# World's Most Expensive Bike ? :)



## SROC3 (Jul 20, 2009)

Check out the website. This is what you get when you marry the desire to build the best road bike with a company that does F1 engineering  Pretty impressive. Now if only I had $40,000 dollars to blow.......

http://www.factor001.com/


----------



## rx-79g (Sep 14, 2010)

What a crock of something. A funny looking, less aerodynamic design than a round tubed frame that uses off the shelf components. 

They have as much reason to charge $40K for that as someone selling a bike Madonna once rode.

If someone wants to charge between 4 and 20 times the going rate for a "custom" bicycle, it had better be custom throughout, and actually be demonstrably better in some way than something you can buy at the Trek store. It would also be nice if it was UCI compliant, as this one is not.


----------



## SROC3 (Jul 20, 2009)

Valid points but the whole point of the bike's creation is NOT to be UCI compliant so that they could stretch the limits of design and technology. The primary purpose of this bike is NOT for speed but for telemetry capture in real-time. The reason Pro-Teams are considering the purchase of it is because of that fact, not because they want Contador to use it in an uphill battle on a Col.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

To be honest, I love its execution. If I was asked how a bike should evolve, that's pretty much it. Cleaner style, more integration, but nothing radically different.

Problem is, I'd have to wait for that time of widespread bicycle evolution altogether. There's nothing convincingly $40K worth about this: Better carbon layup? better aerodynamics? lighter? stronger? Perhaps, but you really think the gains will be that significant at this point of time? You're just left with the burden of having an expensive bike with few interchangeable parts. Now if HongFu or whoever can make a similar style frame that accepts caliper rim brakes....


----------



## Morison (Oct 31, 2005)

*Most expensive?*

There's always this one; http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/04/blacktrail-bt-01-is-the-80-000-electric-bicycle-of-your-dreams/ for a drop-in-the-pan $80,000. Jay Leno has one in his garage, but then that isn't saying much is it?


----------



## cyclust (Sep 8, 2004)

Hey, people routinely spend 10 times the amount of a Ford Focus and wind up with a car that is far less reliable, much less useful, yet they are happy to do so because it's unique, one-off and it turns heads. Shouldn't bike snobs have the same oportunity? If you think it's a joke, then simply don't buy one. They certainly aren't expecting it to a be top seller. Kep in mind that projects like this often spawn new designs and ideas that we may find on our mid-line road bike 5 or 10 years down the road. Many of today's common products came out of the space program ya know.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

I posted a British article on my Facebook about that bike around Thanksgiving. My riding buddies started a roast about that bike. Looks like whoever wrote that article has never heard of Temple Cycles. They've built bikes for customers that cost more than that. Still, I think the focus to that article is probably on the technology that went into that bike like the disc brakes and integrated computer. More show than go but it will have a customer base just because it costs that much. It's not even that light if I recall correctly.


----------



## rx-79g (Sep 14, 2010)

The problem here is nothing special is going on. That frame is less aero, not more. And they aren't collecting any data that hasn't been available from other means for more than a decade. They might be processing it differently, but that's just software.

They are selling the facade of technology, not actual advances. It isn't the space program, it is a sales program dressed up to emulate great engineering programs.


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

Not even close...here is a $100K gold fixie

http://www.booooooom.com/2009/02/27/24k-gold-diamond-encrusted-aurumania-track-bike/


----------



## ghostryder (Dec 28, 2009)

Is it going to help me beat fabian in a time trial or are my lungs going to explode, just like any other bicycle.


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

Ventruck said:


> To be honest, I love its execution. If I was asked how a bike should evolve, that's pretty much it. Cleaner style, more integration, but nothing radically different.
> 
> Problem is, I'd have to wait for that time of widespread bicycle evolution altogether. There's nothing convincingly $40K worth about this: Better carbon layup? better aerodynamics? lighter? stronger? Perhaps, but you really think the gains will be that significant at this point of time? You're just left with the burden of having an expensive bike with few interchangeable parts. Now if HongFu or whoever can make a similar style frame that accepts caliper rim brakes....



+1...me too...clean style.... nice execution....not $40K worth but it's possible to produce a bike like that much cheaper.... This sport is so #$%^ conservative.. we need to loosen up a little


----------



## Opus51569 (Jul 21, 2009)

Agreed that they made a beautiful bike... But not a $40K bike.


