Results 1 to 55 of 55

Thread: Carbon again.

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    160

    Carbon again.

    Hi everyone,

    Just going to stir it up a bit regarding the carbon debate. Sitting here bored, bored, bored recovering form an anal abscess, fistula with a seton in place (to much information) so please don't say "get on your bike and ride then". By the way, I am sure if any of you have had this you wouldn't wish it on your worse enemy, well you would as anything to do with bottoms is funny.

    So, I am the proverbially pain in the arse/ass (which has been recognised for a long time, well before the current situation). But this mystical substance called carbon has made we wonder. I was planning to treat my self to a Burner coming from a 5 Spot and have read so many comments about Dave needing to build a Burner or RFX etc from this wondrous material? So here's some arguments.

    The problem is that this plastic, hessian sacks and glue baked in an oven has flaws. Mainly value for money. I checked out the competition and all frames and bikes are expensive. Here in the UK an Ibis, Pivot, Intense, Santa Cruz and Yeti with good spec all cost around £5500 about $8500. Yes (I hear you say) but you get what your paying for in terms of strength, stiffness and low weight. Really? And anyway these manufacturers produce foundation builds! you curse.

    Carbon is very strong, light and stiff but brittle. Just look at an Indy car or F1 crash with carbon fibre splinters littering the track. Bike manufacturers do produce frame protectors for the down tube to protect the frame which gives some reassurance but also highlights the delicate in some respects and unrepairable aspect of the material.

    As for cost. In today's society it is generally recognised if the consumer purchases a lot of a product the price will also drop. Carbon fibre has been around some time in the Car and
    Bike scene. It is yet to trickle down fully to the mainstream.

    The foundation bikes are extremely good value with no doubt extremely good components. But as the title states they are a foundation with many expecting to upgrade shortly afterwards. There is nothing wrong with that, but all serious bikers are secretly bike tarts and prima donnas who must have the next "in thing". Just look at how we must not be seen with out that delightful Kashima gold. Oh and we were once so happy with 3x9 then it was 2x10, 1x11 what next 15x36, 0x42. Deep thought went into that. We spend hours tinkering with set ups, sags and angles going full circle. Maybe bikes should have a reset button.

    Mountain biking is still about having fun and to explore strange new worlds and b.... Getting a bit carried away there. So what legal fun can be had with £5500 in the UK. I am sure comparisons can be made the world over. Well how about a Honda NC750S, Kawasaki ER 6F, Yamaha MT 07, etc, etc, etc. For about £500 more, there is an even better selection. I guess you can see where I am going and yes they are all mass produced on production lines.

    Anyway enough venting my spleen. If I ever ride again I will be thinking about a carbon Turner. At the moment an Ibis HD 3 foundation with the nice bike shop swapping the fork for maybe a Fox 34/36 or Pike sounds about right for £4000 and it even comes with the Cane Creek thingy as standard. Yes I know, I have contradicted myself but I am one for innovation and just look at the difference the DW link made to riding, I am sure carbon is the same. Then again.

    I just want to stir things up a bit.

    Dave consider building a carbon all mountain/ enduro bike but don't loose sight of your outstanding customer service. I am not Bill Gates more your peasant type who will do without food, a roof over his head and a life (I mean who needs these luxuries) so a foundation build at around £4000 with a decent fork and shock please and I will also sell a body part.

    Thanks for reading this (quite literally) bored pain in the arse and bike tart's mussings. Back to the pain relief or happy pills as I like to call them.

    By the way what's happened to Bikezilla, Tscheezy, Prof, Mr Pink, Wodaphuk, the guy who use to wind every one up and was banned and the guy with all the gold bling thing going on (sorry can't remember their names) etc
    Skye

  2. #2
    Wicketed
    Reputation: swan lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    565
    Mate, just take more of that medicinal morphine ;-)

    I have a carbon Czar for xc racing and love it. I have an aluminium Sultan for hooning about on; love that too. On the former the 1.5lb or so difference in frame weight matters, so the Plastic Fantastic makes sense to me. On the latter I'm more likely to scrape the frame against rocks, and more inclined to continue riding it with a dent than if it were made of the Black Magic.

