unabashed plug, Crumpton

On May 9, 10:58*am, A Muzi wrote:

http://www.funnycoolstuff.com/2006/0...orts-are-alway...

This one loads a lot faster:

http://cucinatestarossa.blogs.com/ph...e_shorts_1.jpg

I think the picture is a little bigger, too. --D-y

dustoyevsky wrote:

Chalo wrote:

Funny-- I've been part of the cycling scene here in Austin for over
twenty years, minus the years of 2001-2006 that I spent in Seattle.
I've never even heard of Nick Crumpton or his bikes. I guess he must
limit his public interface to only the scowling plum-smugglers of our
fair city.

What's a plum smuggler?

Ask your mother.

I checked in with some of my bike shop buddies and discovered that
Nick Crumpton is known as "the guy who shares shop space with Whitney
Moyer" (a framebuilder I am familiar with).

I wonder how much he'd charge for a longtail cargo bike frame? Or a
sociable tandem?

Why be sarcastic? Yes, these are "race bikes". What's the problem?

Problem? I dunno, paying an extra $2000 to $3000 tariff for a frame
that weighs the same, looks about the same, has exactly the same
dimensions, and is made of the same materials as a common commercial
frame could be considered a problem. But I guess some folks must see
that as an enhancement.

I reckon you pay the custom-built surcharge to get something the mass
market doesn't already provide, or doesn't provide in your size. If
you want a 1000g plastic frame with me-too geometry and room for 25mm
tires, you have a number of more reasonably priced choices.

I think handbuilding should be used where it yields
noteworthy benefits.

Noteworthy benefits seem to be the subject of the review. I've heard
testimonials from an owner or two. Um, professional people who haven't
been hypnotized or drugged as far as I know.

I read the review and see imaginary benefits (that can't be expressed
or measured in SI units). I have observed that spending silly amounts
of money for things, or sometimes even getting to play with someone
else's things that cost silly amounts of money, can bring out the
fanciful side of people.

I mean, can't someone buy a plastic road bike
basically indistinguishable from that one just about anywhere for a
whole lot less money?

No.

I think a rattlecan paint job and identical parts selection would
render a Crumpton equal to and indistinguishable from any number of
other plastic bikes costing less. Until I see descriptions of
differences between such things expressed in something besides wine-
taster language, I'll assume that bikes weighing the same, made of the
same materials in the same dimensions are functionally equivalent to
each other.

I guess a lot of folks who are indiscriminate enough to drop $9k on a
bike must want something just like what they've already got, only more
expensive.

"Indiscriminate"? That's taking on a lot, frankly speaking.

If one of the consequences is a guy making bikes by hand
and earning a decent living for his work, though, then that's OK by
me.

That price point enables a "decent living", via spending a lot of time
working at making frames and promoting, etc. Which way do you want to
slice this luncheon loaf,Chalo?

I used to work in a tiny machine shop where one of the regular
customers was a guy who made violin bows. He sold these bows for
$10,000 to $40,000. A few folks thought that was a good enough value
to lay down their own money to buy them. I got a close enough look at
the manufacturing process to believe that those folks were misguided
to pay so much.

Crumpton's frames are not so far out of line with the prices of other
comparable frames as to be absurd; but neither do they have anything
significant to distinguish them from those other frames. He doesn't
make his tubing or subassemblies. He doesn't get to decide that a
certain frame warrants 47cm chainstays-- he has to work with the same
length as everybody else because that's what the manufacturer
provides. He doesn't get to build a frame with room for fat tires.
He doesn't get to specify an extra-fat or extra-thick-walled tube to
compensate for unusual tube length or load. I'd be surprised if he
could even build a bike with a 65-degree seat angle and no other major
divergences from normal. All he can do is bandage up the joints with
more or less wrap and make 'em as purty as possible. That's worth
something, certainly, but $2-3k extra? It does leave me wondering
about cost/benefit ratio.

I guess imaginary benefits are the most expensive ones of all.

To me, the only tangible benefit in the whole deal is this: Some guy
who works hard making the nicest bikes he knows how to make doesn't
have to go broke to do what he loves (which is a pitfall I have
witnessed time and again in the bike business). The bikes themselves
are about as banal as can be-- like a yet fancier and more expensive
set of chrome 22s on an SUV.