----------



## rx-79g (Sep 14, 2010)

Dave Hickey said:


> +1...me too...clean style.... nice execution....not $40K worth but it's possible to produce a bike like that much cheaper.... This sport is so #$%^ conservative.. we need to loosen up a little


I submit that we have been plenty "loose" for at least 20 years:
























These guys are not getting props from me for putting two tubes in the wind when only one was needed. No matter what an F1 company thinks it knows about bicycle engineering.


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

Yep and everyone is illegal under UCI rules...I like the diamond frame as much as the next guy but there is nothing wrong with advancement in frame design...


----------



## rx-79g (Sep 14, 2010)

Dave Hickey said:


> Yep and everyone is illegal under UCI rules...I like the diamond frame as much as the next guy but there is nothing wrong with advancement in frame design...


Actually, the Helix is legal and the Factor is not. My point was simply that the styling isn't radical and cyclists have embraced far less conservative approaches to frame design than this thing.

If this was the 2011 Willier or something for $3000 I doubt it would sell. It is going to be heavy (over 3 pounds) and much less aerodynamic because of those huge holes.

I have my doubts about the weight and aerodynamics of those wheels, too. 


If this bike is $40K because it is a technological hotbed, just what technology are you getting, and how much of it is window dressing posing as innovation? You can shape carbon and metals all different ways, but if the result doesn't do anything better, it is just a shape. If the performance is actually worse, than it is just an affectation.


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

rx-79g said:


> If this bike is $40K because it is a technological hotbed, just what technology are you getting, and how much of it is window dressing posing as innovation? You can shape carbon and metals all different ways, but if the result doesn't do anything better, it is just a shape. If the performance is actually worse, than it is just an affectation.



I agree about the 40K bike... my beef is with the UCI, If the UCI stifles innovation, you'll never know if there is an improvement

These bike were built 15-20 years ago....and outlawed by the UCI...


----------



## rx-79g (Sep 14, 2010)

Dave Hickey said:


> I agree about the 40K bike... my beef is with the UCI, If the UCI stifles innovation, you'll never know if there is an improvement
> 
> These bike were built 15-20 years ago....and outlawed by the UCI...


Well, I don't know if I completely disagree with the UCI about that. There's innovation, and then there's technology wars. UCI's approach isn't nearly as bad as the Japanese track standards, but it prevents races being won from equipment rather than people (and their drugs).

Those TT bikes were pretty (I remember most of them), but if they were all that the less regulated triathalon crowd would be using them. Even their bikes are a little more diamond than not.

I like new stuff, but if someone presents a $40K bike, they better have some near-magic data to back that up. Otherwise it is snake oil.


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

rx-79g said:


> . UCI's approach isn't nearly as bad as the Japanese track standards, but it prevents races being won from equipment rather than people (and their drugs).
> .



Agree 100% but to clarify standard Japanese track tracing is not different that anywhere else in the world. 

Japanese Keirin racing is a different story. Keirin racing exists just for para-mutual betting. 

We bet on horses in the US, the Japanese go to track and bet on bike riders... The Keirin folks go to great lengths to make sure the bikes are equal..than the doped up riders decide who wins


----------



## rx-79g (Sep 14, 2010)

Dave Hickey said:


> Agree 100% but to clarify standard Japanese track tracing is not different that anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Japanese Keirin racing is a different story. Keirin racing exists just for para-mutual betting.
> 
> We bet on horses in the US, the Japanese go to track and bet on bike riders... The Keirin folks go to great lengths to make sure the bikes are equal..than the doped up riders decide who wins


Agreed. I couldn't remember how to spell "Keirin" so I just said Japanese. It's the NJS standard, right?


----------



## herbn (Aug 22, 2009)

i think there are issues with clearences on the split seatpost going around the sides of the tire and a narrow q factor dual chainring crankset,it is just a cad not a real bike.Disc brakes for a roadbike are stupid ,excessive, inefficient.... hydrolic rim brakes would be interesting, molded into the fork and chainstays would be much much better, thin about how clean that would look ,imho.Backwards facing camera's in the handlebar, could provide a rear view which would come in handy for everything from avoiding cars to seeing somebody wind up at the townline sprint. Recording all views of a ride and storing that in a memoy chip,very very useful info ,if you ever get bumped off the road by a car.


