competitive and a huge success, R&D cannondale did their home work and did an outstanding job, they shook up the ATV world.



> Should have cost more.


No, cannondale jumped into the market head first and did two things wrong, one, they offered to large of a product line which was completely unnecessary, and two again, they built their own motor which is the aspect that relaly buckled them, if they again, had waited a couple more years and used a farmed out motor they would have undoubtedly have made it and would still be in the market.


----------



## alexrex20 (Dec 20, 2005)

kapusta said:


> A $1500 bike can be competitive as well.
> 
> MotoGP uses $150k+ motorcycles that are completely inaccessible by us mere mortals, so it would not be a just comparison with the $7k bicycle. they are one-off prototypes that are leased to the team (much like F1), and are not available for sale to the public.
> 
> ...


what part of "MotoGP ($150k+) is not available for sale to the public," did you not understand? what part of "there are entire championships built exclusively around the $10k showroom stock sport bike," did you also not understand?

you suggested that a $10k motorcycle will not get you to the world championship. AMA Pro Racing would disagree.


----------



## Tank99 (Apr 27, 2009)

selector said:


> Nobody on the sales/mfg side got greedy - the consumer did. We're fools and we'll pay anything demanded of us. I'm in an elite group of fools myself...
> 
> We, the consumer, fuel the frenzy, the MFGs just accommodate.


This.

Cable, Phone, Electronics, GAS...this spans all consumer wants/needs/over indulgence.


----------



## trboxman (Jul 7, 2010)

Jayem said:


> And besides economies of scale in terms of R&D and the number of bikes sold, the number of bicycle companies and manufacturers also has to be considered. We have how many major manufacturers? How many semi-large manufacturers? How many small manufacturers? You start adding these up and it is exponentially larger than the motorcycle industry. All of their R&D, production, and so on costs have to be supported by their products. If the industry was more condensed with only 5 or 6 manufacturers, then yes, the price could be quite a bit lower. That's not how the industry is though. There's also a lot more interchangability and compatability in the mtb industry, this is a lot costlier as well (rather than just crank out something optimized for production).


Go research where the frames are made and you'll see that there are only a few mass mfgs of frames and a whole bunch of small custom mfgs. I believe that we're seeing a huge consolidation in the market that will lead to just the kind of environment that you've described. I don't believe that a company like Dorel Ind. will keep separate engineering depts for GT, Cannondale, Schwinn, Mongoose, Iron-Horse etc...especially not if they're competing in the same market segment like GT and Cannondale do. Just like Trek bought companies and eliminated their separate product lines, heck the only one they really kept for any length of time was Gary Fisher. What you won't see with this type of consolidation is lower prices. The consumer is already conditioned to pay the current prices, the mfgs want to reduce mfg expenses yet keep retail costs the same.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

alexrex20 said:


> what part of "MotoGP ($150k+) is not available for sale to the public," did you not understand? what part of "there are entire championships built exclusively around the $10k showroom stock sport bike," did you also not understand?


 www.motogp.com You do not purchase anything on the showroom with current motogp technology, nothing, now you do get the trickle down effect and benefit along that line.



> you suggested that a $10k motorcycle will not get you to the world championship. AMA Pro Racing would disagree.


Comparing your AMA bike to a showroom bike is again, the same, as with WSBK the bikes have differences over what you were to purchase, a 600 class ama bike would smoke any class production bike. Thats racing for ya.


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

Blurr said:


> LOL seriously comparing the two? One you have fuel, Computer technology, wiring up the wazooo, fluids changed after every race, huge teams, backup bikes, ect ect. A bike has well, peddles and suspension. No comparison on any level, none. BTW, a MotoGP bike runs well over a million per bike.


Sure you have a comparison right there:
- top level motor bike costs about 100 times more than a top level bicycle. (MotoGP bike vs. $10,000 road bike or DH bike.
- a supermarket grade motorcycle costs about 5 or 10 times what a supermarket grade FS bike does.


----------



## selector (Aug 27, 2009)

The reason MTBs cost what they cost is because of what I said above.

You enter the high level AMA ranks and MotoGP and now you've added the cost of living (of many people) to a machine.

A very high percentage of these big-time teams are driven/fueled by a big ego and a big wallet, some w/ support from MFGs. There are very rich people out there w/ millions and millions of dollars. To support a race campaign isn't a big deal. I've seen a lot get into it then sell their cars/bikes after a few years and go to something else.

The reason a GP bike costs what it costs is cuz there are people attending to every little part/piece/bit... developing one-off systems w/ mechanical/electrical engineering support, etc. This isn't a once a season deal, it's ongoing. Get to the privateer ranks and yeah, it's once a season. I've seen privateers break and sleep on the floor the rest of the weekend looking for a bike to borrow to qualify (or try) again. Get a big team that breaks and they'll pack the transporter and leave for the next town.

Anyway... the consumer fuels demand and there's NO OTHER WAY round it.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Edit: never mind, the above poster Nailed it.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

alexrex20 said:


> what part of "MotoGP ($150k+) is not available for sale to the public," did you not understand? what part of "there are entire championships built exclusively around the $10k showroom stock sport bike," did you also not understand?


Their relevance. (which leads me to wonder what part of my entire post did you not understand?)

If your point is that bikes are too expensive, your meandering logic and random points about motorcycles are not doing anything to back that assertion up.


----------



## Mr. Doom (Sep 23, 2005)

*Ned won the SS nationals on a Rockhopper.*

Way to go Ned! Specialized calls that a recreational XC bike, far down the line from carbon epics and even the stumpjumper...

It did have fancy wheels, which is and always will be where the smart $ is at .


----------



## Mr. Doom (Sep 23, 2005)

*Not surprised, but who gives you better service!*



trboxman said:


> I don't put bike mechanic in the same worker category as waitress or bartender. It's just not a job that I'll tip someone for doing.


Funny how we pay extra for that service which most anyone can do (smile, walk with food on a plate, pull on a tap) but scoff at the notion of throwing your low paid shop rat a bone for scraping the crap off a beat down bike and wallowing in toxic chemicals so Fred can pretend to be Lance Armstrong on the weekend. The good shops have mechanics with years of experience who fully understand that a mistake can not only damage a shops reputation but injure a rider as well.

Tipping a mechanic will never impress the pus*y or get you laid so I see your point though.


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

RIS said:


> Which vehicle is that? There are no 600s that will go up to 16,500 rpm.
> .


Suuuuuuuuure there are, they just won't do it twice.


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

Blurr said:


> Jesus you are one misleading miserable eh ehhmm, you would make a wonderful politician.
> 
> http://www.kawasaki.com/Products/product-specifications.aspx?id=429
> 
> ...


None of teh Big Four make money on their 600cc Super Sport machines... especially after they all went to 24 month product cycles. It's the Shadow that stays the same for 15 years or the Virago that went IIRC 25 years with nothng but BNG every four years or so that rack up the profits.

I personally think that a modern 600cc Super Sport machine is a bargin. For my cool 11k, I get a motorcycle that will outperform 99.95% of all riders the will ever pilot it. Stock suspensions now are superb (all that needs to be done is proper springs and oil), toss on a half system and rearsets and go race. (and win..).

These 600cc (that's 6/10 of a liter) bikes are making upwards of140 hp at the crank and 125 or so RWHP.. that is 230 HP/Liter with no turbo or supercharger, thats SICK! There is nothing on four wheels that comes close to performance/dollar than a 600 or 1000 sportbike. My 100% stock 600 will run up to an honest 156 mph and a GSXR 1000 will push into the low 180's. a Busa or ZX14r with the electronics "tampered with" will go past 186....