    But like you, I had the option of a Carburner I'd seriously consider it, just because well, it's carbon innit, must be better

    Maybe you should be looking at a DHR for maximum posterior protection during your recovery though (seriously, that sounds a horrible situation you're in, hope it all sorts itself out soon).

    nb Bikezilla occasionally shows himself here, Tcheezy went AWOL ages ago, not sure what happened to Dusty Bottoms...or Aquaholic or Fo. Tidybeard swings by occasionally which makes up for it all though....

    Another one from the old days is that weirdo calling himself 'DT' who occasionally attempts outbreaks of common sense on this forum
    'I've got a bike, you can ride it if you like. It's got a basket, a bell that rings, and things to make it look good' - Syd B

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,593
    Wow, too early and not enough coffee to fully wrap my self around this thesis. Maybe you should read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance as part of your recovery, sorry to hear it is a pain in the ass.

    Dusty is International Knolly shill, the babbler from NM returns regularly under new names before getting re-banned. Aqua only rides his hardtail in the biggest chunk he can find, the rest of the summer he is doing flips on a CARBON FIBRE hulled Richter more horsepower per pound than an F1 car,
    King Phillip aka Tscheezy? Married Princess Adelia and dis appeared into the far north.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    468
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    Wow, too early and not enough coffee to fully wrap my self around this thesis. Maybe you should read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance as part of your recovery, sorry to hear it is a pain in the ass.

    Dusty is International Knolly shill, the babbler from NM returns regularly under new names before getting re-banned. Aqua only rides his hardtail in the biggest chunk he can find, the rest of the summer he is doing flips on a CARBON FIBRE hulled Richter more horsepower per pound than an F1 car,
    King Phillip aka Tscheezy? Married Princess Adelia and dis appeared into the far north.
    Me thinks Dave needs a Snickers......quick.

  5. #5
    Kiwi that Flew
    Reputation: deanopatoni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    740
    Dusty B is now Mr Knolly.
    Tscheey is fat biking close to the Arctic circle.
    CactusCorn never liked the DW link.
    All the above maybe factually inaccurate.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,901
    I like carbon and I like aluminum. I have to admit my Ibis Ripley at a svelte 25.5lb is pretty dang fun to ride. But...it has limitations. If only my 2010 aluminum 5 spot would break I would be getting a Burner with the trade-in. I would have thought it would have by now having broke both a Ventana El Saltamontes and a Ciclon.

    I guess I'm just going to have to trade it in anyway. The 5spot just feels so ... small... after riding the Ripley. It would be awesome to have a 25lb Burner but a 30lb burly bike isn't so bad either. A Burner Pale Ale is in my future.

    You can still find Tscheezy in the fat bike forum.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,528
    Woah.

    I'm pretty sure Fo occasionally frequents these parts, I think I last saw him in the Yeti or Intense forums but I could be wrong?...

    Hope your bum feels better soon.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    148
    I think I read that as, he wouldn't wish carbon on his worst enema, but I could be wrong.
    Mrwhlr's stepmom rides a 5 spot

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,546
    Frame material is about eighth on my list of priorities when bike shopping, after geometry, fit, suspension design, suspension travel, looks, colour and manufacturer.....

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,528
    Personally speaking I think for an all round trail bike a hand made aluminium/aluminum?? frame is much more desirable than a carbon one.

    I personally don't see the point when a bike like the Burner can be stiffer, stronger, faster and just as light as most carbon bikes. I recently had a carbon trail bike that weighed a little bit less than my Burner although I never felt as confident as I do on that bike as I was constantly scared of wrecking it, whereas my friend has a fully xtr'd Nomad C that weighs over 2 lbs more than my Burner. I know which bike I prefer! Most carbon Enduro bikes weigh in around the 28-31lbs mark so they're no lighter than their alloy counterparts.

    I can see the reasoning for xc/endurance/stage race bikes to be offered in carbon but I don't think the Burner or potentially RFX need to be made out of plastic.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,528
    Quote Originally Posted by David R View Post
    Frame material is about eighth on my list of priorities when bike shopping, after geometry, fit, suspension design, suspension travel, looks, colour and manufacturer.....
    ^^^ This.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    193
    Having a Burner and the Ibis HD3 here.. if carbon is important to you just buy the HD3, its great.. really great bike. Depending on price it might very well be the better of the two cost wise as well. That said.. the carbon part of it really is irrelevant.. they are so close to the same, with the burner having half an inch longer TT and a bit longer chainstay, and the HD3 having 10mm more travel in the rear.. other than that they are the same.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gmats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,006
    What a great thread. Maybe not necessarily Turner direct but for sure great chit-chat.

