RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General
why are the new look bikes so expensive, theyre heavy(20 posts)
|why are the new look bikes so expensive, theyre heavy||ishmael|
Jul 9, 2002 1:42 PM
|Going by the numbers in the excel catalog, (which has the weights for the frame and fork, and for the frame alone) they are way overpriced. The new kx is a 4.6 pound frame and fork, and it costs 1795, thats rediculous. The new look bikes all follow this trend- al 384 is 4.7 pounds for the frame and fork and costs 1495, the kg 381i is 4.2 with fork and costs 2195!
I know companies always give the lowest possible weights and you'll rarely find one that light but are all the companies consistant in this? Are look bikes maybe going by the honest numbers? I doubt it.
The older frames are still for sale and there prices and weights are much nicer. The kg386 is 3.8 pounds for frame and fork and its 1298 and the kg 261 is 3.7 and costs 998
|Ishmael, didn't you do this a month ago. Let's look at weights||Dave Hickey|
Jul 9, 2002 2:17 PM
|LOOK KG381i 1850gr 4.08lb
LOOK KG386 1750gr 3.86lb
LOOK AL384 1900gr 4.19lb
LOOK KX 1900gr 4.19lb
I will agree that the new 381i is 100grams heavier than last years 281. If that 100 grams is that important to you, buy this years 381(not i). It weights 1750
Buy the way LOOK measures their frames based on a 54cm frame and their weights are very accurate.
|Ishmael, didn't you do this a month ago. Let's look at weights||legs|
Jul 9, 2002 2:23 PM
I dont think that he gets it...
no matter what you say i think he is gonna be stuck on the idea that Look bikes are 'heavy'...
Ishmael.. go ride a Look and then tell me why you think it feels heavy...
|yea and last time i got a lame answer||ishmael|
Jul 9, 2002 5:27 PM
|last time it was decided that the weights included the fork, well now that I see the weight with and without fork it seems kinda heavy to be charging that price. Im looking at them in comparison to the rest of the market (except the c40 which is a case all by itself). If you and mr legs cant see the logic in what I'm saying,,,well,,it makes sense to me. And the answer this time is lame too. What else are bikes charging us for if not weight? Yes there are other things, and I thought someone would clue me in on the what the new look frames have but it hasnt happend. Im not out to rip look frames, I like their older ones, just trying to understand what they are doing.|
|lots more to a good bike than total weight (nm)||ColnagoFE|
Jul 10, 2002 6:02 AM
|yea and last time i got a lame answer||legs|
Jul 10, 2002 7:23 AM
|Bikes are not sold by the pound. Bikes, like all merchandise are sold by market value and cost of production. Market value is based on the consumer's perception of value and is influenced by intenational exchange rates. The change in price of a French made frame may be influenced by the Euro.
(Oh and please, if we are going to be formal you can just call me Dr. Legs).
I am afraid I dont get your point. Yes the new models are advertised as being heavier... I am not sure that it is reasonalbe to relate that to the value of the frame.
I would base your concerns completely on the ride quality. I happen to prefer Parlee, the C-40, and Calfee over Look...(as carbon frames go)...
Why the fixation on wieght?
If you want a superlight bike I wouldnt consider the Look.. But if you want a light bike.. they are right in the pocket .. If you build uo a 17-18lb rig.. the three or four pounds that is the frame and fork make for less than a third of the total weight. of the complete bike. you can lighten things up more effectively with wheels and components...
I wouldnt base my decision about the worthiness of the frame on anything but a test ride. I certainly would not try and make an informed decision based on numbers
or advertising or popular perception.