----------



## dixie whiskey (Jul 25, 2010)

Don’t buy new, buy used for 1/3 of the price. I can build a custom bike from the frame up - mix-match used parts and new stuff on clearance on the relatively cheap. Most quality parts hold their value somewhat and usually I will sell my old parts to buy new. I don’t find bikes overly expensive; then again I’m not buying a 7k bicycle. Most people I know who ride +4k bikes are not worthy at their skill level anyhow.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

chauzie said:


> I don't believe aluminum or carbon are expensive material. Both materials are readily available. The process of manipulating aluminum can't be more expensive in bicycle than in say a motorcycle or a car. Carbon weaving these days are done in Taiwan (and probably moving to China now) and the process has become automated too (gone are the days where a boutique shop with 5 employees are weaving and layering up carbon).
> 
> So what does a $6000-$7000 mountain bike can do that a $3000 Kawasaki dirt bike (or any dirt bike) can't do? What technology exist in the mbt that is vastly superior to the dirt bike?
> 
> ...


I think it is really easy to say someone could simply sell something for less when you are not in that business yourself. If it were that easy, someone would already be doing it. You have a few companies like Bikes Direct that really do undercut the traditional bike companies on price for comparable products, but that business model will only work for a small part of the market, and would not even be possible without the other companies doing all the R&D work to start with.

On the other hand, I guess the more conspiracy-minded among us could assert that there is some price-fixing going on between all the bike companies.

Every hobby/interest/sport offers options that are ridiculously priced, as well as ones that are affordable. Bikes are in no way different.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

trboxman said:


> Go research where the frames are made and you'll see that there are only a few mass mfgs of frames


Doesn't matter, there are way too many different frames built. You got XS, S, M, L, and XL of most bikes, and even if they are contracting it out (there are more than just a few contractors) it's still a crazy amount of different frames being produced. There would be far bigger gains if they weren't producing so much "different" stuff.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Blurr said:


> You do realize that many bicycles are not made by the actual companies? :thumbsup:


It doesn't matter. Trek has to have their whole line of different bikes made, Giant same thing, Specialized, same thing, and on and on and on and on. It's not like making a bunch of motorbike frames, because they are far more standard and don't require all sorts of different sizes and models between the hundreds of bike companies.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> None of teh Big Four make money on their 600cc Super Sport machines... especially after they all went to 24 month product cycles. It's the Shadow that stays the same for 15 years or the Virago that went IIRC 25 years with nothng but BNG every four years or so that rack up the profits.


 well sure, that is why they milk a bike for more than a couple of years, look at how long the zzr600 ran, R6s and 6r



> I personally think that a modern 600cc Super Sport machine is a bargin. For my cool 11k, I get a motorcycle that will outperform 99.95% of all riders the will ever pilot it. Stock suspens]ons now are superb (all that needs to be done is proper springs and oil), toss on a half system and rearsets and go race. (and win..).


 I wont argue this at all, in fact I will fully agree, I am still trying to understand the sportriders mentality crying over a 16k ducati but joe jackass down the road goes and buys a harly with hardly any technology or R&D for the same price, go figure.



> These 600cc (that's 6/10 of a liter) bikes are making upwards of140 hp at the crank and 125 or so RWHP.


 to my knowledge, there is not a 600 on the market that turns over 115rwhp, which is crazy, if you know of one, please let me know



> . that is 230 HP/Liter with no turbo or supercharger, thats SICK! There is nothing on four wheels that comes close to performance/dollar than a 600 or 1000 sportbike. My 100% stock 600 will run up to an honest 156 mph and a GSXR 1000 will push into the low 180's. a Busa or ZX14r with the electronics "tampered with" will go past 186....


Fastest realistic times one can expect on a liter bike would be pushing high 190s, busa's have went over 200 but the wind drag is just crazy, Off the top of my head I believe the fastest GP time is 224, which is friggin crazy, but I would love to give it a go. Course they would club my ugly ass just looking at a gp bike up close little lone let me ride one :madman:



Jayem said:


> It doesn't matter. Trek has to have their whole line if different bikes made, Giant same thing, Specialized, same thing, and on and on and on and on. It's not like making a bunch of motorbike frames, because they are far more standard and don't require all sorts of different sizes and models between the hundreds of bike companies.


 Sooooo you have no Idea what you are talking about then?


----------



## trboxman (Jul 7, 2010)

Mr. Doom said:


> Funny how we pay extra for that service which most anyone can do (smile, walk with food on a plate, pull on a tap) but scoff at the notion of throwing your low paid shop rat a bone for scraping the crap off a beat down bike and wallowing in toxic chemicals so Fred can pretend to be Lance Armstrong on the weekend. The good shops have mechanics with years of experience who fully understand that a mistake can not only damage a shops reputation but injure a rider as well.
> 
> Tipping a mechanic will never impress the pus*y or get you laid so I see your point though.


I'm long beyond doing anything so superficial to impress others. Nor do I set shop rates so if you're upset at the low wage you should perhaps make your complaint to someone who is responsible for setting the rates. I purchase bikes, parts and accessories, I rarely..as in not once in the past 15 years or so..avail myself of services at a bike shop.


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

Bikes a soooooooo cheap. I go through $400+ in tires on a weekend on my Priller 1000 or Kawi 600 and that's if I'm willing to ride the last half of the second day on tires that are going off...


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

Blurr said:


> ...you are one misleading miserable eh ehhmm, you would make a wonderful politician.
> 
> http://www.kawasaki.com/Products/product-specifications.aspx?id=429
> 
> http://www.yamaha-motor.com/sport/products/modelhome/619/0/home.aspx


It would appear that you are the one that is attempting to mislead.

Neither one of the bikes you linked are intended for 600 Supersport racing.

The Ninja 650 is an update of the ancient EX 500 parallel twin, intended to compete against Suzuki's SV650 V-twin.

The Yamaha FZ6R is an overweight, steel-framed, parts bin turd, with non-adjustable suspension, a conventional fork, and a 160 rear tire. It's purpose is to simulate the shape and sound of an actual 600 Supersport, and it's target buyers are squidiots who can't afford a real 600. It is in no way, and never has been, a race bike.



> Point being however with what hte op is stating is that bikes can cost as much as a motorcycle with far more engieneering and of course parts involved, this is true as we know ,less we divulge straight into the entire product line, but you do not want to go there, do you?


Another misleading statement by you. An AVERAGE open-class Supersport runs around $13,000, and it's not hard to spend over $20,000 on something a little fancier. I haven't seen any stock $20,000 bicycles in any of the bike shops that I've been in.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> Bikes a soooooooo cheap. I go through $400+ in tires on a weekend on my Priller 1000 or Kawi 600 and that's if I'm willing to ride the last half of the second day on tires that are going off...


No chit. It takes some restraint to make a $500 pair of tires last on my R1 for an entire day, and people faster than me often burn through a set in just a few laps.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

Blurr said:


> Fastest realistic times one can expect on a liter bike would be pushing high 190s,


No stock 1000cc bike will do anything even approaching 195-199 mph. Most are out of steam by about 185 mph.



> busa's have went over 200 but the wind drag is just crazy, Off the top of my head I believe the fastest GP time is 224, which is friggin crazy, but I would love to give it a go.


No stock Hayabusa will go over 200 mph. The 1999 and 2000 models were unrestricted, and were not capable of anything over 196-197 mph under ideal conditions (The 2000 model Hayabusa Superbike that I earned my expert road racing license on, would barely break 200 mph. It was not stock.).

All Hayabusa motorcycles from 2001 on, have been restricted to about 186 mph.

There are street registered Hayabusa motorcycles that have gone in excess of 270 mph, but they are FAR from stock.



> Sooooo you have no Idea what you are talking about then?


No, that would (once again) appear to be you.


----------



## womble (Sep 8, 2006)

The OP relied on a straw man argument. How many people ride 6-7k bikes?


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> Suuuuuuuuure there are, they just won't do it twice.