    First off, sorry to hear about your "PITA". I once crashed back in the 90's doing well over 50 mph. Managed to not break anything but have to admit, my whole body was in severe pain from head to toe. That was christened - "I am ONE BIG PAIN".

    Carbon. Great material. Has many merits. But also, has got a number of disadvantages. I won't get into any list of pros vs cons because there has been so many of those over the years. However, I will point out the idea of "shattering" etc with respect to Indy cars and other "crash" results. With race cars, it's a no compromise weight is everything. Cost isn't an issue. Performance is everything. They are willing to except the fact that it might take a hit and will replace it. OR, hey, it's a crash and no matter how beefy it is built, it's going to not survive anyway. They have the budget to go and lay out what they want (after a lot of computer simulations that COSTS BIG $$$$$$$$$$$). Most bike companies don't have that kind of $$ to throw at a "mold" (molds cost a lot of money) and it will change in another year.

    As far as I know, Turner has to build their bikes to fit a super wide spectrum of riders. I don't jump my bikes but do ride aggressively. I wish I could get a frame about 1-1.5lb lighter but realize they need to build something that's affordable (debatable depending on who you talk to) and reliable. Therefore, my bikes (frames) are far more durable then I would need and therefore, weight more. But hey, it's a great peace of mind knowing no matter where I take my bike, the frame is the last thing I need to worry about.

    All that jibber-jabber I said above, leads me to say it is all about compromise of price vs what I am going to get. That's why even after riding Solos and Flux's back to back in 2013, I bought the Flux because I knew how good the bike was going to turn out, the carbon wasn't going to get me much closer to where I wanted and it was going to cost me a whole bunch more.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    619
    Quote Originally Posted by gmats View Post
    ... the carbon wasn't going to get me much closer to where I wanted and it was going to cost me a whole bunch more.
    new aluminum Burner frame w/ db inline shock - $2745
    new carbon Ibis mojo hd3 w/ db inline shock - $2960

    math: difference of $215

    buuuut, but, its not over yet.... if you know "someone" the Ibis actually comes out cheaper at - $2,569.27

    nothing against the Burner, love my bike, but carbon is not as expensive as you think when it comes just to the frame....usually its the build kits that jack up the prices...put a set of carbon enve M series wheels on and it almost doubles the cost of a complete bike

  15. #15
    Pixie Dust Addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,349
    Quote Originally Posted by Just J View Post
    Woah.

    I'm pretty sure Fo occasionally frequents these parts, I think I last saw him in the Yeti or Intense forums but I could be wrong?...

    Hope your bum feels better soon.
    Fo's like Voldemort. If you start throwing his name around, he'll show up whether you want him to or not. I'm not sure that's a force we want to trifle with.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,593
    Nothing against the Ibis as they make a darn sexy frame, but I have to add some details to dmar comparo. American labor is more than a bit higher than Chinese. Ibis VOLUME is massively different as well, money talks when it comes to negotiating prices, so even if a Turner RFX were built of the same materials and weight in same factory as Ibis, the Turner Bike would be higher. Economies of scale blah blah. Obviously most riders don't give a shit, but I thought some additional info was needed.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gmats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,006
    dmar,

    Thanks for the info. Back in 2013 the the Ibis mojo hd3 was not available in that form nor was the db inline shock. And no, I don't know anyone at Ibis. I guess that's why again I bought and have bought from Turner. I actually know the people I am supporting there. This is not to say there aren't good people at Ibis, Santa Cruz or anywhere else. I happen to like my Turners, I've now purchased or have been part of the purchase of 8 Turners over the years. Still love my 2007 5 Spot.

    I build all of my bikes up from frame up. Have since the early 90's. I do know the prices of frames and parts. But yes, I have weighed all those considerations and chose and aluminum bike because up until today (I don't really actually know today because I'm actually not shopping for a new bike), carbon for the kinds of bikes I was wanting to build was not worth it to me. Me personally as each person has to make those decisions based on bang for the buck.

