# Did the original Madones become "too expensive to make?"



## the sky above tar below (Mar 31, 2004)

Hi. I just read a comment on the internet from a poster that stated that the original Madones had become too expensive for Trek to make. This to me increases the value of say, a 2007 frame, especially at the sale prices right now. How much creedence should I put in this claim?


----------



## tellico climber (Aug 14, 2006)

I have been wondering the same thing. Maybe WhiskeyNovember might have some insight. I saw the new Madones yesterday at LBS and liked them but when I got home and looked at my 07 Madone SSL 6.5 I liked it even better. Does anyone know if the new Madones have the Defense grade high modulus carbon in the bottom bracket area like the 07 6 series frames. Obviously if they do it would probably only be in the top line frames. Maybe trek was able to produce the same stiffness in bb area with the new wider bb area of the new Madones without using the defense grade carbon thus requiring less cost. This is all speculation on my part. It would be interesting to hear from someone more knowledgable on this subject


----------



## the sky above tar below (Mar 31, 2004)

There's an 07 Madone 5.2 SL triple going for $2300 on sale that's getting hard to resist. I'm beginning to wonder if the original Madones are the ones to hurry for before they are gone.


----------



## Gretzky (Feb 13, 2007)

the sky above said:


> There's an 07 Madone 5.2 SL triple going for $2300 on sale that's getting hard to resist. I'm beginning to wonder if the original Madones are the ones to hurry for before they are gone.


Our LBS has the 5.2 SL on sale for $1,999 :thumbsup:


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

They just came up with a design innovation and are trying something they consider an improvement and hence, the birth of the new Madones.


----------



## robertburns3 (Jan 11, 2007)

*Looked at a new Madone*

If looks can judge a product, the new Madone is not cheaper to make. That is a pretty wild bike.

Has anyone noticed the seatpost? It clamps on the outside of the seat tube instead of inside it. (Maybe I have been out of the loop for too lang and it's common.) It's a wild design, but I like bikes whose parts are compatable with other brands. The fork and frame are integrated design too.

Sweet ride. Not sure I like the compact design either, but the way the seat post/tube is made, you won't have a bunch of post sticking out.


----------



## Daddy yo yo (Apr 2, 2005)

i don't think that the production process of the new madones is any cheaper than the "old" madones'. why? the carbon fibre is still the same (oclv 55 = red, oclv 110 = black, oclv 120 = white), trek still offers frame sizes in 2cm increments, the new fork is made of carbon too (including the steerer). so, no cost savings here!

but i have to admit that i had the same thought too. i thought all the manufacturers of sloped frames offer this sloped design because of cost savings. and in the case of trek's competitors, this might be true as they all offer only 3-4 different frame sizes. but trek went for a sloped design without major size jumps, so the possible cost savings clearly were not a reason for trek to change the design of their top bike.


----------



## the sky above tar below (Mar 31, 2004)

"the carbon fibre is still the same (oclv 55 = red, oclv 110 = black, oclv 120 = white)"
With all respect, do you have a source for that? I've never read that anywhere yet.


----------



## Daddy yo yo (Apr 2, 2005)

the sky above said:


> "the carbon fibre is still the same (oclv 55 = red, oclv 110 = black, oclv 120 = white)"
> With all respect, do you have a source for that?


sure: july issue of german *Procycling* magazine, p.106. :thumbsup:


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

the sky above said:


> "the carbon fibre is still the same (oclv 55 = red, oclv 110 = black, oclv 120 = white)"
> With all respect, do you have a source for that? I've never read that anywhere yet.



http://www2.trekbikes.com/madone/technology/performance/

As OCLV Carbon frame construction has become more and more sophisticated, carbon fiber material variety, lay-up schedules, and manufacturing processes have all likewise continued to increase in complexity. As a result, it's significantly more challenging to identify a specific frame as 55GSM, 110GSM, or 120GSM, because *every frame is actually a hybrid of a variety of materials arranged according to sophisticated lay-up schedules*. By changing the material hierarchy to Red, Black, and White, we can still rank frame materials and talk about a range of OCLV products, but it won't be necessary to rely on associations to specific carbon fiber materials or GSM numbers.

The proliferation of carbon fiber in today's bicycle market underscores the need for Trek to maintain leadership. By calling out specific materials (like 110GSM), second-tier frame manufacturers can attempt to equate their frame to ours by pointing out that they use the same material as Trek. This tactic allows them to shift the discussion away from process capability and material usage strategies, and focus the discussion on the materials themselves. But the same (or similar) ingredients don't equate to the same end product. With carbon fiber structures, process is critical.