I try to avoid that problem by making sure that everything that I ride shifts in the same direction. That way I don't run the risk of forgetting, and accidentally putting all the intake valves in the airbox by making a full-throttle "upshift" at red-line, that ends up actually being an unintended downshift. :eekster:


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

RIS said:


> It would appear that you are the one that is attempting to mislead.
> 
> Neither one of the bikes you linked are intended for 600 Supersport racing.


 do you read anything or are you just not smart enough, and yes, the R6s was yami's race bike previously 



> The Ninja 650 is an update of the ancient EX 500 parallel twin, intended to compete against Suzuki's SV650 V-twin.


 Irrelevant, it is a sports bike and has stacks of technology behind it, which is what this thread is about genius.



> The Yamaha FZ6R is an overweight, steel-framed, parts bin turd, with non-adjustable suspension, a conventional fork, and a 160 rear tire. It's purpose is to simulate the shape and sound of an actual 600 Supersport, and it's target buyers are squidiots who can't afford a real 600. It is in no way, and never has been, a race bike.


 only 2 percent of the bikes sold will ever touch a race track, course then there are keyboard comando's such as yourself that prolly never leave the house soooo... bar stool with a racing seat suits you fine. :thumbsup:



> Another misleading statement by you. An AVERAGE open-class Supersport runs around $13,000, and it's not hard to spend over $20,000 on something a little fancier. I haven't seen any stock $20,000 bicycles in any of the bike shops that I've been in.


Again dumbo the point of this thread was to show the bloated price of a mountain bike vs that of a motorcycle, which it has more than accomplished. 
In reality, it should have been compared again, to a dirtbike since we are talking dirt after all. and ohh looky here, at this price, wtf is going on here? whats this? http://www.yamaha-motor.com/sport/products/modelhome/30/1/home.aspx

BTW the 2006 r6 had a redline of 17500  just to keep educating ya.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Edit; piss on it, Not gonna waste my time with RIS anymore.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

womble said:


> The OP relied on a straw man argument. How many people ride 6-7k bikes?


I suspect that my wife's new 20 pound FS XC race bike would have been in that general price range if we had paid full-boogie retail.

The bare frame listed for something approaching $2,000, and her wheelset listed for about $1,000. That's half way to $6,000 for only two components.

The components to complete the bike were not entirely inexpensive either.


----------



## GlassTrain (Oct 22, 2008)

Dammit! Wrong thread.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

Blurr said:


> do you read anything or are you just not smart enough, and yes, the R6s was yami's race bike previously


Your link was not to the R6S. Your link was to the FZ6R. They are two different bikes.

And Yamaha has never paid a single dollar in contingency payments on the R6S or the FZ6R. Because they're not race bikes.



> Irrelevant, it is a sports bike and has stacks of technology behind it, which is what this thread is about genius.


Chauzie stated "For $7000, one can get a 600cc race rocket replica from Yamaha or Honda", and you pull an entry-level 650 sport twin out of your butt? There's a HUGE difference between a first-tier 600 Supersport and a bike like you found. They're not even eligible for the same classes.



> only 2 percent of the bikes sold will ever touch a race track, course then there are keyboard comando's such as yourself that prolly never leave the house soooo... bar stool with a racing seat suits you fine. :thumbsup:


Wrong again:












> BTW the 2006 r6 had a redline of 17500  just to keep educating ya.


Welcome to four and a half years ago. I guess you were absent that day. The 2006 R6 hit the rev limiter at about 16,000 rpms:

http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2006/02/01february06_redline/

...and the power peaked much lower, at 14,000 rpms:


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

Blurr said:


> Edit; piss on it, Not gonna waste my time with RIS anymore.


Man up.

If you post fiction, you run the risk of being called on it.

And before you edited your post:

1) You claimed that 1000cc bikes were not capable of more than about 185 mph (after waffling on your claim that they were capable of upper 190s.), due to some rumored "agreement" between manufacturers:



> care to explain to the class why that is? something about an agreement bettween the japs, do you know about that? prolly not.


Let me turn that question around on you:

Show us this alleged "agreement".

My R1 is unrestricted. It won't go over about 185 mph simply because it lacks the horsepower to push the air out of the way any faster.

2) You implied that I had not earned an expert road racing license:



> expert road racing license my ass, you didnt even understand trail breaking, your so goddamn full of **** its ridiculous. re read what we are talking about dumbo, as usual your running your gums and in above your head.


Do you know what white-colored number plate backgrounds on my race bikes mean? I can post a copy of my expert road racing license if you feel that you need to eat more poo on this issue. And I trail-brake just fine. Like in the picture of me on my R1 above. By the way, it's "trail braking", not trail breaking".

3) You claimed that by altering the wiring of 1000cc Supersports, that you can add nearly 15 mph to their top speeds:



> and again with creative wiring same as with litre bikes they are capable of more. damn son, what are you ever right about? Did you bother reading the above exchange? or just had to flap your gums via keyboard?


Please enlighten us with evidence of this "creative wiring" that magically adds nearly 15 mph to the top speed of today's open-class Supersports. Do you have any first hand experience with this, outside of stuff that you have read on the internet? Sounds a lot less expensive than the way that we would do it here in the real world.

4) You made some kind of statement questioning the existance of a 270 mph Hayabusa street bike:



> where?


It was actually 272.340 mph, and he did it in only a mile, from a standing start:

https://www.ultimatemotorcycling.com/2010_World_Fastest_Street_Motorcycle_Record

Want to "educate" me on the Hayabusa (or any other motorcycle) any more?



















Hmm. The reflection in that cluster looks a lot like...me.


----------



## clutch_08 (May 5, 2009)

i have an easy answer for you they charge so much because people will pay for it.
but i agree bicycles are expensive for so little that you get


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

Blurr-

Wherever you go, you're "that guy", aren't you.


----------



## ajd245246 (Sep 1, 2008)

BAM!!! thread hijacked


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

ajd245246 said:


> BAM!!! thread hijacked


Well, hopefully, Blurr won't continue "educating" me. I don't know how much I could stand the whole "BBQ XR1200 series vs. the V&H XR1200 series" comentary from an "expert" like him.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

Crap, I just clicked on the link in Blurr's signature, and I think this may be him:


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

clutch_08 said:


> but i agree bicycles are expensive for so little that you get


... but nothing compared with golf or fishing gear, or Breitling watches.


----------



## ajd245246 (Sep 1, 2008)

RIS said:


> Crap, I just clicked on the link in Blurr's signature, and I think this may be him:


LOL, honestly it's quite funny see you two go at it, it's almost like some weird bonding experience!


----------



## alexrex20 (Dec 20, 2005)

Blurr said:


> www.motogp.com You do not purchase anything on the showroom with current motogp technology, nothing, now you do get the trickle down effect and benefit along that line.


are you really THAT stupid? i've been saying that all along: MOTOGP BIKES ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR SALE TO THE PUBLIC.


----------



## alexrex20 (Dec 20, 2005)

kapusta said:


> If your point is that bikes are too expensive, your meandering logic and random points about motorcycles are not doing anything to back that assertion up.


no sh!t. from the beginning, i have been justifying the perceived high cost of bicycles. the fact that i'm arguing about racing class sport bikes is because some idiot (was it you?) tried to make a point that the same money can NOT get you a competitive motorcycle. it can.


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

You get a competitive bicycle for less than € or $ 2,000, except for DH maybe. There aren't many motorbike racing classes where you get a competitive new bike for that.

well, maybe...










https://tsmmr.netfirms.com/TSMMR/nfpicturepro/thumbnails.php?album=1


----------



## womble (Sep 8, 2006)

RIS said:


> I suspect that my wife's new 20 pound FS XC race bike would have been in that general price range if we had paid full-boogie retail.
> 
> The bare frame listed for something approaching $2,000, and her wheelset listed for about $1,000. That's half way to $6,000 for only two components.
> 
> The components to complete the bike were not entirely inexpensive either.