    Quote Originally Posted by dmar123 View Post
    new aluminum Burner frame w/ db inline shock - $2745
    new carbon Ibis mojo hd3 w/ db inline shock - $2960

    math: difference of $215

    buuuut, but, its not over yet.... if you know "someone" the Ibis actually comes out cheaper at - $2,569.27

    nothing against the Burner, love my bike, but carbon is not as expensive as you think when it comes just to the frame....usually its the build kits that jack up the prices...put a set of carbon enve M series wheels on and it almost doubles the cost of a complete bike

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: freebiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    762
    Dude did you just post that you are ranting and have an anal abcess?

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,528
    Quote Originally Posted by 2TurnersNotEnough View Post
    Fo's like Voldemort. If you start throwing his name around, he'll show up whether you want him to or not. I'm not sure that's a force we want to trifle with.
    Eek my bad!!

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    619
    I was just illustrating a point that if your primary concern is money savings buying an aluminum Turner frame is not that much cheaper than buying some carbon frames. These days most carbon frames are falling around the 2700-2900 dollar range.

    But I agree with what has been said above, I dig the Turner brand. I like the awesome customer service. Im a fan of made in the USA and no BS. Im not riding a Turner because I got a good deal or its cheaper then other bikes ...I like what they stand for and their passion about bikes and attention to detail. Feels like a more personal company. Not to mention that they also ride great and are bomber bikes!! Been riding a turner since 09 when they introduced the dw 5 spot. To me thats worth paying a premium.

    But for my next bike I think I would like to try something different.... I would like to spend some time on a carbon frame with some bearings. I am a fan of the dw link platform so I would like to stick with that but thats all i know at this point.

    I dont know anyone at Ibis, but I supposed if I were friends with people at a certain company I would be more willing to support them.

    I just think the days of carbon being this crazy expensive thing is or should be winding down....Although ENVE is very much on the high side of cost but I think they kinda fall into the same category as Turner...handmade in the USA!! Like Turner its a company that has awesome customer service and a brand im willing to support, worth paying a premium for. I cracked a rear wheel got a new one in 5 days, no bs!! Being able to talk to humans on the phone who actually have a passion about mountain biking and care about fixing problems is kinda a big deal.

    To turnerbikes: any thoughts on going to direct sales like YT is doing? They have some pretty darn good prices and are a small company with passionate riders.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by dmar123 View Post
    To turnerbikes: any thoughts on going to direct sales like YT is doing? They have some pretty darn good prices and are a small company with passionate riders.
    You're a bit late to the party mate...
    Turner Goes Factory Direct and New Colorway or New Frame?


  22. #22
    Kiwi that Flew
    Reputation: deanopatoni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    Nothing against the Ibis as they make a darn sexy frame, but I have to add some details to dmar comparo. American labor is more than a bit higher than Chinese. Ibis VOLUME is massively different as well, money talks when it comes to negotiating prices, so even if a Turner RFX were built of the same materials and weight in same factory as Ibis, the Turner Bike would be higher. Economies of scale blah blah. Obviously most riders don't give a shit, but I thought some additional info was needed.
    There you have it - DT said name of the "frame that must not be named"
    I agree money is some peoples no.1 priority, but having a Turner is also no.1 to others.

    A carbon RFX would rule ALL the carbon mini link frames.
    An alum RFX would be the king of chunk and aggro!

    Either one works for me. (but I'd go alum)

    deanō


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,751
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    Nothing against the Ibis as they make a darn sexy frame, but I have to add some details to dmar comparo. American labor is more than a bit higher than Chinese. Ibis VOLUME is massively different as well, money talks when it comes to negotiating prices, so even if a Turner RFX were built of the same materials and weight in same factory as Ibis, the Turner Bike would be higher. Economies of scale blah blah. Obviously most riders don't give a shit, but I thought some additional info was needed.
    Yes, but is IBIS' volume more than Turner because of the carbon?
    On MTBR, the reputation is infamous.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    160
    Hi,
    Ranting probably, anal abscess definitely, tongue in cheek yeh but very serious, yes.
    Whether you like it or not the single most important and expensive outlay on a bike is the frame. The name on the frame should exude respect, confidence and reassurance and that's why I have a Turner. Brand loyalty and allegiance is crucial for business but we can be a fickle bunch of consumers.

    Hopefully I will be popping up to Tweedlove TweedLove next week, just to look around mind! A round of the World Enduro is happening so the expo should be interesting.
    Skye

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    619
    Quote Originally Posted by David R View Post
    You're a bit late to the party mate...
    Turner Goes Factory Direct and New Colorway or New Frame?