If you think Looks are too heavy... then just move along...If you think they are too heavy to be good you are totally off-base. There are more 18lb bikes in the peleton than you can imagine...
|Could the extra weight be due to...||Nessism|
Jul 9, 2002 6:12 PM
|...the integrated headsets? If so, the weight increase is understandable.
|why do you waste your time with this JA???||JohnG|
Jul 9, 2002 8:31 PM
|Really, he's always posted BS crap.
|John, you are correct. He's not worth it. nm||Dave Hickey|
Jul 10, 2002 3:29 AM
|then move on and dont answer||ishmael|
Jul 10, 2002 9:52 AM
|You are awfully excited. dont bother to write, keep your great comments for the important topics.|
|Weight doesn't mean everything||Nessism|
Jul 9, 2002 2:46 PM
|Those frameset weights seem pretty darn nice to me. I would much rather have some meat in the tubes as opposed to some featherlight fragile bike that will fall apart at the first mishap.
|no it doesnt||ishmael|
Jul 9, 2002 5:37 PM
|but what are we paying for? for the money might as well get two leader frames, paint them however you want, and have one as back-up. Maybe the look frames have some amazing ride quality that is worth the money. Maybe its the warrant(doubt it), or the paint job(possibly), or the cool chic french thing(I dig it).|
|It's not that complicated really...it's just marketing.||Ahimsa|
Jul 9, 2002 5:51 PM
|The frames are slightly heavier this year. Why?
1) They may be responding to research they have done that shows the frames needed to be beefed up.
2) They may be responding to surveys of riders that would prefer a beefier frame.
3) The engineers and/or frame builders decided they needed to do something different that affected the weight a bit.
The heavier frame is also more expensive. Why?
1) They are responding to competion pricing.
2) They are just plain raising prices for any number of reasons.
3) Material costs have gone up.
4) Labor costs have gone up.
I hope you understand that I mean this in the most sincere way when I say that you are looking for an answer that is not available from anyone but the Look Corp.
There may be no rhyme or reason other than Look is making a decision to offer a heavier bike at greater cost. wheter it is stupid or not is really up to two things, the market, and time.
Time will tell.
Hope this sheds some light on this. I'd ask Look via email if I were that concerned.
Also of interest is your comment about seeking two frames from Leader. I'm sure that many potential buyers might do the same thing if the trend is against Look's price and weight increase.
Jul 9, 2002 3:37 PM
|The 54 c40 frame is about 1100 g and the fork 360, for a total of around 3.2 pounds. I think it's generally acknowledged as plenty stiff and durable, too. Of course, it costs twice as much.
|re: why are the new look bikes so expensive, theyre heavy||dasho|
Jul 9, 2002 5:49 PM
|I was hesitant to buy a Look KG 281 because of the weight issue but I gave in to my yearning and built the frame/fork up with DA components, 3TTT Prima bars, Open Pro wheels with DA hubs, SI Flite seat, Look carbon seatpost, Thomson Elite stem, and Axial Pro tires. The total weight of the bike (50 cm) was 17.25 lbs. with pedals (Icon). It is about 2.5 lbs lighter than my Ultegra Trek 5200 which I no longer ride. The shape and appearance of the hand crafted (naked) carbon tubes impressed me but the ride greatly exceeded my expectations. The KG281 has a much more comfortable, compliant ride than the Trek and is also very responsive.
As much as I love the ride of the Look, a bike shop in France that sells Look, Trek, and Colnago claims the C-40 is the most incredible bike they have ever ridden. It must be some kind of special and I would love to test ride one some day.
Jul 10, 2002 12:36 PM
|I won't comment on the price other than to say that it's WAY out of my range.
In terms of weight, maybe they've layed down a few more layers of carbon fiber. I say this because, 1.) they have a rep for being a little soft at the BB and 2.) because in the 2-3 years since I got back to riding, I've seen one Look fork and two their frames fail. As others have stated when carbon fiber fails, it's much more catastrophic than when a metal fails. This was certainly true in two of these cases.