----------



## JustTooBig (Aug 11, 2005)

SROC3 said:


> Valid points but the whole point of the bike's creation is NOT to be UCI compliant so that they could stretch the limits of design and technology. *The primary purpose of this bike is NOT for speed but for telemetry capture in real-time. The reason Pro-Teams are considering the purchase of it is because of that fact*, not because they want Contador to use it in an uphill battle on a Col.


"telemetry capture in real time"? Seriously?? That amounts to a heaping helping of a "solution" desperately in search of a problem. Capturing data instantaneously through telemetry accomplishes NOTHING without a means to instantaneously analyze that data, and provides no benefit unless that feedback (post-analysis) provides something meaningful that also needs to be based in real time. 

Being ABLE to use technology to do something does not mean that there is any meaningful utility to be realized by doing so. 

Care to enlighten us as to which ProTour teams are lining up to buy this thing?


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

Dave Hickey said:


> Yep and everyone is illegal under UCI rules...I like the diamond frame as much as the next guy but there is nothing wrong with advancement in frame design...


+1.....That Trek Y-Foil was a beautiful bike. Too bad it's time was cut short..


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

Interesting responses. 

I think it is a beautiful bike. If I had $40,000 to blow on a bike, I would buy it. Then again, if I had $40,000 to blow on a bike, I wouldn't be eating my lunch at work right now. 

I was surprised that folks aren't fond of disk brakes for a road bike. I think rim braking on carbon fiber wheels sucks! My mountain bike disk brakes are SO nice. 

I agree that there are far more radical bike designs, many that are more aesthetically pleasing, but I think it is a brilliant idea to begin to think about integration and smoothing bike lines. 

Who would be crazy enough to buy a gold plated fixie?


----------



## pdainsworth (Jun 6, 2004)

rx-79g said:


> What a crock of something. A funny looking, less aerodynamic design than a round tubed frame that uses off the shelf components.
> 
> They have as much reason to charge $40K for that as someone selling a bike Madonna once rode.
> 
> If someone wants to charge between 4 and 20 times the going rate for a "custom" bicycle, it had better be custom throughout, and actually be demonstrably better in some way than something you can buy at the Trek store. It would also be nice if it was UCI compliant, as this one is not.


Wait a minute... Do you have a bike Madonna once rode? PM me, and we'll discuss.
:wink5:


----------



## skygodmatt (May 24, 2005)

It costs $1600 US dollars just to get fitted --before they build you one. 

No billionaire left behind. 

The UCI can kiss my A$$. They try to hinder advancement of the sport in anyway they can. 
Just ask Graeme Obree about that UCI bull.


----------



## twinkles (Apr 23, 2007)

Might be worth it if they throw in free tune ups for a year and a water bottle cage!


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*yup standardized NJS bikes*



Dave Hickey said:


> Agree 100% but to clarify standard Japanese track tracing is not different that anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Japanese Keirin racing is a different story. Keirin racing exists just for para-mutual betting.
> 
> We bet on horses in the US, the Japanese go to track and bet on bike riders... The Keirin folks go to great lengths to make sure the bikes are equal..than the doped up riders decide who wins


is the equivalent of adding weight to horses with super light jockeys


----------



## brblue (Jan 28, 2003)

jspharmd said:


> Interesting responses.
> 
> I think it is a beautiful bike. If I had $40,000 to blow on a bike, I would buy it. Then again, if I had $40,000 to blow on a bike, I wouldn't be eating my lunch at work right now.
> 
> ...


Next bling bling will be CF brake disks and there you go - suckyness for disc braking too 
really, I think rim brakes are the more simple / traditional and currently the lighter approach - even though disc brakes have more advantages in terms of braking..


----------



## MX304 (Nov 25, 2010)

brblue said:


> Next bling bling will be CF brake disks and there you go - suckyness for disc braking too
> really, I think rim brakes are the more simple / traditional and currently the lighter approach - even though disc brakes have more advantages in terms of braking..


True carbon discs would not work on a bike. They require massive heat to work properly. Ceramic infused disc would work, but there wouldn't be much if any weight advantage over steel. If I had the cash, I'd have a custom builder build me a frame similar to that just as a bling toy. I really like the way that bike looks even if it isn't any real advantage over anything available now.


----------



## cyclintruckin (Feb 10, 2012)

I have read everyones replies to this bike, No there might not be any advantages of it's design and price but Damn that thing looks good ! I especially like the wheels. Now to intergrate a 800 lumens headlight and tail light with intergrated battery pack along with "herbn's" ideas. Bottom line if I win the lottery I'm getting one


----------