But what did you actually pay for it- anything near the 6-7k range?

Anyways, even by the fairly high-end standards of these forums, that really is looking at the upper range of what people pay for bikes. Most people (outside of the spendy DH crowd) seem to end up with bikes in the 2 - 3.5k range.

The OP just seems to make out that 6-7k is the norm, or a least common. That's like someone saying that all cars are insanely expensive, because Ferarris cost a couple of hundred grand.


----------



## hazdxb (Oct 11, 2008)

i didnt care to read all of it but im guna throw this out there just incase nobody mentioned it. Cars are mass produced on a a scale much much larger than bikes are, so the cost of R&D and all the extra costs impact the consumer less because many more people buy cars than bikes and so that cost is spread out over a larger group.


----------



## selector (Aug 27, 2009)

RIS said:


> Hmm. The reflection in that cluster looks a lot like...me.


All I see is a big head...

I guess it is you... go figure.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

$40,000 for a stock, street-legal open-class Supersport.

I don't think I've ever seen a $40,000 bicycle.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

You may have things such as "_facts_", "_current information_" and actual "_racing experience_" on your side of this debate, but your lack of ability (or will) to match your opponent's level of personal attacks, insults, and mean-spirited sarcasm leaves me unconvinced of your points.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

kapusta said:


> You may have things such as "_facts_", "_current information_" and actual "_racing experience_" on your side of this debate, but your lack of ability (or will) to match your opponent's level of personal attacks, insults, and mean-spirited sarcasm leaves me unconvinced of your points.


Oh, I probably have the ability to match my "opponent's" level of personal attacks, insults, and mean-spirited sarcasm.

I just choose not to.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

kapusta said:


> You may have things such as "_facts_", "_current information_" and actual "_racing experience_" on your side of this debate, but your lack of ability (or will) to match your opponent's level of personal attacks, insults, and mean-spirited sarcasm leaves me unconvinced of your points.


He doesnt have racing experience, he's full of ****.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Blurr said:


> He doesnt have racing experience, he's full of ****.


Thank you, your strong language has convinced me.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

RIS said:


> Man up.
> 
> If you post fiction, you run the risk of being called on it.
> 
> ...


 All litre bikes are limited to the 185 from the factory do to agreement by the japanese manufacturers dumbo. that same agreement you mention on the busa in your next post. you have the IQ of a retarded squirrel.



> Let me turn that question around on you:
> 
> Show us this alleged "agreement".
> 
> My R1 is unrestricted. It won't go over about 185 mph simply because it lacks the horsepower to push the air out of the way any faster.


 Your Imaginary R1 sucks. and if you were smart enough to get by the restrictor you may go a bit more, not much, but. when you get one, maybe you can find out? Part of the problem is your limiter kicks in and often throttles a bike down before its capability, now again, as we stated, the 190s is about the nomral limit however 206 on sulby straight in the ISLE of man has been clocked on a 07 gsxr 

http://www.zx11.info/zx12r/history/speedlimits.htm
Last week we revealed manufacturers were being forced to consider a speed or power limit to appease those politicians who are becoming increasingly concerned by the high maximum speeds of some bikes.

Now we have discovered that senior representatives of Japanese and European bike makers have already met in Italy and come up with a 186mph (300kph) speed limit. And this is just a first step. Lower limits are expected in years to come.

Reading & education are fundamental jack, you should try it.



> 2) You implied that I had not earned an expert road racing license:
> 
> Do you know what white-colored number plate backgrounds on my race bikes mean? I can post a copy of my expert road racing license if you feel that you need to eat more poo on this issue. And I trail-brake just fine. Like in the picture of me on my R1 above. By the way, it's "trail braking", not trail breaking".


 Its the internet you can post or be anyone you want, which you seem very good at, just by watching your posts, Its easy to ascertain that you do not have one. I see you still do not know what trail braking is, not surprised, most people do not, which is where the difference between a good racer and a wanna be such as yourself lay for those reading, getting an expert license only requires enough points to do so, winning is not necessary, dumbo here would only have to race X amount of races to receive one, if he ever was to quit posting and try. Course in reality RISA, I really do not give crap if you have one or not, it makes zero difference on a MTN bike forum at all 



> 3) You claimed that by altering the wiring of 1000cc Supersports, that you can add nearly 15 mph to their top speeds:


 Me personally no, other people sure many variances ad to such and are able to reach over 190mph.



> Please enlighten us with evidence of this "creative wiring" that magically adds nearly 15 mph to the top speed of today's open-class Supersports. Do you have any first hand experience with this, outside of stuff that you have read on the internet? Sounds a lot less expensive than the way that we would do it here in the real world.


 Its very simple, you may do a google to educate yourself, sky is blue here again today btw.



> 4) You made some kind of statement questioning the existance of a 270 mph Hayabusa street bike:


 Where ? lol that was it dumbo, having trouble with the english language?



> It was actually 272.340 mph, and he did it in only a mile, from a standing start:


 The mile is the official standard :thumbsup:



> http://www.ultimatemotorcycling.com/2010_World_Fastest_Street_Motorcycle_Record


 so by posting this you are proving that bicycle is not capable of speeds of 200mph? Still confused where you are trying to go with all this, very confused. what is your point exactly? that you are not to bright? The forum is well aware of that.



> Want to "educate" me on the Hayabusa (or any other motorcycle) any more?


 Was pretty easy actually, first off, you went off on a tangent not bothering to read what was actually written, and did not have the capacity to understand what was written, that is entertaining as hell, you are good at it, so it will not stop after this post unfortunately.



> Hmm. The reflection in that cluster looks a lot like...me.


 I second the big head, no argument here, course the helmet. .............. hey, could you do it again with your helmet off?


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

kapusta said:


> Thank you, your strong language has convinced me.


Must have been the asterisk, they always make little children cover their eyes.


----------



## trboxman (Jul 7, 2010)

> Womble said:
> 
> But what did you actually pay for it- anything near the 6-7k range?
> 
> ...


If nothing else, his deeply discounted bike kinda defines just how much overpriced the retail price is...oh, the irony.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

Blurr said:


> All litre bikes are limited to the 185 from the factory do to agreement by the japanese manufacturers dumbo. that same agreement you mention on the busa in your next post. you have the IQ of a retarded squirrel.


Actually, here is what I said:



RIS said:


> All Hayabusa motorcycles from 2001 on, have been restricted to about 186 mph.


I said nothing about any "agreement", I mentioned no motorcycle manufacturer or model other than the Hayabusa, and the Hayabusa is not a "litre bike".



> Your Imaginary R1 sucks.


Well, it seemed pretty real when I rode it to work last night, and it seemed pretty real when I rode it home from the station after I got off this morning.



> ...and if you were smart enough to get by the restrictor you may go a bit more, not much, but. when you get one, maybe you can find out? Part of the problem is your limiter kicks in and often throttles a bike down before its capability,...


Then it shouldn't be too hard for you to show us this magical "limiter" that "kicks in" and "throttles a bike down". In reality, the throttle is cable operated on my R1, with no interference of any kind.



> ...now again, as we stated,...


Are you off your meds? You're referring to yourself in the plural.



> ...the 190s is about the nomral limit however 206 on sulby straight in the ISLE of man has been clocked on a 07 gsxr


First off, Anstey was on a 2006 Gixxer 1000, not a 2007.

Second, no stock GSXR of any year or displacement has ever run in "the 190s".

Third, Anstey's unofficial 206 mph speed was unofficial because it was derived from his own bike's on-board telemetry- it referenced his calculated rear wheel speed, not his actual road speed. Anyone who has ever run truly large speed, knows that there is a significant amount of tire slippage at top speed.