And process, specifically our patented OCLV Carbon process, is where Trek's true advantage lies. By de-emphasizing specific materials and instead focusing the discussion on our OCLV Carbon process – a process we invented 16 years ago and have been refining ever since –Trek can leverage our manufacturing, engineering, and design expertise to underscore the unique nature of our carbon fiber frames: a difference we're confident makes for the best carbon fiber frames on the planet.


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

bas said:


> http://www2.trekbikes.com/madone/technology/performance/
> 
> As OCLV Carbon frame construction has become more and more sophisticated, carbon fiber material variety, lay-up schedules, and manufacturing processes have all likewise continued to increase in complexity. As a result, it's significantly more challenging to identify a specific frame as 55GSM, 110GSM, or 120GSM, because *every frame is actually a hybrid of a variety of materials arranged according to sophisticated lay-up schedules*. By changing the material hierarchy to Red, Black, and White, we can still rank frame materials and talk about a range of OCLV products, but it won't be necessary to rely on associations to specific carbon fiber materials or GSM numbers.
> 
> ...


You saved me the hassle of copying that in here 

So daddy yo yo, yer WRONG!!!


----------



## Daddy yo yo (Apr 2, 2005)

uzziefly said:


> So daddy yo yo, yer WRONG!


dude, i don't have a problem with being wrong. :idea: although, strictly speaking, i was not wrong, i just quoted a source which was wrong (procycling magazine; hmm, this doesn't really outline procycling magazine's reputation of a well-informed magazine, does it!?).

but let me ask you a question: do you guys blindly believe everything that someone (especially the marketing-department of a global player) tells you??? ok, maybe that's a european thing, challenging what people with a certain interest want to make you believe... fact is that there were 3 types of carbon fibre before (oclv 55, 110 & 120) and now there are red, black & white - 3 types again, what a coincidence! ok, maybe it is not exactly the same anymore, but still... don't get me wrong, the explanation of trek's marketing department is nice to read and easy to understand and i am not saying that they're lying. i am just not blindly believing what i read (apparently except for the contents in the procycling magazine article about the new madone, hahaha).


----------



## robertburns3 (Jan 11, 2007)

bas said:


> http://www2.trekbikes.com/madone/technology/performance/
> ..., because every frame is actually a hybrid of a variety of materials arranged according to sophisticated lay-up schedules. By changing the material hierarchy to Red, Black, and White, we can still rank frame materials and talk about a range of OCLV products, but it won't be necessary to rely on associations to specific carbon fiber materials or GSM numbers...


I totally buy that. Every manufacturer realizes that in certain areas there is no need for more expensive materials. It is a waste of money for the manufacturer and consumer. 

Using a non-Trek example: The Cannondale Six-13 bikes used to have three tubes of Carbon. They dropped the seatube of carbon because it didn't offer any significant increase in ride quality and wasn't any lighter than Aluminum. That way they could also use their exisitng CAAD 9 rear ends for the bike. 

If it saves money and doesn't reduce performance, why wouldn't you use the less expensive materials? Technology for the sake of technology just plays to the techno-geek, poser crowd. (Of which I am often a member.):thumbsup:


----------



## the sky above tar below (Mar 31, 2004)

robertburns3 said:


> I totally buy that. Every manufacturer realizes that in certain areas there is no need for more expensive materials. It is a waste of money for the manufacturer and consumer.
> 
> Using a non-Trek example: The Cannondale Six-13 bikes used to have three tubes of Carbon. They dropped the seatube of carbon because it didn't offer any significant increase in ride quality and wasn't any lighter than Aluminum. That way they could also use their exisitng CAAD 9 rear ends for the bike.
> 
> If it saves money and doesn't reduce performance, why wouldn't you use the less expensive materials? Technology for the sake of technology just plays to the techno-geek, poser crowd. (Of which I am often a member.):thumbsup:


So you're saying that the original Madones did use more expensive carbon fiber, needlessly, but yes, it was consistently the more expensive kind. So perhaps the original query was true, that the original Madones were more expensive to make than the new ones.


----------



## robertburns3 (Jan 11, 2007)

the sky above said:


> So you're saying that the original Madones did use more expensive carbon fiber, needlessly, but yes, it was consistently the more expensive kind. So perhaps the original query was true, that the original Madones were more expensive to make than the new ones.


I suppose you are correct. Or you could say that using less expensive materials where they are not needed allows you to use more expensive materials and componenets elsewhere. Either way it's a trade off.


----------

