# Any experience qwith Bicicompra.com ???



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

*Any experience with Bicicompra.com ???*

Check this out, guys...

www.bicicompra.com

I hit their stand at the Expobici and they seem to have a somewhat decent selection - Fox, Spesh, Shimano, etc - with decent prices. They're at Aguascalientes, but they ship nationwide by courier (ok, not UPS, but Redpack or Multipack).

Their listed prices are without IVA and shipping is a flat rate of 75 pesos (or so I was told).

Anyone want to be the Guinea Pig?

They have the Spesh tyres I'm looking for, in stock... :skep:

Anyone has dealt with them?


----------



## rzozaya1969 (Nov 28, 2004)

Warp, why won't you be your guinea pig and then tell us how they are? 

Nice graphics but they make a confusing site.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

rzozaya1969 said:


> Warp, why won't you be your guinea pig and then tell us how they are?
> 
> Nice graphics but they make a confusing site.


Oh, come on... it's like made for someone who knows nothing about bikes... a symbol, a bike style; a symbol, a bike part and a big sign at the far right.

Next, you'll start asking for a computer with knobs instead of keys... :skep:

I'd like to be the Guinea pig... I was >< this close to be... but I went fundless in a blink of an eye (darn kid!) and my wheels (and tyres) will have to wait.


----------



## rzozaya1969 (Nov 28, 2004)

Warp said:


> ...
> Next, you'll start asking for a computer with knobs instead of keys... :skep:


What? Do you mean that my new laptop won't include any bulbs inside? eeeek!

If someone doesn't know anything about bikes, I don't think they would identify the icons to what it is. I think it's flashy but hard to use. Anyway, I looked for stuff and on all the icons I clicked they didn't had any items.

Probably they're just starting and building an online inventory, which is not easy as far as I know.

I hope everything is fine with your kid. I thought you had already bought your tires, but anyway, I hope you get to buy them soon.


----------



## 545cu4ch (Aug 11, 2005)

Yeah, their stand in the expobici had some nice stuff, some of it with prices similar to the US. I saw an Gt-I drive something with fox float and fox talas fork for 15,000 pesos. I also saw an Spec. Enduro with Zoke AM-1 and I dont remember what for less than 38,000 pesos. However, they did have that Stumpjumper S-works carbon frame for over 50,000 pesos......:eekster:


----------



## the last biker (Oct 12, 2005)

Warp said:


> Check this out, guys...
> 
> www.bicicompra.com
> 
> ...


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ç

Till I know , bicicompra is part of the biciclass group , they're ,as you know , Specialized and Fox authorized dealers for Mèxico .

However I don`t see advantages in prices and the parts and components offer is very small , maybe in tires (or tyres ) the offer is good , I bought in expo-bici the Spz.Roll X in a honest price , but for example the Stumpy FSR Carbòn that I want is very expensive if I compare with USA price.

the last biker.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

the last biker said:


> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ç
> 
> Till I know , bicicompra is part of the biciclass group , they're ,as you know , Specialized and Fox authorized dealers for Mèxico .
> 
> ...


IMHO, the FSR Carbon is expensive, no matter where you want to buy it... for that price I can get a boutique (Titus, Turner, Ventana, etc) frame that works better, dress it with nicer components and in the end have a better bike for less money. For 3800, I rather have an Exo-Grid Frame. Blingier, nicer and I won't have to worry to walk back home if I crash. Plastic, err... I mean Carbon Fiber is good for F1 cars, but not for MTB's.

Yeah, offer is limited, as anything in our country, though.

There's still that business opportunity of making a decent on-line mail order store in Mexico, like Jenson or any other store alike. There's lots of bikers off Mexico City and that could make an important market.


----------



## the last biker (Oct 12, 2005)

Warp said:


> IMHO, the FSR Carbon is expensive, no matter where you want to buy it... for that price I can get a boutique (Titus, Turner, Ventana, etc) frame that works better, dress it with nicer components and in the end have a better bike for less money. For 3800, I rather have an Exo-Grid Frame. Blingier, nicer and I won't have to worry to walk back home if I crash. Plastic, err... I mean Carbon Fiber is good for F1 cars, but not for MTB's.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Warp :
> My point of view ..............
> ...


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

the last biker said:


> YES IS EXPENSIVE , BUT IS NOT THE SAME 3400 U.S. DLLS. THAT CIINCUENTA Y TANTOS MIL PESOS PLUS TAX.