And finally, Anstey's bike was a Superbike, with a heavily modified engine. It was not a stock bike that somebody just fiddled with a few wires on.



> http://www.zx11.info/zx12r/history/speedlimits.htm
> Last week we revealed manufacturers were being forced to consider a speed or power limit to appease those politicians who are becoming increasingly concerned by the high maximum speeds of some bikes.
> 
> Now we have discovered that senior representatives of Japanese and European bike makers have already met in Italy and come up with a 186mph (300kph) speed limit. And this is just a first step. Lower limits are expected in years to come.


You're kidding. You're quoting a third-hand quote off the internet, from a 10 year old blog, that speculates on bikes in the future having restricted top speeds, and that these restrictions are expected to be implemented in 2001.

How about you show us ANYTHING from any manufacturer that acknowledges this alleged "agreement" to restrict top speeds.



> Reading & education are fundamental jack, you should try it. Its the internet you can post or be anyone you want, which you seem very good at, just by watching your posts, Its easy to ascertain that you do not have one. I see you still do not know what trail braking is, not surprised, most people do not, which is where the difference between a good racer and a wanna be such as yourself lay for those reading, getting an expert license only requires enough points to do so, winning is not necessary, dumbo here would only have to race X amount of races to receive one, if he ever was to quit posting and try. Course in reality RISA, I really do not give crap if you have one or not, it makes zero difference on a MTN bike forum at all
> 
> Me personally no, other people sure many variances ad to such and are able to reach over 190mph. Its very simple, you may do a google to educate yourself, sky is blue here again today btw. Where ? lol that was it dumbo, having trouble with the english language? The mile is the official standard :thumbsup: so by posting this you are proving that bicycle is not capable of speeds of 200mph? Still confused where you are trying to go with all this, very confused. what is your point exactly? that you are not to bright? The forum is well aware of that.
> 
> ...


I just figured that you were drunk last night, but your emotional histrionics seem very erratic this morning. I may have been closer to the mark than I realized, when I suspected that you may be off your meds.

For what it's worth, you're making a fool of yourself.


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

Blurr said:


> BTW the 2006 r6 had a redline of 17500  just to keep educating ya.


No it didn't. The "real" redline was about 1,500 rpm south of that.

Yamaha bought back every single one (from owners wanting this remedy) because it's claims of such were not valid and considered false advertising..

I guess class is in session for you as well. :thumbsup:


----------



## davidbeinct (Dec 6, 2007)

kapusta said:


> Name one hobby that cannot get ridiculously expensive if you want the very best out there


Fly fishing. It is impossible to get ridiculously expensive spending your money on fly fishing tackle and accessories. Don't even try, it cannot be done.

David B.


----------



## ajd245246 (Sep 1, 2008)

davidbeinct said:


> Fly fishing. It is impossible to get ridiculously expensive spending your money on fly fishing tackle and accessories. Don't even try, it cannot be done.
> 
> David B.


I love fly fishing, partly because of what you just mentioned...lol


----------



## bing! (Jul 8, 2010)

davidbeinct said:


> Fly fishing. It is impossible to get ridiculously expensive spending your money on fly fishing tackle and accessories. Don't even try, it cannot be done.
> 
> David B.


Hmmmmm.

I fish.

You could buy a Hardy Zane Ti Fly Fishing Reel. A dollar less than $ 8000 at Amazon.com. No tax and free shipping 

Match that with an Oyster custom bamboo fly rod in 3 pieces....about $ 3700 bucks. 3 month lead time for an order. Extra if you want it rushed.

As a fisherman, you can't own just one rod and reel 

Your gonna want at least Van Staal ti needle nose pliers to go with the rig. Very reasonable at $ 314.

I'll stop there. There are some silly prices of fly tying vises out there as well.

Personally, I buy what I can afford, so it doesnt get too expensive. If I had extra dough, I'd blow it. Uncle Sam aint gonna touch anymore than he has already 

/bing


----------



## chauzie (Mar 8, 2010)

womble said:


> The OP relied on a straw man argument. How many people ride 6-7k bikes?


Apparently, enough to warrant the price, no? Or do you think bike manufacturers just make up high prices if buyers are not willing to pay for them?
I know some who ride $8k (road) bikes too. Think rich people with disposable income.

The prices of top end bikes also determine the prices of the lower end in trickle down fashion. If top prices are brought down, then so will be the lower prices.


----------



## ajd245246 (Sep 1, 2008)

bing! said:


> Hmmmmm.
> 
> I fish.
> 
> ...


Yea you're right, but the only somewhat expensive piece of equipment I've ever bought for any kind of fishing were the reels.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

I don't ride 7k bikes myself, but I do own probably 50k worth of bicycles.

Hell just counting the ones I have built and for sale right now....

- 1 at 1800
- 2 at 1600
- 1 at 1400
- 1 at 1300
- 1 at 1200
- 1 at 800
- 1 at 700

That's $8800 worth just in my completed and ready to sell pool. It doesn't count the stuff that isn't for sale, or the stuff not yet assembled that will be for sale. I have in my own personal fleet FOUR full suspensions counting the singlespeed. Five if you count the softtail also.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> No it didn't. The "real" redline was about 1,500 rpm south of that.
> 
> Yamaha bought back every single one (from owners wanting this remedy) because it's claims of such were not valid and considered false advertising..
> 
> I guess class is in session for you as well. :thumbsup:


What I read
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/269/332/Motorcycle-Article/2006-Yamaha-R6-First-Ride.aspx

And I assume this is what you are reading? http://www.cmsnl.com/news/yamaha-offers-to-buy-back-new-r6_news242.html

Both right, gotta hate that but, that is also the only article I could find on the net. soooo you can go kissy kissy with your E pal again now if you like though, he's waiting for his support group.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

RIS said:


> Actually, here is what I said:
> 
> I said nothing about any "agreement", I mentioned no motorcycle manufacturer or model other than the Hayabusa, and the Hayabusa is not a "litre bike".


 I know you did not mention any agreement over litre bikes because your dense ass knows nothing about it, and still dispute it. which is WHY I POSTED IT, its widly known, should you read any magazine its talked about regularly, which is why I posted that damn article dingbat.



> Well, it seemed pretty real when I rode it to work last night, and it seemed pretty real when I rode it home from the station after I got off this morning.


 People with mental disorders often find it difficult to distinguish between reality and fiction.



> Then it shouldn't be too hard for you to show us this magical "limiter" that "kicks in" and "throttles a bike down". In reality, the throttle is cable operated on my R1, with no interference of any kind.


 lol ohhh? so no mapping is needed? Quick do a google to find out what that is!



> First off, Anstey was on a 2006 Gixxer 1000, not a 2007.
> 
> Second, no stock GSXR of any year or displacement has ever run in "the 190s".
> 
> ...


 so what it proved you wrong, the sky was blue again today btw.



> You're kidding. You're quoting a third-hand quote off the internet, from a 10 year old blog, that speculates on bikes in the future having restricted top speeds, and that these restrictions are expected to be implemented in 2001.
> 
> How about you show us ANYTHING from any manufacturer that acknowledges this alleged "agreement" to restrict top speeds.


 Denial of reality is another symptom of people with a mental disorder.



> I just figured that you were drunk last night, but your emotional histrionics seem very erratic this morning. I may have been closer to the mark than I realized, when I suspected that you may be off your meds.
> 
> For what it's worth, *you're making a fool of Me*.


 I know, and its easy. SO can we get onto the actual discussion at hand in relation to the exorbitant prices of peddle bikes or is your E penis still not allowing it?


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

Blurr said:


> What I read
> http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/269/332/Motorcycle-Article/2006-Yamaha-R6-First-Ride.aspx
> 
> And I assume this is what you are reading? http://www.cmsnl.com/news/yamaha-offers-to-buy-back-new-r6_news242.html
> ...