Chalo

Chalo wrote:
Funny-- I've been part of the cycling scene here in Austin for over
twenty years, minus the years of 2001-2006 that I spent in Seattle.
I've never even heard of Nick Crumpton or his bikes. I guess he must
limit his public interface to only the scowling plum-smugglers of our
fair city.

dustoyevsky wrote:
What's a plum smuggler?

Chalo wrote:
Ask your mother.

I checked in with some of my bike shop buddies and discovered that
Nick Crumpton is known as "the guy who shares shop space with Whitney
Moyer" (a framebuilder I am familiar with).

I wonder how much he'd charge for a longtail cargo bike frame? Or a
sociable tandem?
Why be sarcastic? Yes, these are "race bikes". What's the problem?

Problem? I dunno, paying an extra $2000 to $3000 tariff for a frame
that weighs the same, looks about the same, has exactly the same
dimensions, and is made of the same materials as a common commercial
frame could be considered a problem. But I guess some folks must see
that as an enhancement.

I reckon you pay the custom-built surcharge to get something the mass
market doesn't already provide, or doesn't provide in your size. If
you want a 1000g plastic frame with me-too geometry and room for 25mm
tires, you have a number of more reasonably priced choices.

I think handbuilding should be used where it yields
noteworthy benefits.
Noteworthy benefits seem to be the subject of the review. I've heard
testimonials from an owner or two. Um, professional people who haven't
been hypnotized or drugged as far as I know.

I read the review and see imaginary benefits (that can't be expressed
or measured in SI units). I have observed that spending silly amounts
of money for things, or sometimes even getting to play with someone
else's things that cost silly amounts of money, can bring out the
fanciful side of people.

I mean, can't someone buy a plastic road bike
basically indistinguishable from that one just about anywhere for a
whole lot less money?
No.

I think a rattlecan paint job and identical parts selection would
render a Crumpton equal to and indistinguishable from any number of
other plastic bikes costing less. Until I see descriptions of
differences between such things expressed in something besides wine-
taster language, I'll assume that bikes weighing the same, made of the
same materials in the same dimensions are functionally equivalent to
each other.

I guess a lot of folks who are indiscriminate enough to drop $9k on a
bike must want something just like what they've already got, only more
expensive.
"Indiscriminate"? That's taking on a lot, frankly speaking.

If one of the consequences is a guy making bikes by hand
and earning a decent living for his work, though, then that's OK by
me.
That price point enables a "decent living", via spending a lot of time
working at making frames and promoting, etc. Which way do you want to
slice this luncheon loaf,Chalo?

I used to work in a tiny machine shop where one of the regular
customers was a guy who made violin bows. He sold these bows for
$10,000 to $40,000. A few folks thought that was a good enough value
to lay down their own money to buy them. I got a close enough look at
the manufacturing process to believe that those folks were misguided
to pay so much.

Crumpton's frames are not so far out of line with the prices of other
comparable frames as to be absurd; but neither do they have anything
significant to distinguish them from those other frames. He doesn't
make his tubing or subassemblies. He doesn't get to decide that a
certain frame warrants 47cm chainstays-- he has to work with the same
length as everybody else because that's what the manufacturer
provides. He doesn't get to build a frame with room for fat tires.
He doesn't get to specify an extra-fat or extra-thick-walled tube to
compensate for unusual tube length or load. I'd be surprised if he
could even build a bike with a 65-degree seat angle and no other major
divergences from normal. All he can do is bandage up the joints with
more or less wrap and make 'em as purty as possible. That's worth
something, certainly, but $2-3k extra? It does leave me wondering
about cost/benefit ratio.

I guess imaginary benefits are the most expensive ones of all.

To me, the only tangible benefit in the whole deal is this: Some guy
who works hard making the nicest bikes he knows how to make doesn't
have to go broke to do what he loves (which is a pitfall I have
witnessed time and again in the bike business). The bikes themselves
are about as banal as can be-- like a yet fancier and more expensive
set of chrome 22s on an SUV.