I'll not argue that... but that's soemthing common amongst most bike sellers in Mexico. Exception made by the guys selling Santa Cruz, which I think have very fair prices.

28,000 for a Marin Rock Springs? Gimme a break! I was about to buy that bike for 1000 dollars in february.



the last biker said:


> I DON`T THINK THAT A TURNER , TITUS , VENTANA FRAME WORKS BETTER THAT THE SPECIALIZED CARBON FRAMES , EVERY BIKER HAS A PERSONAL PREFERENCES ABOUT BRANDS AND PERFORMANCE , I WAS READING RECENTLY EXCELLENTS OPINIONS , COMMENTS AND TESTS ABOUT THE SPZ CARBON FRAMES ,THIS OPINIONS ARE FROM PEOPLE VERY RECOGNIZED IN THE MOUNTAIN BIKE BUSINESS ,
> 
> ABOUT THE COST OF THE BIKES OR FRAMES IS A UP&DOWN DANCE, THE BEST IS EXPENSIVE .


This is something that can be taken in reverse... I don't think that Spesh frames are better than Turners, Titus, etc. I truly don't think they're "better". The Aluminum Stumpjumper was basically the same bike and it was not better, not even close. Suddenly, the bike goes carbon and it's "the best bike of the world". Sorry, I don't buy it. Much less to justify the price tag.

As for people recognized in the MTB biz... who? Richard Cunningham and MBAction? 
The mexican review said the rear end was flexi... that's not something you'll hear from a Turner or Titus.



the last biker said:


> I RATHER HAVE A STUMPY CARBON FSR FRAME (close -eyes /hands down ) THAT THE EXO-GRID (beautiful frame too ) I HAD BOTH FRAMES IN MY HANDS SOME MONTHS AGO , AND I LIKE SO MUCH THE SPZ.


As this quote of yours says: "EVERY BIKER HAS A PERSONAL PREFERENCES ABOUT BRANDS AND PERFORMANCE"



the last biker said:


> I DON`T THINK THAT THE R%D AREAS OF THE TOP & LARGEST BIKES BRANDS ARE WRONG , EVERY YEAR THEY PRODUCE ,PARTS MORE AND MORE CARBON FRAME , COMPONENTS ,ETC


This is not necessarily better. Even if I had the budget, I'll keep many parts of my bike (the frame to start with), being some kind of metal.

This is based on a personal preference and it's based on the fact of the yield strees plots for each material. I want something that will bend or deform past its Yield Point, instead of suddenly snapping off. Impact resistance is another welcome feature of plain ole Aluminum and steel.

Iso-Grid and Materials alike cope a bit with this, but the increased care you have to have to install and maintain these parts, make a deal breaker for me (and I insists this is my very personal opinion). The weight gains are marginal, while the increase in costs are substantial.

It'll change in the future... but I rather wait 'till then.


----------



## the last biker (Oct 12, 2005)

Warp said:


> I'll
> 
> As for people recognized in the MTB biz... who? Richard Cunningham and MBAction?
> 
> ...


OK. YOU ARE CORRECT, YOU ARE IN THE TWENTIES , I PAST THE HALF CENTURY, JA JA JA

regards.

the last biker


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

the last biker said:


> NO, PEOPLE FROM OTHER SITES AND MAGAZINES ,BICYCLING, BIKE,MOUNTAIN BIKE,DIRT RAG,BIKE A FONDO (ESPAÑA) SOLO BICI .
> 
> MEANWHILE , I AM NOT A RC FAN ,HOWEVER, I KNOW THAT THIS GUY (I LIKET OR NOT ) HAS A GREAT MOUNTAIN BIKE KNOWLEDGE , AND ACCESS FOR THE LAST IN THE MTB WORLD , JUST A FEW PEOPLE IN THE WORLD COULD BE HAVE THIS KIND OF INFO, BIKES , PARTS ,ETC. FOR TESTING , NICE JOB.


It wouldn't be the first time the whole media is overhyping Specialized.
They're nice bikes, no doubt. But there are nicer out there... especially for the price.



the last biker said:


> NOTHING IS FOREVER


Exactly, my friend... and when the end of a component of my bike happens, I don't want it to detach from the rest of the bike. That's exactly my point.



the last biker said:


> OK. YOU ARE CORRECT, YOU ARE IN THE TWENTIES , I PAST THE HALF CENTURY, JA JA JA


Could be... why not? 
Ever wondered why commercial airliners do not extensively use carbon fiber? They would be lighter, fly faster, etc...


