Chinertown
Other Resources => Vendor Discussion & Reviews => Topic started by: xcbarny on January 12, 2016, 06:39:17 PM
-
I was asked in another thread to post this link. I guess it's an interesting discussion for this forum. I certainly don't agree with the article claiming that Chinese carbon frames being of inferior quality:
http://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/components/catch-counterfeiter-sketchy-world-fake-bike-gear
-
Specialized has a whole department that deals with fakes. I remember a guy that brought in an "S-Works" Tarmac to get assembled. The frame was identified as a fake immediately by the shop guys. Shop contacted Specialized and was given the address of where the frame was bought from. In return, Specialized gave the guy that bought the fake frame a new carbon Tarmac. Not an S-Works...but sure as hell costs more than the 500 he spent on the fake one. I thought that was pretty cool on Specialized's part.
-
So after reading the article, there are two categories. "Fakes" and "knock-offs" with the fakes being directly labeled as something it is not, and the knock-offs just being a copy of something. So what can Specialized really do for something that isn't be labeled as a Specialized bike, it just has the same geometry? I have never looked at a carbon SJ up close to see how close it really is. If the lines are different but the geo is the same, and Workswell doesn't say "Specialized" brand anywhere in the listing, does it really count? The article definitely appears to be written in a way to scare consumers away from buying the direct frames and parts which isn't the way an article should be written, IMO. Like this quote here-
"Real: went 42 inches before breaking.
Fake: went only 10 inches before entire right side of handlebar broke completely off at riser bend."
Really? Do they really have to be so dramatic. All good information, I guess I'm just not a fan of how it was written. I do agree that we definitely assume a little more risk with this parts though.
-
I'm pretty sure that's the whole point of the article. To steer away people buying direct from China...so you'll buy from the guys that advertise in their magazine. ;D
-
I'm pretty sure that's the whole point of the article. To steer away people buying direct from China...so you'll buy from the guys that advertise in their magazine. ;D
And for Specialized and Pinerello to justify their exorbitant prices!
-
So what can Specialized really do for something that isn't be labeled as a Specialized bike, it just has the same geometry? I have never looked at a carbon SJ up close to see how close it really is. If the lines are different but the geo is the same, and Workswell doesn't say "Specialized" brand anywhere in the listing, does it really count?
I think the Workswell is a very close copy, down to the tube profiles and the 3 screw holes on the down tube for SWAT.
-
For me, there seems to be 2 distinct types of Chinese carbon frame sellers / manufacturers. Those like Miracle bike that do lots of knock offs, and those like Iplay and Hong-fu that sell open mould frames - ie not a copy off another brand.
Personally, I probably trust the open mould frames more, but I've no real evidence for that, except for the fact that for many years I've followed the threads on MTBR and roadbikereview, and their are 1000s of happy customers out there. I also have a number of friends with them - and they haven't broken yet.
I guess I trust the counterfeit frames less, simply because of what they're doing, and feel they're probably less concerned about making a quality product.
I've owned bikes from Ribble, On One and Planet X. These UK brands sell their frames direct to the customer, after having sourced them from China. I don't see what we're doing, in buying direct from the chinese suppliers, as being much different to what these companies are doing. The trick id finding a good company to deal with.
-
For me, there seems to be 2 distinct types of Chinese carbon frame sellers / manufacturers. Those like Miracle bike that do lots of knock offs, and those like Iplay and Hong-fu that sell open mould frames - ie not a copy off another brand.
Personally, I probably trust the open mould frames more, but I've no real evidence for that, except for the fact that for many years I've followed the threads on MTBR and roadbikereview, and their are 1000s of happy customers out there. I also have a number of friends with them - and they haven't broken yet.
I guess I trust the counterfeit frames less, simply because of what they're doing, and feel they're probably less concerned about making a quality product.
I've owned bikes from Ribble, On One and Planet X. These UK brands sell their frames direct to the customer, after having sourced them from China. I don't see what we're doing, in buying direct from the chinese suppliers, as being much different to what these companies are doing. The trick id finding a good company to deal with.
