On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, dave bohm wrote:
> I was recently asking myself this same question. Why is it that the British makers seem to be able to offer a frame for less than it would cost me in materials in the U.S?
>
> There are some reasons for this. It depends on a case by case basis, some of the companies have had there equipment paid off for decades. The cost of living can be substantially lower in some areas than the average in the U.S. There is no need for product liability insurance, some of the builders of classic frames are older, have pensions and the like and do not need to make much of a profit.
>
> The frames can differ too. U.S. builders tend to have sophisticated fixturing and tools whereas British builder often do with much less, silver brazing is prevalent in the U.S, stainless, expensive painting procedures using Imron, not just enamel etc. I am not debating the merits of these differences, just pointing them out.
>
> Its the little details that can really start to increase the prices through higher materials cost, tooling and time. I am surprised that this detail may be seen as a unnecessary expense. This from the country that brings us Aston Martin, Jaguar, Rolls Royce. All highly unnecessary but thankfully still produced.
Add these to the list:
Cost of "safety" rules/regulations in the UK vs the US.
Many of the longer-lived builders probably have stockpiles of Reynolds tubing, lugs, etc. Getting a 531 or 853 tubeset in Derby England is probably easier or cheaper than getting the same thing here in Colorado.
Volume. Many of the large builders sell more "custom" frames than most US builders. Economy of scale in action. Plus, if you're competing with 2-3 dozen builders in your own country, you either have to offer something that no-one else offers, or price your frames competitively.
--mc (supporting framebuilders here and abroad)
-- cyclist [at] dimensional [dot] com