"Quality in a product or service is not what the supplier puts in. It is
what the customer gets out and is willing to pay for. A product is not
quality because it is hard to make and costs a lot of money, as
manufacturers typically believe. This is incompetence. Customers pay
only for what is of use to them and gives them value. Nothing else
constitutes quality." - Peter Drucker

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

dustoyevsky wrote:

Just as a side note, I was talking to Nick on a ride a week or so ago,
IRT stay length and room between the chainstays for "wider" tires,
since I'd noticed that one of his customer bikes had a whole lot more
"tire clearance" just aft of the BB than his personal ride. The brake
bridge on the customer bike was quite a bit higher, also. How about
that, a well-regarded custom CF builder leaving room for 25mm tires,
mud, and out-of-true wheels? There's some progress for you! g

Now that is a good thing. I wonder how he managed it with prefab stay
units?

I used to hang out occasionally with this guy at Dead Baby Bikes
events:

http://www.outsideconnection.com/gallant/hpv/joe/

Joe would occasionally become visibly irritated and perturbed that I
would spend so much time and expertise making ordinary bikes, as
opposed to some ungainly feet-forward abortions. He thought it was a
waste of my effort. Now I find myself in Joe's position, thinking in
regard to Nick's bikes "why bother, when you could buy almost the same
thing on eBay for less than the cost of materials?"

I guess it's like curly lugs. I don't mind curly lugs, but I'll be
damned before I'll spend a fortune and years on a waiting list to get
a bike whose only real distinction is curly lugs. Still, there are
folks who do go to absurd lengths to get curly lugs (and the maker's
mark thereof).

As for me, I don't opt in to being choosy. I can either be choosy, or
I can give up cycling, or I can hurt myself. If I were 5'10" and 150
lbs., and every manufacturer of every bike-related thing in the entire
world made something that would work just fine for me, I suppose I
might get distracted by minutiae. But to my eyes, every bike with
73.5 degree angles, short stays, plastic forks, too few spokes and too
little tire clearance is so interchangeable with all the others as to
become invisible. They all make me say "meh". I wouldn't know how to
pick from among them except by weight and price.

Chalo

A Muzi wrote:

Chalo wrote:

To me, the only tangible benefit in the whole deal is this: Some guy
who works hard making the nicest bikes he knows how to make doesn't
have to go broke to do what he loves (which is a pitfall I have
witnessed time and again in the bike business). The bikes themselves
are about as banal as can be-- like a yet fancier and more expensive
set of chrome 22s on an SUV.

"Quality in a product or service is not what the supplier puts in. It is
what the customer gets out and is willing to pay for. A product is not
quality because it is hard to make and costs a lot of money, as
manufacturers typically believe. This is incompetence. Customers pay
only for what is of use to them and gives them value. Nothing else
constitutes quality." - Peter Drucker

A corollary of the above is that superior quality should not
necessarily cost extra (and in my experience, it often doesn't).

Chalo

On May 9, 5:03*pm, Chalo wrote:
I wouldn't know how to
pick from among them except by weight



Oooh, there goes *your* credibility.

In article
,
Chalo wrote:

A Muzi wrote:

Chalo wrote:

To me, the only tangible benefit in the whole deal is this: Some guy
who works hard making the nicest bikes he knows how to make doesn't
have to go broke to do what he loves (which is a pitfall I have
witnessed time and again in the bike business). The bikes themselves
are about as banal as can be-- like a yet fancier and more expensive
set of chrome 22s on an SUV.

"Quality in a product or service is not what the supplier puts in. It is
what the customer gets out and is willing to pay for. A product is not
quality because it is hard to make and costs a lot of money, as
manufacturers typically believe. This is incompetence. Customers pay
only for what is of use to them and gives them value. Nothing else
constitutes quality." - Peter Drucker

A corollary of the above is that superior quality should not
necessarily cost extra (and in my experience, it often doesn't).

Chalo

Yes, but it also means that small marginal increases in quality can
cause large increases in the value of the product to the end user.

Drucker's point could be rephrased as saying that customers will pay in
accordance to the value they get from a product, and with almost no
regard for what it cost (convincing them a product was costly to make
can be a useful marketing approach, though).

The majority of the market for bespoke high-end bikes like the Crumpton
can largely be explained by the fact that the cost of a high-end bike
will easily fit into a great many fairly middle-class budgets, and that
means there is a market for an even higher-end bike, if only a
differentiation can be created.