----------



## rzozaya1969 (Nov 28, 2004)

Ok, my point of view... the VW Passat is like 80% Audi. The Passat is a pretty nice car, has nice technology, it sells very well. It's niiiiiice.... but I'd rather get an A4 for virtually the same price  

In Mexico, in the end it could cost about the same any of this 2 frames. Maybe less if you already had a trip planned to the USA to bring the bike.

As you said, it's a personal thing mostly on which bike is 'better'. Because better can mean different to different people. So, I will talk on what it's better for me. 

I would prefer hands down the Exo ML than a CF Stumpy. And I don't say this without any basis, since I've owned and ridden the AL version of both bikes, and to me the Moto Lite is just simply plainer better, more responsive bike. For the amount of cash I would dump on any of those frames, I can order the ML custom built to my size, which I doubt I could on the Stumpy. In my case this is one of the deal breakers, since I'm kinda of in between sizes (on both bikes).

Also, the only carbon fiber I trust to have in a bike is the one covered by Ti. 

This is completely personal, but I really don't like how the CF Stumpy looks, while I do the Al version. I don't really know why, but I just think the Al is pretty and slick, while the CF is crooked or something. And I think that the ML is very elegant and simple.

I don't say that the Stumpy is a bad bike. I liked my Stumpy, but when I got the ML I just didn't found any reason to keep the Stumpy. I sold the frame and I'm building a HT. I doubt that given the choice of a Exo ML to a CF Stumpy, I would find reasons to go to the Specialized. In Mexico, both frames would cost the same, since I would need to import the ML and I don't know how much it would be. 

Still, for me, it would be like comparing a Passat to an A4. The Passat is pretty nice, has tons of things, but it's not an A4. For some people, I'm sure that they would prefer a Passat.

And, DON'T USE ALL CAPS, PLEASE!


----------



## rzozaya1969 (Nov 28, 2004)

Warp said:


> ...
> Ever wondered why commercial airliners do not extensively use carbon fiber? They would be lighter, fly faster, etc...


I've read that either Boing or Airbus is actually planning to use CF extensively for their next airplane.....

And, I think that right now speed is not that important to aircraft builders, while operating economy is. Probably a CF plane would be more fuel efficient?

Some airlines don't use that much paint because paint is heavy for the amount they need to paint the whole plane.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

rzozaya1969 said:


> I've read that either Boing or Airbus is actually planning to use CF extensively for their next airplane.....


I don't think it would be the superstructure but the "envelope". We have only the superstructure on the bike.



rzozaya1969 said:


> And, I think that right now speed is not that important to aircraft builders, while operating economy is. Probably a CF plane would be more fuel efficient?


Yeah, it would be lighter, hence more efficient (you need less power to move the plane if you reduce the dead weight by making the plane lighter or you can use the same power to move more payload).

Because operating economy, speed is important. More speed = less flying time. There's a little problem... speed is limited to around 950kmh because of sound barrier and probable problems with mach speeds forming at the control surfaces, compressiblity effects and such.

This latter is not something CF would solve... rather with more powerful computing aids to develop aero design software. This stuff is really complicated. Laminar flow (sub-sonic) is "easy" to calculate, but trans-sonic (flow changing from laminar to turbulent) is extremely complicated to even theorize, not to mention making an adequate simulation.



rzozaya1969 said:


> Some airlines don't use that much paint because paint is heavy for the amount they need to paint the whole plane.


I was amazed at how thin the aluminum sheet is. It's around 5mm. A bike with tube walls of 2mm looks like overkill... obviously, the alloy is not the same.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

rzozaya1969 said:


> I've read that either Boing or Airbus is actually planning to use CF extensively for their next airplane.....


You were right, Rzoz... Boeing ios making the "Dreamliner" (I wonder why the name:skep: )

It's supposedly to be almost made up from CF and composites. Including the structure and fuselage.

However, they're still in diapers and delivery is expected to 2008.

The reasons for going CF?
- Weight? Yeah... but not that attractive.
- Corrossion resistance? Yeah, but not a deciding factor.

So, what made composites so attractive?
Yeah, you guessed it... IT'S CHEAPER!!! Believe it or not!!!

BTW... You should get one of those beauties RIGHT NOW!!! Becuase the Dreamliner, the JSF-35 and the YF-22 are sucking all of the Carbon Fiber in the world. There's a HUGE shortage of carbon fiber. They will only get more expensive for a while.
(At least until 2008, when Boeing delivers the Dreamliners to China... yeah, China. The first units will go to CHINA!!)