You're dumber than a box of hammers. No, really. You're wrong. An editorial pc is not fact. Neale reported on what he saw on the tachometer.. these readings were never supported by dyno runs.

Do a serach on the Yamaha recall. R6's run outta steam at 14,500... and over rev another 900 or so. I guess my friends at Yamaha just decided to offer a buy back on all the 2006 models because they needed something to do.

We took an R6 and put a really good FX build on it (nice and loose, so it would rev to the moon) and ran 0w-5w oil in it (that allows the wet clutch and gears of the transmission to run in a oil bath with the appoximate viscocity of water... less friction, faster revs and less friction loss) and we wee able to get it to go 16,800 or so As a famous fighter once said.... "No Mas". The bike stops making power at about 14,600 anyway and all the extra RPM's allow for is some over rev to hold a gear into a corner without the need for an up shift. But I am sure you know all this because you spend a lot of time mentally masturbating on the interwbs and reading about it.

Yamaha go busted for caliberating the tachs to "fib" and show 17,800 or so. It was a pretty big deal and if you actually were a rider vs a reader, you'ld know these things.Yamaha realized late in teh production cycle that these bike would not rev to that figure and would not atay together even if they did.

FWIW...Neale (who wrote the acticle you quote...) and I are great friends and have been for 11 years....He learned a lot of his track riding craft at my companies track days and is a great personal friend. We've also been all over the USA and abroad together testing and riding bikes. He was pissed about being dooped by yamaha.

From a press release.....

In 2006, Yamaha advertised that the R6 had a redline of 17,500 rpm. This is 2,000 rpm higher than the previous R6 model and was the highest tachometer redline of any 2006 production four-stroke motorcycle engine.[citation needed] It was widely reported that the 2006 YZF-R6's motor did not actually have this engine rpm redline level and was closer to around 16,200 rpm, *but because of a deliberate tachometer error of about 8%, it read 17,500 rpm on the tachometer. In February 2006, Yamaha admitted the bike's true engine redline was more than 1,000 rpm lower than displayed on the tachometer than advertised, and offered to buy back any R6 if the customer was unhappy*


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> You're dumber than a box of hammers. No, really. You're wrong. An editorial pc is not fact. Neale reported on what he saw on the tachometer.. these readings were never supported by dyno runs.
> 
> Do a serach on the Yamaha recall. R6's run outta steam at 14,500... and over rev another 900 or so. I guess my friends at Yamaha just decided to offer a buy back on all the 2006 models because they needed something to do.
> 
> ...


*

Then you probably should have read the second article I posted and saved yourself a shitload of typing and time, but seriously, I would like a CREDIBLE link, I did some searching and found nothing but one more time, the second article I posted, unlike you and Risa if I am wrong (which I was not as I based what I stated from the actual companies release and credible journalist statements). But calibration being off is nothing new because I am sure as you know sportbike speedo's are almost always off by 6% on as well, something that is inexcusable coming from the factory.

But judging from your response I can only assume that the Rumors about you and Risa are true..................*


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

Blurr said:


> Then you probably should have read the second article I posted and saved yourself a shitload of typing and time, but seriously, I would like a CREDIBLE link, I did some searching and found nothing but one more time, the second article I posted, unlike you and Risa if I am wrong (which I was not as I based what I stated from the actual companies release and credible journalist statements). But calibration being off is nothing new because I am sure as you know sportbike speedo's are almost always off by 6% on as well, something that is inexcusable coming from the factory.
> 
> But judging from your response I can only assume that the Rumors about you and Risa are true..................


I have to say I am sorry to all the hammers out there. Lets go box of rocks.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

I don't really think that you're being fair to rocks now. 

Isn't there something that falls out of the south end of a northbound animal that would work?


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> I have to say I am sorry to all the hammers out there. Lets go box of rocks.


So you do not have a credible link, yes or no, very simple question, which requires a very simple answer that is all I asked for.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

RIS said:


> I don't really think that you're being fair to rocks now.
> 
> Isn't there something that falls out of the south end of a northbound animal that would work?


You win man, you win


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

Blurr said:


> You win man, you win


You seem to have so much cred.. so for the enjoyment of the group here and of course to seperate your BS and "I can post a linky, therefore I MUST know WTF I am talking about.." from reality why don't you share with us your vast experience in the technical arena with sportbikes. You know... like how many times you dyno tested various bikes with different builds (FX, supersport superstock, superbike, etc..) hell I'm sure you have done many race preps yourself. Then share with us your pesonal experience riding the various bikes as well. What WAS the difference between the ZZX 6 and the R6... How did those confentionsl forks differ from the upside down units, did that steel frame flex? What was the real effect of the R6 that didn't rev to its claimed 17.5k. (hint, that R6 claimed more contengency that the other 600's combined in 2006..) I am sure you do have tons of experience.....right....?

This should be sweet as you can't search the web and post a link to this one


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> You seem to have so much cred.. so for the enjoyment of the group here and of course to seperate your BS and "I can post a linky, therefore I MUST know WTF I am talking about.." from reality why don't you share with us your vast experience in the technical arena with sportbikes. You know... like how many times you dyno tested various bikes with different builds (FX, supersport superstock, superbike, etc..) hell I'm sure you have done many race preps yourself. Then share with us your pesonal experience riding the various bikes as well. What WAS the difference between the ZZX 6 and the R6... How did those confentionsl forks differ from the upside down units, did that steel frame flex? What was the real effect of the R6 that didn't rev to its claimed 17.5k. (hint, that R6 claimed more contengency that the other 600's combined in 2006..) I am sure you do have tons of experience.....right....?
> 
> This should be sweet as you can't search the web and post a link to this one


...and if I may continue, along the same lines:

I'm wondering if the E-diot can answer the following:

1) How can you tell if someone is drafting you, even if you can't see or hear them?

2) What happens to a motorcycle when drafting another racer?

3) Why do Supersport bikes have a more limited ability to cope with the condition mentioned above in question # 3?

4) How does a "bounty hunter" make a living at motorcycle road racing?

5) Name some endurance-specific parts of race prep, as opposed to what you can get away with on a sprint bike.

6) Why are there no "male enhancement" ads in Roadracing World?


----------



## the-one1 (Aug 2, 2008)

> Why are bicycles so expensive?


has turned into


> My motorcycle is faster than yours. I win.


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

the-one1 said:


> has turned into


Not at all..... my favorite moto is an old BMW airhead and it makes juuuuuust about enough power to pull a sick hiker off of a port-a-potty. That fact that I regularly ride on a race track at speeds well in excess of 150mph is merely a by-product of my job.. as in it's what I do for a living :thumbsup:

A good rider understands that it's not the wand that performs the magic, it's the magician. I have made a habit out of riding basically stock motorcyles over the years to prove just this point. I put a half system (mostly for weight savings...) rearsets, Michelin tires (usually I ride slicks), SBS or Carbone Lorain carbon brake pads and dial in the suspension (correct spring rates and oil) then I go ride.


----------



## ajd245246 (Sep 1, 2008)

Still though, it would have been better if this had stayed on topic instead of arguing about how fast motorcycles go.....


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

ajd245246 said:


> Still though, it would have been better if this had stayed on topic instead of arguing about how fast motorcycles go.....


IIRC the question was answered..

A) Supply and demand - The market sets the price to the greatest extent
B) R&D, tooling and prduction costs amortized over small runs.
C) The publics demand for latest and greatest. = short product life cycles

There.... how much fun was that?


----------



## the-one1 (Aug 2, 2008)

There we go. If the second post to this thread was that, then no one else would have chimed in with their opinions. .