    Not the same as what YT is doing....mate.

    YT actually offers their complete bike at an extremely competitive rate because there is no retail mark up on the frames.

    Whereas yes you can order directly from Turner but the price is still the same as what you'd pay at a retail bike shop for their frames.

    correct me if I'm wrong but it goes:
    1. factory cost (materials, labor etc.)
    2. manufacturer mark up (factory direct) what the company sells it to the shops for
    3. retail markup (what the shop sells it to you for)
    Last edited by dmar123; 05-21-2015 at 11:12 AM.

  26. #26
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,536
    I just went through the process of building a new bike. I'm not Carbon adverse, but it wasn't one of the things on my checklist either. You save about a pound, but you have to worry about smashing into rocks when you crash. I didn't care enough about the weight for it to influence me. I was much more interested in geometry and it's corresponding fit. Lots of bikes have great suspension these days but few will fit me the way I wanted. If the new version of the Burner had been out I may have gone with it. If the new Burner was carbon it wouldn't be more or less desirable to me. I realize that I'm not the typical bike buyer. I was talking to a young fella who works in a LBS and he said lots of people come in with their sights set on carbon. He also puts frame material further down on his list of priorities, and tries to convince people that carbon isn't as important as other factors. As an example, they sell both SC and Kona. Say I want a new bike and am looking at the carbon Bronson, and aluminum 153. For arguments sake I like the suspension equally and they both have good spec. Bronson is carbon but I can only run a 100mm dropper, while the 153 fits like a glove and a 150mm uppy/downy has plenty of room. The allure of carbon isn't going to make me comprise fit with a crazy long seat tube. I'm sure there is going to be more carbon every year but for me it's a relatively unimportant advancement. New school geometry, great shocks and forks, and 1X drivetrains, and droppers are much more important IMO.
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,546
    Didn't realise YT offered cheaper prices by direct retailing, have never even looked at their website. It's a tricky one really, I value and speculate having a worth while LBS, even though it's now two hours away since we moved to a small town, but at the same time it is frustrating seeing the cost of things going up as various people clip the ticket asking the way.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,611
    Quote Originally Posted by swan lee View Post
    Mate, just take more of that medicinal morphine ;-)
    No, no, no! He's had too much already. I remember writing a "family" email describing my broken pelvis and subsequent hospital stay while hopped up on narcotic pain meds and let's just say it was even more rambling than skye's and contained way too much graphic information for public consumption.


    As to his point (at least what I think is his point), carbon is cool and has some unique properties and it will probably continue to increase in market share, but after "having" to have carbon on my most recent bike I'm somewhat over it. It's great but like others have said, a well built alloy frame will be just as good in most ways and better in some...... depending on who's designed and built it of course.

    So, plenty of bikes in that price range that are killer..... including the Burner.
    I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth...
    Isaiah 58:14

    www.stuckinthespokes.com

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,901
    This might sound corny but an aluminum, hand-built frame has way more soul than a carbon one pressed from a mold in China. I could part ways with my Ripley in a heart beat for the right price even though I'm riding the crap out of it. In contrast, I would be torn to sell my Turner or my 1997 Moots for that matter.

    I don't know if that makes sense to anyone but it was heart-wrenching when my Ventana El Ciclon was stolen. I'm not sure I would feel the same about my Ibis, even though I think highly of the company and the people who work there.
    Last edited by rockman; 05-21-2015 at 05:01 PM.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,781
    I always repeat this when I hear talk about carbon but Pivot put out the numbers a while back between their aluminum 5.7 and carbon 5.7. Carbon 0.5lbs lighter 8% stiffer (they didn't say where). Gordon Murray, who use to be the chief engineer for Mclaren and designer of F1 cars, wrote an article a while back that the area where carbon is at a huge disadvantage is at suspension mounting points... on bikes, CF chain stays seem to be the #1 failure point. Here is a video showing CF car wheels being made. Seems like a lot of money for what you are getting ... I mean, applying it to bike frames, I don't see how it is that much more labor intensive. I'm personally not sold when you can buy a frame made in the USA that is on par performance wise for less.
    Killing it with close inspection.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by dmar123 View Post
    Not the same as what YT is doing....mate.

    YT actually offers their complete bike at an extremely competitive rate because there is no retail mark up on the frames.