Exactly. It's about doing some research. There are good products and sellers out there, just as I'm sure there are bad products and sellers out there. Personally, I don't feel I'm incurring any extra risk at all by riding my 057 frame. I haven't seen a single failure of this frame yet, and it's been out for a few years now with thousands sold.
I don't think open mould frames are inherently any stronger/better than imitation/clone frames, but perhaps -as you pointed out - it's the nature of the seller. Selling open mould frames seems as if it's a more long term viable business model, whereas those selling copy frames apparently have to worry about being closed down. Someone who's trying to build a business long term has more incentive to invest in the quality of their products and service.
The article was most definitely written to scare people away from going the China direct route. I guess you can't really blame Specialized for wanting to stop people from selling imitation frames that literally have the S-Works sticker on the down tube.
-
I think the Workswell is a very close copy, down to the tube profiles and the 3 screw holes on the down tube for SWAT.
Holy cow. I just compared this to the Specialized Stump Jumper HT. VERY close. The only differences I could spot were the different dropout design and the notch in the seat tube for clamp compression.
:o
-
I agree that the article attempts to scare too much, and ends up somewhat discrediting itself by doing so.
The copy frames that attempt to convince consumers they are purchasing an actual legit S-works frame.. I don't agree with that at all.. But having an unbranded chiner frame that shares almost identical frame geometry as an s-works.. Well, how to judge what is copyright infringement? I actually have no clue technically, but it seems a lot like Apple and it's attempts to copyright everything they possibly can concerning the iPhone. They even wanted to copyright the shape of their phone (rounded corners, rectangular, mostly screen surface) but they didn't win bc that shape is the standard. Same with bikes, there are only a certain number of aways to arrange two triangles in a frame, and while it may be obvious to us where the "inspiration" came from, it's still following the standard double triangle frame configuration.. At what point would it be "okay"? If they had an unbranded frame that's almost identical to a name brand frame but then changed the head tube angle from 71 degrees to 70 degrees.. Is that then enough to avoid it being a copy?
I'm just thinking out loud here as I'm really not sure how it all works.
-
Not sure how a company can patent a shape. They can with suspension and other "mechanical" designs...but not sure if they can patent some basic shapes. Especially being based in China...there is nothing Spesh can do.
Nobody is really sure who the heck is making these frames. Take the 036. There is a HF, IP, CS, and probably several other different prefix versions of the same frame. They look to mostly be trading companies buying from the same manufacturer. When I went to Interbike there were several vendors selling these blank frames.
There is one company that did stand out for me...they are supposed to come out with a new "all mountain" frame coming out in March of this year.
I also asked a few how they came about their geometries...Scott and BMC were two popular responses.
-
I've owned bikes from Ribble, On One and Planet X. These UK brands sell their frames direct to the customer, after having sourced them from China. I don't see what we're doing, in buying direct from the chinese suppliers, as being much different to what these companies are doing. The trick id finding a good company to deal with.
This. There's no difference at all in those frames and the ones we're all buying direct from China. Now you start talking about a 3000 dollar S Works frame and okay, I'm sure there are serious improvements to be had with the S Works. We all know that, It's just not worth the extra thousand or two bucks! And so they resort to what people always resort to when trying to control something they have no control over: fear. Like Sitar said, can't blame bike companies for trying to stop the sale of frames that are using name brand stickers and potentially fooling consumers into thinking they're getting the real thing (although you'd have to be pretty naive to think that imo) other than that, this is a disruption in their business model that will only grow in scope.
-
Now you start talking about a 3000 dollar S Works frame and okay, I'm sure there are serious improvements to be had with the S Works. We all know that, It's just not worth the extra thousand or two bucks!
I would say marginal improvements. I bet if if you rode the SW Stumpy and then rode the 062 copy frame you wouldn't be able to tell the difference and the 062 is just as dependable and reliable. The differences will be apparent on the finish, the precision of the openings on the frame, etc. Oh and the SW Stumpy frame will run you about $3000. So about $2500 more than the 062.
-
I think the main reason the Sworks costs so much is marketing!
Specialized spend a lot of money on advertising and sponsorship. They try to come up with new ways of describing their product to make it appear different / better somehow.