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> You seem to have so much cred.. so for the enjoyment of the group here and of course to seperate your BS and "I can post a linky, therefore I MUST know WTF I am talking about.." from reality why don't you share with us your vast experience in the technical arena with sportbikes. You know... like how many times you dyno tested various bikes with different builds (FX, supersport superstock, superbike, etc..) hell I'm sure you have done many race preps yourself. Then share with us your pesonal experience riding the various bikes as well. What WAS the difference between the ZZX 6 and the R6... How did those confentionsl forks differ from the upside down units, did that steel frame flex? What was the real effect of the R6 that didn't rev to its claimed 17.5k. (hint, that R6 claimed more contengency that the other 600's combined in 2006..) I am sure you do have tons of experience.....right....?
> 
> This should be sweet as you can't search the web and post a link to this one


lmfao this is to funny, so you are pissed because I even helped to bolster your argument but could not find anything to completely back it? man that is new, I did find one link for nothing but motorcycle recalls, the only major recall it showed was for brakes on that year and model. Sorry again if I try to use facts and links to back what I say, I mean that must be horrible for you to understand since you are such butt kissing buddies with RIS who just makes **** up as he goes, crazy I tell ya. 
Again, I do not know everything & nobody ever does, Hell all I asked for was a CREDIBLE link from yourself, I have been around the block enough to know that most people and most rumors are not true, but again, I yield to the Omnipotent ones such as yourself who's huge pathetic Ego gets in the way of any kind of rational conversation, Very Sad.
But hey, Ris likes ya, that speaks for itself.

Now onto the current actual relevant discussion at hand.


----------



## ajd245246 (Sep 1, 2008)

STT GUY said:


> IIRC the question was answered..
> 
> A) Supply and demand - The market sets the price to the greatest extent
> B) R&D, tooling and prduction costs amortized over small runs.
> ...


more fun than listening to the jibber jabber of, "Oh my bikes faster than yours!" Most sports bikes do well over 100 stock, usually 140ish

EDIT: more like 160-170ish


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Nah not mine, at this altitude with my fat ass I top out at 150ish as indicated, so puts it around 140 or so actual, and hell, Im even going down to the lowly 650vtwin for the track, top out at 120s good enough for me, the fun is in the corners anyhow.......

Edit: bikes are like anything else, most people will spend alot of money trying to make up for their own inadequacies whatever those may be.


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

Blurr said:


> lmfao this is to funny, so you are pissed because I even helped to bolster your argument but could not find anything to completely back it? man that is new, I did find one link for nothing but motorcycle recalls, the only major recall it showed was for brakes on that year and model. Sorry again if I try to use facts and links to back what I say, I mean that must be horrible for you to understand since you are such butt kissing buddies with RIS who just makes **** up as he goes, crazy I tell ya.
> Again, I do not know everything & nobody ever does, Hell all I asked for was a CREDIBLE link from yourself, I have been around the block enough to know that most people and most rumors are not true, but again, I yield to the Omnipotent ones such as yourself who's huge pathetic Ego gets in the way of any kind of rational conversation, Very Sad.
> But hey, Ris likes ya, that speaks for itself.
> 
> Now onto the current actual relevant discussion at hand.


Box O' Rocks... with your uber link finding skills how could you miss this...

Google.... "Yamaha R6 Redline"

First hit!!!!!!!!!! Is Wikepedia and the whole R6 redline snafu...

My god man....you even suck at the stuff you say you're good at.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> Box O' Rocks... with your uber link finding skills how could you miss this...
> 
> Google.... "Yamaha R6 Redline"
> 
> ...


You do realize anyone can log into Wiki and write? Its a basic reference and nothing more that can be misleading at times, again, I did not say it did not happen, I only asked for more than someones word whom I do not know spouting it, I really do not care, I do not own one, and probably never will, perfectly content with what I got and its not from the blue team  well one sorta is lol.


----------



## ajd245246 (Sep 1, 2008)

Blurr said:


> Nah not mine, at this altitude with my fat ass I top out at 150ish as indicated, so puts it around 140 or so actual, and hell, Im even going down to the lowly 650vtwin for the track, top out at 120s good enough for me, the fun is in the corners anyhow.......
> 
> Edit: bikes are like anything else, most people will spend alot of money trying to make up for their own inadequacies whatever those may be.


True, I was just looking at R6's, i don't know what other companies such as Honda and Kawasaki have to counter it, but stock the speedo maxes at roughly 160-180mph.


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

Blurr said:


> Nah not mine, at this altitude with my fat ass I top out at 150ish as indicated, so puts it around 140 or so actual, and hell, Im even going down to the lowly 650vtwin for the track, top out at 120s good enough for me, the fun is in the corners anyhow.......
> .


Well darn....Now you go and say something really smart that makes all the sense in the world.

Riding an SV or 650 Kawi will make you a great rider i wish more riders were willing to do what you are doing. 130 is plenty fast enough for sure...want to really have a blast.. pick up a Priller RS250. 63 or so HP. 290 lbs and 200+ smiles per hour. Your tire bill is going to go down 50% or more ridng the SV. Go race it... lightweight twins is crazy fun.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

STT GUY said:


> Well darn....Now you go and say something really smart that makes all the sense in the world.
> 
> Riding an SV or 650 Kawi will make you a great rider i wish more riders were willing to do what you are doing. 130 is pleany fast enough for sure...want to really have a blast.. pick up a Priller RS250. 63 or so HP. 290 lbs and 200+ smiles per hour.


Dude I read your posts on the motorcycle thread, I have no problem with your knowledge and I think if you read my post on trail braking, you would have no problem with me either. 
What I have learned as that most experienced track guys go down in speed as you mentioned and just have a good time, I kind of did to start, despite growing up on dirtbikes I went down in CCs from my cruiser days to start a lil 250 ninja, went up, then found a screaming deal on a wrecked vstrom that I currently am setting up for the track, probably will just go with stock front suspension for now and watch for a wrecked gsxr to swap out when the price is right, put on some rear sets and get a different set of clip ons, new tires even though those only have 150 or so miles on em they have sat far to long for my liking, and it should be good to go.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Blurr said:


> Now onto the current actual relevant discussion at hand.


Have you actually commented on that?


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

ajd245246 said:


> True, I was just looking at R6's, i don't know what other companies such as Honda and Kawasaki have to counter it, but stock the speedo maxes at roughly 160-180mph.


Doesnt matter what the speedo says, what it can do is another thing, and for some reason as I mentioned earlier and I am not happy with, motocycle speedo's seem to be 6 percent or more off, irritating and I dont know why, if you have not ridden start small, so much to learn its crazy, my personal favorite book is Lee Parks Total Control, very practical and easy to understand. take a riders course, and wear bright colors for your jacket and helmet.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

kapusta said:


> Have you actually commented on that?


Post 49 or something like that



> The basic price aspect of MTN bikes is supply and demand, they can charge high prices to people who are willing to pay for those prices. There is not any where near the engineering on a MTN bike as in a motorbike, not even close on any level, with that said Kawi, Yami, honda for example are mult tiered companies and motorcycles are only one aspect of what they do, thus cutting manufacturing costs. Anything handmade will cost more, as will anything made from a small company, that is not to say that again, it is not possible to lower the prices, I would love to see a boycott and have bike prices drop substantially.


----------



## Biohazard74 (Jul 16, 2009)

Yawn


----------



## blunderbuss (Jan 11, 2004)

ajd245246 said:


> Still though, it would have been better if this had stayed on topic instead of arguing about how fast motorcycles go.....


I enjoyed reading it. These forums have too many people who know just enough to sound legit... until somebody comes along that really knows what they're talking about. The comedy is watching the poor guy stumble and resort to name calling when he gets called out.


----------



## selector (Aug 27, 2009)

ajd245246 said:


> Most sports bikes...