It's not even a small market: I have a club-mate who amiably pointed out
that buying high-end bike gear isn't a big deal, because he "loses" far
more money by not being able to do billable work during his
training-or-racing hours than his (generous) equipment budget. He's
certainly doing well, but his lifestyle is of the comfortably
upper-middle-class stratum, and by no means plutocratic.


This leads to the corollary I'll repeat until someone takes me up on it:
lots of people (like me) are now commuting by bike, and basically the
price range for "serious" commuter bikes is something like $300-2000.

Considering that these bikes replace $20,000 cars for many of their
purchasers, someone has to figure out the parameters of the $3000-6000
commuter bikes.

My theory of the day revolves around some combo of an electric-assist,
using typical Crumpton-like materials and bespoke construction on a
commuter-oriented frame, or perhaps a white-glove concierge service that
was tied to the bike's ownership.

Hm. What about a one-stop commuter nexus in a downtown core? Valet bike
storage, on-site showers and lockers, bike shop with same-day service
for repairs, and (oh, why not...) a bit of coffee service? The trick
would be getting a central enough location that you had a viable
customer base, but such a business would have a chance of being a
game-changer: actually creating bike commuters by virtue of easing some
of the pain.

Plus, you know, the stick of gas at 1.30/L

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

Ryan Cousineau wrote:


Hm. What about a one-stop commuter nexus in a downtown core? Valet bike
storage, on-site showers and lockers, bike shop with same-day service
for repairs, and (oh, why not...) a bit of coffee service? The trick
would be getting a central enough location that you had a viable
customer base, but such a business would have a chance of being a
game-changer: actually creating bike commuters by virtue of easing some
of the pain.




Check. Bike Central here in Portland.

http://www.portlandonline.com/transp...=34813&a=58381


Ted

--
Ted Bennett

On May 9, 3:34*pm, Chalo wrote:
dustoyevsky wrote:

What's a plum smuggler?

(Chalo responded):
Ask your mother.

Well I did and she had no idea. She suggested I wait in line and ask a
real expert. Your mom.

Sincerely, D-y

On May 9, 4:03*pm, Chalo wrote:
dustoyevsky wrote:

Just as a side note, I was talking to Nick on a ride a week or so ago,
IRT stay length and room between the chainstays for "wider" tires,
since I'd noticed that one of his customer bikes had a whole lot more
"tire clearance" just aft of the BB than his personal ride. The brake
bridge on the customer bike was quite a bit higher, also. How about
that, a well-regarded custom CF builder leaving room for 25mm tires,
mud, and out-of-true wheels? There's some progress for you! g

Now that is a good thing. *I wonder how he managed it with prefab stay
units?

He's good. Wins shoot-outs and awards and stuff for his work.

*Now I find myself in Joe's position, thinking in
regard to Nick's bikes "why bother, when you could buy almost the same
thing on eBay for less than the cost of materials?"

You'd have to ride and compare and be honest with yourself.

I guess it's like curly lugs. *I don't mind curly lugs, but I'll be
damned before I'll spend a fortune and years on a waiting list to get
a bike whose only real distinction is curly lugs. *Still, there are
folks who do go to absurd lengths to get curly lugs (and the maker's
mark thereof).

Curly lugs, I don't care too much but for those who do, more power.
Not a waste in my book.

As for me, I don't opt in to being choosy. *I can either be choosy, or
I can give up cycling, or I can hurt myself. *If I were 5'10" and 150
lbs., and every manufacturer of every bike-related thing in the entire
world made something that would work just fine for me, I suppose I
might get distracted by minutiae. *But to my eyes, every bike with
73.5 degree angles, short stays, plastic forks, too few spokes and too
little tire clearance is so interchangeable with all the others as to
become invisible. *They all make me say "meh". *I wouldn't know how to
pick from among them except by weight and price.

You're not picking from among them in the first place. My secondhand
Litespeed Catalyst, with 73.5's, short stays, carbon fiber fork, 32/36
spokes (unless I put the Shamals or the Trispoke on) works just fine
for me. Tire clearance isn't vast but it works with a 25-ish tire on
the back, handles very well, rides a little stiff but OK as I'm not
doing the 140-mile days of my relative youth. If I were carrying loads
or other people, well duh, I wouldn't use that bike in the first
place. So lighten up on the sour grapes already, OK? --D-y