    Whereas yes you can order directly from Turner but the price is still the same as what you'd pay at a retail bike shop for their frames.

    correct me if I'm wrong but it goes:
    1. factory cost (materials, labor etc.)
    2. manufacturer mark up (factory direct) what the company sells it to the shops for
    3. retail markup (what the shop sells it to you for)
    Turner would be undercutting their existing dealer network and devaluing their inventory in the process, would be a really shitty move from a dealer's perspective. If they had no dealers or chose to sever dealer ties could offer a lower retail price as said. My $0.02 is Turner is doing it right, making their bikes more easily obtained but not excessively harming dealers.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    619
    Quote Originally Posted by kevin372 View Post
    Turner would be undercutting their existing dealer network and devaluing their inventory in the process, would be a really shitty move from a dealer's perspective. If they had no dealers or chose to sever dealer ties could offer a lower retail price as said. My $0.02 is Turner is doing it right, making their bikes more easily obtained but not excessively harming dealers.
    Yes there are two paths you can go by
    but in the long run
    There's still time to change the road you're on

    And it makes me wonder…ohhh ooh woe

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,593
    I watched the CF wheel video for awhile, and if one is wondering where the labor is, note that from the time the video starts and the camera is on the first step that guy laying up the CF wheel doesn't get shit done! Note it is VERY hand made, every single layer of carbon is pressed into place and smoothed and caressed before the next one can be added. Now do this to the tune of one- to-several mm's thick all over a frame... with smoothing each layer and going from thin center sections to massively thing near pivots and headtube. This video clearly shows that laying up CF is stupid amounts of time, and a car wheel is very simple compared to an mtb frame! Look at suspension pivots, BB/ HT /ST/Axle/brake mounts/shock tabs/ tunnels for links to go thru and on and on. It is tedious work. Have been in CF factories, a single mtb handle bar takes half hour for lay up.... Not the sanding and the pretty spray finish, not the guys carefully laying them into the steel molds before the cure, just the lay up on a foam core. The bars I saw were Easton and Syntace, so maybe off brands are quicker? can't say, but a top quality bar, perhaps the most simple part of a bicycle is still a time suck.

    Of course the price difference in material is huge as well. Is it 'worth it'? Seems like many are willing to pay. Those that don't have the money or are worried about crash damage can justify their way onto on alloy frame, just as many can justify their way on to a carbon frame for what truly is nominal weight savings. A large % of the dirt bikes on the trail are in excess of 200 pounds total vehicle weight...Saving even 2 full pounds on the frame is illogical, but is there ANYTHING about toy based sports that is logical? NO, of course not! Pick any sport and more often than not, the costs of equipment are ridiculous, including mtbs!

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: freebiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    762
    Sorry double post

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: freebiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    762
    Fyi . I have always been many much way more psyched to get an alloy turner bike than a carbon bike for several reasons, cost and durability and looks and pivot loveliness and the proven hx of ultra bichin shred ability and customer service, including free replacement parts and loaner frames(until the new model is available) and turners willingness and sense of humility to upgrade, step outside the box and update to what's the latest/proven suspension design/and or suspension tune, and geometry updates w lots of proven shredding customer insight. All in an effort to have a better bike. And custom affordable and professional, durable paint/anodize options and and etc. etc. I am super psyched on the gold plated(not really but in my eyes it is) burner en route to mi casa!!!!!!!Thx Turnerbikes!! Simply put, I feel like I have the turner mafia behind me and I wouldn't be the same without it!!


    k

    Truthful many years old experienced based rant over........

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    160
    Ok so what have we learnt.

    Turner riders don't want a carbon Burner or RFX type of bike.
    Turner riders would like a carbon Burner or RFX type of bike if Dave builds one.
    Dave can't build a carbon Burner or RFX type of bike as it doesn't make financial sense at the moment or ever.
    Anal fistulas are a pain in the arse.


    So out of interest. Is the Czar like the Bugatti Veyron. Produced as a show stopper and sold at a loss just because?
    Skye

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,611
    Quote Originally Posted by skyerose123 View Post
    Ok so what have we learnt.

    Turner riders don't want a carbon Burner or RFX type of bike.
    Turner riders would like a carbon Burner or RFX type of bike if Dave builds one.
    Dave can't build a carbon Burner or RFX type of bike as it doesn't make financial sense at the moment or ever.
    Anal fistulas are a pain in the arse.