What's w/ calling them "sports bikes"???? It's "sportbike" folks. There are sports bars and sports and bikes, but "sports bikes" tells me you're a casual observer and not much more.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Blurr said:


> Post 49 or something like that


Cool, thanks.

Just wanted to put everything else in perspective.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

Blurr said:


> ...at this altitude with my fat ass I top out at 150ish as indicated, so puts it around 140 or so actual, and hell, Im even going down to the lowly 650vtwin for the track...


How on earth would you even get out onto a race track?

As a race official and instructor, If I encountered someone with your tenuous grasp on reality, I would bounce you so fast it would make your head spin.

And I can't speak for Monte, but If I was working for someone like STT GUY, I suspect that both of us would deny you participation in his track day function.

We've both been around the block a time or two, and I'm sure that we've both encountered more than enough E-heros (a close relative of the "fast" street rider, but with the added element of mental illness).

We don't need the headaches involved in shutting the track down to land the helicopter, we only have a limited amount of grease sweep, we don't want you getting someone else hurt, and the civil liability associated with us allowing someone like you out onto the race track just isn't worth it.

Unless and until your doctor gets your medications sorted out better, I just don't see you on the race track.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

RIS said:


> How on earth would you even get out onto a race track?
> 
> As a race official and instructor, If I encountered someone with your tenuous grasp on reality, I would bounce you so fast it would make your head spin.
> 
> ...


LOL based on what, this is the absolute first time I have heard that someone going to a Twin over a I4 would be banned from a track, Course again, like I said, you are the E hero and apparently have a fairly pathetic home life.
Have fun in the iggy bin , you really take the cake as probably the most worthless poster on the net, and that takes some work. buy bye


----------



## kingbozo (Jan 31, 2004)

This is one of the finest examples I have seen in a while of a thread that should be killed.


----------



## the-one1 (Aug 2, 2008)

I think this would work here too for the moto guys and their display of supreme motobike knowledge:


----------



## womble (Sep 8, 2006)

chauzie said:


> Apparently, enough to warrant the price, no? Or do you think bike manufacturers just make up high prices if buyers are not willing to pay for them?
> I know some who ride $8k (road) bikes too. Think rich people with disposable income.
> 
> The prices of top end bikes also determine the prices of the lower end in trickle down fashion. If top prices are brought down, then so will be the lower prices.


I would argue these points with you, but there's no way we can beat the other guys on the thread for petty debate. I'm just sitting back i awe for now.


----------



## RIS (Nov 4, 2009)

FWIW, I am an extremely outspoken proponent of the SV650.

This is my wife on her street and track day SV650:










And on the same bike, after we converted it to a Supersport-spec race and track day bike:


----------



## Mrwhlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Sweet Jesus....did Papa close the Dungeon again?


----------



## Backyard Pro (Jul 16, 2010)

cost to enjoyment makes it a very cheap investment to me. for me to get near the same enjoyment out of my cars takes 10k and a turbo. so a bike has a good cost to enjoyment ratio for me.


----------



## InlawBiker (Aug 19, 2009)

I was thinking about this today. A random example, an S-Works carbon epic has an MSRP of $8800. Here's some chit you can buy for $8800 MSRP.

2011 KTM 530 XC-W - ($8988)
2010 Hyundai Accent GS
or
2010 Chevrolet Aveo, plus a new Stumpjumper hardtail.
2010 Honda Shadow RS 750, plus a new Rockhopper Pro Disc

The carbon frame is $3300 alone, and you can get a "generic" carbon frame off Ebay for $330 shipped. So obviously there is some hefty profit margin.

All that said, to some people $10k is pocket change so more power to ya if that's your life.


----------



## ajd245246 (Sep 1, 2008)

Blurr said:


> Doesnt matter what the speedo says, what it can do is another thing, and for some reason as I mentioned earlier and I am not happy with, motocycle speedo's seem to be 6 percent or more off, irritating and I dont know why, if you have not ridden start small, so much to learn its crazy, my personal favorite book is Lee Parks Total Control, very practical and easy to understand. take a riders course, and wear bright colors for your jacket and helmet.


I realize that, that's why I clearly stated the SPEEDO maxes at..... I don't know where you came up with 6% but most of my buddies bikes are off by 10-15mph. And I've ridden before


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

ajd245246 said:


> I realize that, that's why I clearly stated the SPEEDO maxes at..... I don't know where you came up with 6% but most of my buddies bikes are off by 10-15mph. And I've ridden before


Mathematics


----------



## STT GUY (May 19, 2009)

Mrwhlr said:


> Sweet Jesus....did Papa close the Dungeon again?


I just spit my pop out!!!


----------



## turnerth (Aug 4, 2010)

I love my ducatis and I love my bikes for different reasons. 

I was thinking the same thing until I rode a nice new MB - could not believe how well it worked. 

Go ride a nice mb and you might just understand what we are talking about.


----------



## kingbozo (Jan 31, 2004)

the-one1 said:


> I think this would work here too for the moto guys and their display of supreme motobike knowledge:


That rules


----------



## Mike1237 (Mar 18, 2013)

I really love biking. I know the sport is way overpriced, but I accept the cost because I loveit. I have no justification for theprice I pay to do what I love other than it's my money and I'll do what I wantwith it. I have thousands and thousandsof dollars into the sport and I'd spend the money again like most avid cyclist.<o></o>

<o> </o>

What does tickle me however is when I hear a lot of peoplewho do actually try and justify the cost by saying things like "oh, well youhave to look at the technology of the frames", "the R&D that goes intothose bikes cost so much money" Just look at the tolerances of those forged andmachined chain rings" and those ceramic bearing hubs really have a lot oftechnology that goes into them! People tryand compare bicycles to motorcycles and cars saying they have the same level oftechnology, engineering and advanced materials incorporated into them as motorvehicles and they simply do not. Whennew vehicles are developed the time frame from concept to production istypically 7 years. Throughout thoseseven years every component within the vehicle will be fatigued tested,prototyped several times and finally crash tested hundreds of times. The crash tests alone that are run costhundreds of millions of dollars to run because of all the computer analysis andsensors that are involved that analyze the load and force almost everycomponent in the vehicle can withstand. Thematerials are much more advanced because they not only have to be reasonablelight to cut down on fuel usage, but they also need to withstand heat exposureand very high load ratios&#8230; ect. Just totool up one vehicle it costs billions of dollars. Then take into account all the federalregulations that have to be administered and the list goes on. The truth is that if all the components inyour car had as much mark-up as your bike components, even the simplest carwould be over a $1,000,0000 dollars. <o></o>

<o> </o>

Now what does need to be taken into consideration is thatthe volume of higher end bicycles' sold is much less than the volume vehiclessold of almost any make or model. Therefore the profit margin as a percentage of sale price needs to behigher on bikes than on vehicles. Thecost to tool anything new is also very costly. For Shimano to tool up a new design for a crankset it may cost$1,000,000 just in tooling. That costneeds to be amortorized into the sell price so it is recovered. Since there are only so many high endcranskests sold the sell price needs to be higher in order to re-coup thatcost. However, don't kid yourself by thinkingthat the technology in a crankest or the materials used within it are moreadvanced than say what is used in an engine in a car or catalytic converter orsteering system for that matter. Ifanything, what we really pay for in the price of the expensive bike components webuy is marketing. Somehow they have mebelieving that if I buy a $1,200 wheelset I'm going to corner faster and riderharder. I know it's way overpriced andthat's okay because I love the sport. <o></o>

<o> </o>

I think what drives me nuts is when people say that the bikemanufactures like Specialized, Sram or Shimano really aren't making that muchmoney. We shouldn't fool ourselves, theyare making a killing off us. If they aren'tit's because of poor or inefficient manufacturing processes on their end. It's definitely not because their prices aren'thigh enough. <o></o>


----------