Based on this (alone), and the comments of others who I respect, I wouldn't touch a Look product. Reynolds makes a better fork, while both Trek and Calfee make better, more reliable CF frames, and they're lighter.
|A lot more reliable than your comments?||dasho|
Jul 10, 2002 4:09 PM
|I think the Look bikes are a lot more reliable than your comments. It's obvious you have never ridden a Look or probably a Calfee or OCLV for that matter yet because you saw a broken Look frame you wouldn't touch one. I guess OCLVs and Calfees never break right? Unless you have first hand knowledge of the bikes, why make generalizations and bad mouth a great bike that happens to be ridden by 20% of the TDF riders. Of course it couldn't be because it is a French product and not made in the USA right?|
Jul 10, 2002 6:27 PM
|Let's see, I've seen 2 frames fail, one catastophically at the BB. I've also seen one of their forks fail in a similar manner. OK, lets take it a step further, I've actually spoken with more than one guy currently riding in the TdF, and when the subject of bikes came up, they had some very strong opinions on the matter. Only a simplton thinks that the a product is great because it's ridden by a pro team. And no, I won't give their names because a couple of them are negotiating contracts soon. I forget the rider's name, but there is a picture of a guy's failed Look on cyclingnews that doesn't speak well to their quality. One of these guys pointed me to it.
In terms of riding one, no I haven't. Why would I? I have no interest in ever spending my hard earned money on one. I did test ride an OCLV, thought it was very nice, and would consider purchasing one. I have ridden a friend's Calfee and loved it, and if I win the lottery, maybe. But no as with the OCLV I doubt that I'll ever be able to justify the cost.
As for reliability, I know that Trek had it's problems, so fair enough comment in that regard, though it's my perception that they're cleared them up, and they supposedly did a great job with warranty replacement. Do you know how many Calfee's have failed? From what I've heard he's never had to do a warranty replacement. I see them all the time around here, and every owner I speak with loves his ride. That's enough for me, and quite a contrast to Look.
Finally, yes the fact that it's made in France does color my opinion. Why would I buy a product built in a nation of America haiters, especially when it's inferior to two that are built here? I guess if I was a poser, there might be some justification, but then I'd buy a C-40.
See ya out there on your Look, Fred.
Jul 11, 2002 3:57 AM
|Happy to see you admit that the real problem you have with Look bikes is where there made. Calfee has had their share of quality problems in the past and you would know this too if you read posts on their forum. With all your 2-3 years of riding experience, I think I know who the poser is, Fred.|
Jul 11, 2002 6:58 AM
|LOL, you can't read can you Fred.
FYI, I use Carnac shoes and Mavic rims because in the former case they are the best fitting (for me), and in the later case the best value. So I don't boycott French gear, but all things being equal, I will buy from companies based elewhere, and yes, I'd prefer to support American companies who build a quality product, and think that is a logical and rational form of patriotism.
As for 2-3 years of riding I should have clarrified for you. I both rode and raced extensively 15-20 years ago before life and a real job got in the way. Now I have the time to ride again so I do, and enjoy it, and will race masters next year, when I can ride at a standard that I set, which as with everything is high. I also could buy any of the bikes we've discussed here, but think spending that kind of money, especially on something as over-priced and over-rated as a Look is stupid.
I hadn't been to the Calfee board in sometime, and based on what you said in you silly response, I thought that I would find dozens of P-Oed owners. I couldn't find any, but then again, I only checked it out for around 15 minutes. Only happy folks over there from what I can see. Then again, Calfee gives great warranties on his product, in some cases lifetime, and Look, well 3 years. That speaks for itself now doesn't it. Besides, no pro team rides Calfees so you wouldn't be interested now would you....Fred.
So lets talk about top riders for a bit now. Two riders who are on a Look sponsored team, CSC, Jalabert and Hamilton, both wanted to ride a re-badged Cervelo rather than the Look TT tank that they were being asked to ride. I also heard that Hamilton had either Calfee or Parlee making special climbing bikes for him, but that could be conjecture. Taken to another step, as well as the French have done at the velodrome, their guys would prefer to to be riding Corima's rather than the Looks. I got this from an American who has ridden against them. He said that they hate the fact that kitted out the Looks weigh-in at nearly 20lbs. It does prove that it's the rider not the bike though.
Lastly, I checked the reviews of the Look on this site. Afterall that what it's for really. While the reviewers really loved the product two things stuck out. All of them were recreational riders, and they all commented on how nice the ride was, some even admitting that the bike was soft.
Sorry to spoil your fantasy that you look like a pro riding your Look. Now you know that everyone thinks your a silly Fred. Which team TdF uni will you be wearing this weekend?