    So out of interest. Is the Czar like the Bugatti Veyron. Produced as a show stopper and sold at a loss just because?

    Wait, what? At $1.2million per and they're losing money on the Veyron?? Isn't it pretty much their only model?

    Sorry for the off topic "what-the-heck?".
    Last edited by KRob; 05-27-2015 at 04:43 PM.
    I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth...
    Isaiah 58:14

    www.stuckinthespokes.com

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    160
    Yes about $6million per car Volkswagen losing an unbelievable 6.27M USD for each Bugatti Veyron sold
    Sorry off topic but, if Turner were to make a carbon bike in the USA how much would it cost? Probably out of reach for many unless they had a Bugatti.
    Skye

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,593
    I will take a drive on that road with ya Rob... until Fire posted that link I had never even heard of KOENIGSEGG super cars... but then I wasted some time on a few of their videos, SHITE! that is crazy cool. Maybe the Veyron is a bit easier to pronounce but the tech info on the Koenigsegg is beyond impressive.

  40. #40
    The Bubble Wrap Hysteria
    Reputation: mtnbiker4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,608
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    I will take a drive on that road with ya Rob... until Fire posted that link I had never even heard of KOENIGSEGG super cars... but then I wasted some time on a few of their videos, SHITE! that is crazy cool. Maybe the Veyron is a bit easier to pronounce but the tech info on the Koenigsegg is beyond impressive.
    Their is a show on the history channel or one of those types of channels on the Koenigsegg. It's bad ass carbon technology and they sell all the cars they produce.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,593
    How many do they produce and what do they cost? as soon as Turner Bikes has a carbon RFX everyone will buy one (based on the internet facts) and I will be able to buy one. I hear Chuch Ibis has a Koenigsegg AND a Veyron!

  42. #42
    nocturnal oblivion
    Reputation: stumblemumble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,330
    It's like riding with or without a helmet. There is a sense of insecurity riding a new bike, driving a new car, riding a carbon frame vs aluminum or steel.
    For me that sense, unless the bike were well used and I no longer cared about dropping it over in a rock garden to take a leak (would never happened with anything but an absolute beater), would always be a restrictive sense on my riding.

    First time I wore a helmet snowboarding my game stepped up, a !possibly false! sense of security. But there is a psychological difference for some that changes how we feel when we ride.

    I've demo'd carbon bikes and ridden them hard because they weren't mine, so that feeling wasn't there.

    FoShizzle
    FoShizzle
    FoShizzle
    ...looking into the computer screen.
    "...like sex with the trail." - Boe

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,955
    Fo's mom banned him from the Turner forum (parental controls).

    Carbon is sexy, and surprisingly repairable (maybe more so than aluminum).

    I used to beat my buddy on every climb and descent, when I had a carbon Czar and he had an aluminum Flux. Therefore, carbon rules.

    It's funny how aluminum has become somewhat worship-worthy with some. Dating myself for sure (I'm older than DT, but not dead yet!!!) but this reminds me of the time that aluminum started dominating, and the same group was bemoaning the demise of steel, noting how worthless aluminum was in terms of fatigue resistance.
    Whining is not a strategy.

  44. #44
    nocturnal oblivion
    Reputation: stumblemumble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,330
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    Fo's mom banned him from the Turner forum (parental controls).

    Carbon is sexy, and surprisingly repairable (maybe more so than aluminum).

    I used to beat my buddy on every climb and descent, when I had a carbon Czar and he had an aluminum Flux. Therefore, carbon rules.

    It's funny how aluminum has become somewhat worship-worthy with some. Dating myself for sure (I'm older than DT, but not dead yet!!!) but this reminds me of the time that aluminum started dominating, and the same group was bemoaning the demise of steel, noting how worthless aluminum was in terms of fatigue resistance.
    Not much has changed I think, steel is still best, aluminum came about as forming + suspension were required and available which relieved fatigue. Now it's carbon which, theoretically, should be the best of form for design w/ suspension. Issues will remain with the design/cost restrictions though.
    Then there's the made in Asia thing, faith in the material, and gasp! dare I say...environmental perspectives. You say aluminum is worship-worthy with some? Of course, but I think it's relative. Steel is worship-worthy with many, aluminum is a far backseat to that, carbon certainly is to many, and worthy, but it's limited by cost vs design (and general faith/support from the consumer for the above reasons).
    "...like sex with the trail." - Boe