----------



## rzozaya1969 (Nov 28, 2004)

Warp said:


> ...
> Because operating economy, speed is important. More speed = less flying time. There's a little problem... speed is limited to around 950kmh because of sound barrier and probable problems with mach speeds forming at the control surfaces, compressiblity effects and such.
> ...


Warp, sorry, but ur wrong on this. Planes have not been faster over the years, and I think they're actually slower. Yes, faster means less flying time, but more fuel consumption. It's like cars, they say a car give u a certain mileage, but it's at 60km/h at sea level, not 80 or 120.

Finally, some decisions come to a multiple of factors.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

rzozaya1969 said:


> Warp, sorry, but ur wrong on this. Planes have not been faster over the years, and I think they're actually slower. Yes, faster means less flying time, but more fuel consumption. It's like cars, they say a car give u a certain mileage, but it's at 60km/h at sea level, not 80 or 120.
> 
> Finally, some decisions come to a multiple of factors.


Nope. Not wrong.

Cruise speed has gone up from around 850kmh pushing close to 900kmh. You won't see drastic changes (or look like they're not going faster) because the limiting of the sound barrier (which at altitude is slower, as it depends on Mach number of the air and it depends on atm pressure, as you fly higher, the sound barrier is closer).

In a transatlantic flight this increase in speed is important, as the distances are larger, speed becomes important. Not for domestic flights, but for long shots... as the engines are more efficient, they can yield more power (thrust, actually) using less fuel. I have worked on aeroderivative and industrial Gas Turbines and they've seen major advances in controls, materials, fuels, etc.

You'd be impressed how much power a Gas Turbine can put out using little fuel nowadays.

The situation you describe (more fuel consumption) is valid for a turbine that has not grew in power. If you push speed, it'll use more fuel.

Thing is, engines are more efficient now. They put out more power, using less fuel. In the end, airlines can decide to use a higher payload sacrificing speed, but it doesn't mean the plane is slower. The capability is there.


----------



## elmadaleno (Jul 8, 2005)

WTF??? How did this thread go from being about bicicompras to airplanes???


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

elmadaleno said:


> WTF??? How did this thread go from being about bicicompras to airplanes???


Bro, if you haven't noticed... this is the Mexico board.

Tell me of just one thread here that had not been highjacked one way or another!!!

Hey... are you trying to highjack it?:skep:


----------



## the last biker (Oct 12, 2005)

rzozaya1969 said:


> And, DON'T USE ALL CAPS, PLEASE!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I use caps when I want to project some different , like questions & answers or special comments inserts , now if you think that is VERY annoying for you , please don't read my comments.
I also hate when people write ALL their messages in caps!!!

the last biker


----------



## csbueno (Jan 10, 2006)

50,000 pesos for a spzd frame; wow!, yes I know that even in USA its an expensive frame, but personal preferences notwithstanding; there are so much better choices..
Ibis Mojo carbon..
Titus Motolite (in any material, particulary exogrid)
SC Blur xc
Moots Zirkel
and many more that offer xcelllent performance for any given price..

Its my personal humble opinion..Im for the ride, not the flash.
personally, Ill keep the Ibis:full sram X.0, hope brakes, and some other goodies ,it stll be cheaper than the Spzd.

Ride!, dont be PG!!


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

csbueno said:


> Ibis Mojo carbon..


Man, that frame is like having a sex vacation with Elisha Cuthbert on the French Riviera with all expenses paid.

In all seriousness... I'm not weight weenie (like Elmadaleno), so I dunno about frame weights. Are carbon frames significantly lighter than Alloy ones for comparable designs?

Other than that, I don't see much reason to have a full carbon bike. It needs more care, it's more expensive on bikes, you need metal inserts in it, etc.


----------



## csbueno (Jan 10, 2006)

I m also not a weight weenie; I more concerned with good handling overall; not just have a light bike to brag about but it may not take serious abuse; I dont think that carbon frames are lighter than a good designed alloy one. 
With both materials, design its critical, but as Keith Bontrager once said: light, cheap... take two. 
In the case of the Ibis Mojo, its not only a very good looking design, Ive read that its handling its great, and not too heavy for its travel. But in the past I once owned an Ibis hardtail, and it was great, so, I expect a very good handling from Ibis.
In the case of the specialized, I think that they are great bikes, I Just dont like them.

Greetings from Queretaro


----------