Case in point - Fact 11 carbon - what is this? Other manufacturers tell us if its toray 700 / 800 / 1000 etc, but Specialized won't do this because then we'll know how overpriced their product is.
They don't say what their products actually weigh because they aren't particularly light, and say with their duel suspension bikes, you have to buy the Sworks in order to get the full carbon frame, whereas other brands allow you to buy a cheaper model, which still has the same frame as the top model, allowing you to upgrade over time.
I take great pleasure in beating the local Specialized sponsored riders at the races, on my bike that cost a fraction of the price of theirs.
-
I had a pretty long reply typed up but I don't want to start/fuel a flame war. Chiners are great, but they're cheap because they don't do anything innovative. They just copy what's already out there. The 057 (and several other bikes) have geometry lifted straight from the Scott Scale. The new 29+ bike is a dead ripoff of the Trek Stache. Let someone figure out the cool new things, then copy it as cheaply as possible and you've got a winner, plain and simple. If Trek stopped their R&D efforts on carbon in the early 90s, the Chiners we'd be buying today would be round carbon tubes bonded to aluminum lugs. ;D
Also notice the wide variation in suspension design for the name brand full suspension bikes, vs what's available for the Chiners. They take the basic four-bar suspension design that you can copy without problems, and call it a day. No Maestro suspension, no VPP, none of the truly revolutionary suspension designs available from the big names. Does it work? Sure does, there are a bunch of happy Chiner FS owners on this very forum.
-
So I wonder how the big companies decide how much to charge for their frames?
Foes sells their aluminum frames for 2400. How much R&D do they do? All Foes frames are aluminum. My Mach 5 frame back in 2010 was 2k. Canfield sells their EPO frame for 1500. I wonder how much engineering went into the EPO? Evil sells their carbon Following for 2500. These are small guys with very little employees. Specialized employs hundreds and sells their S-Works Stumpjumper HT frames for 4K (with the overpriced RS-1).
Can anybody shed some light on how prices are determined?
-
Good luck getting an answer on that. :) A whole bunch of stuff goes into the price of anything - manufacturing, R&D, marketing, materials, labor costs, etc, etc, and then you've gotta make some profit on top of that. Just because Foes frames are aluminum I wouldn't think they're automatically cheap... the Evil Following, jeez, just looking at all the pivots and stuff near the BB I'm surprised it's not more. $4k for the Stumpy S-Works does seem like a hell of a lot of money, even with a $2k fork that's been revalved with their Brain stuff, but hey, if someone is willing to pay it, they can charge it. I think with all things, the high end stuff often commands a higher price simply because it is high end. I mean, look at folks willing to pay hundreds of dollars for "premium" home audio cables - especially when those cables are carrying a digital signal, rendering all that fancy construction completely moot? :D
-
The reaction I'm seeing here is pretty negative on the article, as though the article says that all Chinese bikes are bad. I actually read the article and I've got to say, I think it was pretty well done. Considering my opinion of that magazine, that's pretty high praise. ;D VeloNews (http://velonews.competitor.com/not-all-frames-are-created-equal-a-look-deep-inside-the-carbon-in-counterfeit-bikes) did a very similar article, also focusing on fakes.
The key that I think folks are missing is they're warning folks about counterfeits of big name brands. The stuff we're talking about on this site isn't counterfeits, it's stuff that other companies are paying to put their names on. Look at the CS-041 - Peter posted photos of someone who "won first prize" (http://chinertown.com/index.php/topic,602.msg6975.html#msg6975), and it turns out to be the U23 winner of the UCI MTB World Cup race in Nove Mesto in 2015. That's as high-level as racing gets, and it was a rebranded 041 that was ridden to that win. Peter obscured the brand name on the bike, but a little bit of web searching uncovered it. This is a company that is big enough to sponsor a world cup race team and thinks the 041 is good enough to put their name in it - that's a far, far cry from the counterfeit bikes they're talking about in the Bicycling article.
Counterfeits are dishonestly sold as a high end bike that they're not, made as cheap as possible to maximize profit. Frames like the 041 manufactured to be sold by companies who want you to think they did all the design and manufacturing. I'd say that's a pretty huge difference.
-
Don't forget the pro tour teams that the big brand companies sponsor. A lot of what you get on the bikes are due to the feedback from the pro riders. Cervelo almost put themselves into a hole that they couldn't get themselves out of with their "Test Team" in 2009. All of that gets passed onto the consumer.
The Chiner companies don't have any of that. They just make parts. The savings get passed onto the consumer. Sure a lot of it is reverse engineered...and I don't think I want an open mold frame that isn't. ;)
Companies like Evil and Canfield are small operations and use Taiwan or China to make their frames. They don't have hundreds of employees to support or sponsor a big pro team to provide feedback on their designs.
-
I had a pretty long reply typed up but I don't want to start/fuel a flame war. Chiners are great, but they're cheap because they don't do anything innovative. They just copy what's already out there. The 057 (and several other bikes) have geometry lifted straight from the Scott Scale. The new 29+ bike is a dead ripoff of the Trek Stache. Let someone figure out the cool new things, then copy it as cheaply as possible and you've got a winner, plain and simple. If Trek stopped their R&D efforts on carbon in the early 90s, the Chiners we'd be buying today would be round carbon tubes bonded to aluminum lugs. ;D
Also notice the wide variation in suspension design for the name brand full suspension bikes, vs what's available for the Chiners. They take the basic four-bar suspension design that you can copy without problems, and call it a day. No Maestro suspension, no VPP, none of the truly revolutionary suspension designs available from the big names. Does it work? Sure does, there are a bunch of happy Chiner FS owners on this very forum.
Agreed. What the Chinese do well is copy someone else's idea, and make it for cheaper. I'm wary of going with a chinese frame that it too light, because no engineering will have been done on it to actually see if its strong enough in the right places.
But what got me interested in a Chiner, was seeing all these brands selling very gereric looking Carbon frames with a hefty price tag, when a very similar frame could be got for a fraction of the price, so long as you're willing to go through the hassle of dealing with the supplier/ chinese trader yourself.
I do however have a great deal of respect for bike companies coming up with the new innovative designs. This does seem to be more obvious with rear suspension design. Personally, I wouldn't be interested in a chiner duelly, as I think there's too many variables that need to be done correctly for it to ride well.
Obviously it's a bit harder for the chinese to copy a duelly frame. Whether that's down to Patent infringement or something else I don't know, but it does seem that they're only able to produce a faux bar linkage frames.
-
So I wonder how the big companies decide how much to charge for their frames?
Foes sells their aluminum frames for 2400. How much R&D do they do? All Foes frames are aluminum. My Mach 5 frame back in 2010 was 2k. Canfield sells their EPO frame for 1500. I wonder how much engineering went into the EPO? Evil sells their carbon Following for 2500. These are small guys with very little employees. Specialized employs hundreds and sells their S-Works Stumpjumper HT frames for 4K (with the overpriced RS-1).
Can anybody shed some light on how prices are determined?
I think it's mostly down to what people will actually pay for the product.
The mid - level bikes all generally seem to be fairly well priced, even specialized, since its such a competitive market, and since this is the price level where they'll sell most bikes, they need to be competitive and priced well.
However, with SWorks, I feel that they are constantly trying to push the envelope of what people will pay. Here in Australia, you can get the entry level Carbon Epic for $3600, but the Sworks is well over $10000. There is no way that it could be worth $6400 more, yet people still buy them (often the type of person that has more money than sense).
-
However, with SWorks, I feel that they are constantly trying to push the envelope of what people will pay. Here in Australia, you can get the entry level Carbon Epic for $3600, but the Sworks is well over $10000. There is no way that it could be worth $6400 more, yet people still buy them (often the type of person that has more money than sense).
Hey, if they can get people to pay $10k and they use that money to keep making better bikes, I'm all for it.
It sure does seem strange that for an additional $900 over what I paid for my complete, rideable Epic Elite World Cup, I can get an S-Works frame, fork, seatpost, and headset. Having demo'd the $10k S-Works and now riding the Epic Elite, I sure don't think I notice the difference.
Of course, if I hit the lottery, I'd probably rush out and buy one just because ...