  45. #45
    Large member
    Reputation: Tidybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,732
    I'm afraid that Fo is very busy with his new job at the penis enlargement company. He didn't really want to join them but they offered him a very impressive package.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    619
    I prefer a set of aluminum wheels over a set of carbon ENVE's said no one ever.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,528
    This thread brings this song to mind!

    http://youtu.be/aC6CPwu0I44

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,901
    Quote Originally Posted by dmar123 View Post
    I prefer a set of aluminum wheels over a set of carbon ENVE's said no one ever.
    That's true. The price margin is totally different though. The difference between a Flow/King wheelset and a Enve/King wheelset is perhaps 70%. That is, 70% more of your hard-earned cash to run carbon made in the USA. Upgrading to a carbon frame over an aluminum is not nearly the same.

    If indeed a carbon frame is an upgrade (certainly lighter and the ride quality thing is debatable) but it's more like 10 to 20% more expensive. I'm just pulling those numbers out of my A$$ but there is a notable difference..

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miles e's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,968
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    The difference between a Flow/King wheelset and a Enve/King wheelset is perhaps 70%. That is, 70% more of your hard-earned cash to run carbon made in the USA. Upgrading to a carbon frame over an aluminum is not nearly the same.
    By 70%, do you mean the Flows cost 30% of what the Enves do? It's actually more like 10% if you look at the rim only pricing. And technically that would mean it's 10x more of your hard earned cash, not 90% more.

    Of course a more fair comparison might be to an imported rim like Nox; then the premium drops to ~5x. Either way, your larger point stands: for whatever reason, carbon commands less of a premium (relatively speaking) when it comes to frames.

    Santa Cruz offers a perfect apples to apples example of this: to get a carbon version of a given frame, it's right at a 35% upcharge over the aluminum. And that's for their top of the line CC frame, not the lower priced C version that reportedly may kill off their aluminum VPP bikes altogether.

    What does this all mean for Turner? I don't know. Bikes like the Nomad, Mach 6, HD3, and SB6 are all available in carbon only, which probably says something about where the market is. OTOH, that also means there is very little competition for an aluminum "boutique" enduro bike, especially of the mini-link variety.

    Personally, I'd be hard pressed to turn down an aluminum DW Link RFX, especially if US made- I've only been waiting for one for like seven years! That said, a carbon version would scratch that itch pretty well too I'm sure. The Czar is a phenomenal bike- best in class IMO- and I'd love to see DT do the same with a carbon RFX.
    ''It seems like a bit of a trend, everyone trying to make things longer over the last couple of years" Sam Hill

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,901
    You'd think for all the R&D, molds, cost of each mold, etc that goes into a carbon frame that the disparity between rims and frames wouldn't be that great. Either way, I'm getting a Burner but wish it weighed closer to 25lb than 30lb. I've gotten spoiled pedaling around a Ripley at 25lb even with a dropper post. 5lb off the gut isn't nearly the same; at least that's what I tell myself. Cost per gram.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    598
    PLASTIC!!! .....sorry.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,955
    PROCESSED ROCKS!!! .....sorry.
    Whining is not a strategy.

  53. #53
    Kiwi that Flew
    Reputation: deanopatoni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    740
    +1 for processed rocks!

  54. #54
    It's carbon dontcha know.
    Reputation: 6thElement's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,018
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    You'd think for all the R&D, molds, cost of each mold, etc that goes into a carbon frame that the disparity between rims and frames wouldn't be that great. Either way, I'm getting a Burner but wish it weighed closer to 25lb than 30lb. I've gotten spoiled pedaling around a Ripley at 25lb even with a dropper post. 5lb off the gut isn't nearly the same; at least that's what I tell myself. Cost per gram.
    Well the Burner frame doesn't weigh 5lb more than a carbon one would...
    Rolling on 29", 650b, 8.3" and 23mm

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    193
    The difference between the old HDR and the burner in medium was 200grams, the HD3 i guess 300g? Lifting both upon the bikerack feels the exact same.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-11-2014, 05:36 AM
  2. PAID SPAM: Clyde Worthy Carbon Handlebar ANSWER Pro Taper Carbon 720 AM
    By jonshonda in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-16-2013, 05:23 AM
  3. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-25-2013, 10:22 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-20-2012, 01:02 PM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-12-2011, 08:50 AM

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •