Things the MTB industry does wrong

[HamboCairns]

I'm sitting in a hospital waiting room and reading various posts here and got me thinking about details the industry gets wrong in my opinion.

Not showing photos of all sizes of bike -

I always see the svelte lines of a Medium but does the bike look awkward in larger sizes? Especially important on a 650B bike.

Not speccing stronger components on larger bikes -

It stands to reason that an XL bike will be hosting a heavier rider so why not charge a bit more and spec stronger hubs and wheels for instance?

 

[Minlak]

I'm sitting in a hospital waiting room and reading various posts here and got me thinking about details the industry gets wrong in my opinion.

Not showing photos of all sizes of bike -

I always see the svelte lines of a Medium but does the bike look awkward in larger sizes? Especially important on a 650B bike.

Not speccing stronger components on larger bikes -

It stands to reason that an XL bike will be hosting a heavier rider so why not charge a bit more and spec stronger hubs and wheels for instance?

Price - imagine the bigger Karen's if they had to pay more for their bike just because then need an XL

 

[HamboCairns]

Price - imagine the bigger Karen's if they had to pay more for their bike just because then need an XL

You mean like office chairs? There's plenty of extra costs because of height and weight. If there's a tangible advantage to paying more then I'd be all for it.

 

[Minlak]

You mean like office chairs? There's plenty of extra costs because of height and weight. If there's a tangible advantage to paying more then I'd be all for it.

You say that from the point of view of someone who can appreciate the difference in spec and quality - and I am sure if they started doing it 5yrs from now it would be another thing of "That's just how it is" and no one will question it - Like no pedals - or tubeless ready and not actually tubeless.
The majority of people will just see it as a price gouge for being taller

 

[HamboCairns]

You're probably right, of course I hadn't considered heavier average height riders.

This thread's going well..

 

[Minlak]

You mean like office chairs? There's plenty of extra costs because of height and weight. If there's a tangible advantage to paying more then I'd be all for it.

Was going to edit but decided two replies - also technically you buy a model of chair for "$X" and if you want a chair for the more portly gentleman / lady you buy "$Y" model - I personally have never seen exactly the same model of chair offered in multiple weight limits

 

[Minlak]

You're probably right, of course I hadn't considered heavier average height riders.

This thread's going well..

We should have just PM'd - and me as a super busy business owner doesn't have time for this - I had to work for nearly an hour today.

 

[Chriso_29er]

Frame colour changes in association with spec changes.
Multiple colour choices should be available at all spec levels of a given model. Even if only 2 or 3 choices.

I know some higher end bikes do this but most mid level bikes you cant.

 

[Flow-Rider]

One thing they consistently get wrong is sizes for clothing and shoes.

 

[moorey]

Telling us what we need...rarely asking us what we want.

 

[Minlak]

Telling us what we need...rarely asking us what we want.

Impossible - imagine trying to get a agreement on that - we don't need 29" - we don't need 27.5" - we don't need more than 26" - I say the majority of people are unable to effectively determine what they want or need for themselves

 

[The Reverend]

Telling us what we need...rarely asking us what we want.

This is interesting, only a small sub segment actually know what they want or can express it well enough to translate into product development.

The Henry Ford statement comes to mind.

 

[mike14]

Not giving me test bikes to ride is a pretty big flaw...

Agree that a few more colour options wouldn't hurt for mid-range models.
Super-boost and other 'odd' standards that impact on cross-compatibility shit me, as do proprietary parts. I understand that they want to lock customers in to their brand, but having components with ease of use across a fleet of bikes seems like a way to sell more, not less...

 

[The Reverend]

Interesting question.
As a card carrying Clyde 1.93m / 100kgs I find XL sized bikes are generally a joke. Seldom do the brands get fit, geo and spec right.

The new colours each year is just stupid.
Warranty that's not transferrable.
XT models where the only thing XT is a minor element like the derailleur. That one's for you Pivot.
Limited chances to try big ticket items. Forks, shocks and wheels are generally expensive when one goes top end. Almost no chance of demo'ing them prior to purchase.

The list goes on...

 

[Dales Cannon]

Just like condoms, always too short and waaay too skinny.

 

[Flow-Rider]

Non-transferable warranty on new bikes is another.

 

[HamboCairns]

Non-transferable warranty on new bikes is another.

Yeah that's stupid

 

[Minlak]

Just like condoms, always too short and waaay too skinny.

Have you seen what they write on the bottom of condoms now?

 

[Minlak]

Non-transferable warranty on new bikes is another.

Yeah that's just bullshit and have always wondered why that is a thing - with proof of original purchase the warranty should still be there - might help with stolen bikes too - Its not just bikes either heaps of manufacture's claim this exeption.

 

[HamboCairns]

SRAM SX