I don't know how well the bamboo frame performs, but I'm not sure your critiques really demonstrate that it's "not a serious bicycle".
> $400 for just some tubes, glue, and dropouts, plus another $800-$2500 for the other parts needed to turn the frame into an actual bicycle, plus however much you value several days of labor
$400 is extremely cheap for a bike frame, not to mention a custom one. And the "labor" is a selling point -- this a niche product is for customers who _want_ to build their own frame. The DIY assembly isn't a cost-saving measure like with furniture.
The $800-$2500 is just a catch-all range for the rest of the components. It's doesn't have anything to do with their specific frame.
> Care for your bike like a musical instrument?! They can't be serious. That instrument had better be a steel triangle.
I'm not sure what your issue is with their statement. Regular maintenance is important, and will extend the life of the components. That's true for all bikes. People that spend time & money on a quality bike are willing to maintain them.
> Is that 10 miles each? That's not very reassuring.
I agree with you that their statement doesn't give any indication of the durability of the frame. They should have quoted some kind of actual statistics, either real world or from factory testing.
> I'm not sure what your issue is with their statement. Regular maintenance is important, and will extend the life of the components. That's true for all bikes. People that spend time & money on a quality bike are willing to maintain them.
I keep my musical instruments in padded hard cases, in climate-controlled rooms away from direct sunlight. That kind of treatment is not remotely practical for a bicycle if you're actually using it as a means of transport.
> If you fly with a bike then you’ll want a hard, padded case for it, like one of these[1].
Sure, but flying is very much an occasional thing; you have to semi-disassemble a bike to put it in a case like that, and generally reckon on having to do a shakedown ride after you've unpacked it (at least I do). Putting it in a box every time would not be practical.
> I also keep my best bike (I, er, have several) in the house. i.e. a temperature controlled room.
That's not unknown but not exactly normal; you must admit having several bikes is pretty extreme in itself. If you're not on the ground floor then knocking the bike against a wall or doorframe on the way in or out is almost inevitable, whereas I certainly wouldn't want to do the same to a musical instrument. I suspect the majority of people who are using a bike as day-to-day transport would keep that bike in, at best, an unheated garage.
The bike I use for commuting is a Brompton. Folding it up to put in its padded bag takes less than 30 seconds and I do that every time I put it away in my hall. I don't own a flight case for it but they exist and don't require disassembly to use.
I'm not saying that everyone does this, just that treating a bike like a musical instrument isn't that far fetched an idea.
> you must admit having several bikes is pretty extreme in itself.
I'm in a bike club. I know so many people with more than one bike it's not even a joke any more. N+1 and all that.
And you'd what, stash a second box at the office? Always have a support car? Only do circular rides from home?
I'm sure there are some people whose lifestyle lets them treat a bicycle like a musical instrument. I really don't think most people could do it, not while riding with any real frequency. I count myself lucky that my office has underground bicycle parking (and we're still talking wheel-bender racks next to the A/C exhaust vents). I stand by the statement that a bicycle that needs to be looked after that carefully isn't, by the usual standards of such things, a practical bicycle.
Of course I don't keep a second box at the office. Likewise I know very few people that keep a piano in a flight case when they're not transporting it.
I actually do have bikes that I only take on circular rides because of their value and I baby the hell out of them but that's a false dichotomy.
They are not saying you have to treat these bikes as fragile musical instruments. They're just saying that if you do it will incur less wear and tear.
A carbon fibre bike frame is probably more fragile than a steel one. That limits the number of use cases for carbon but doesn't mean it's not a practical material for different usecases.
As a further example, I have a TT race bike. I keep mine hanging up in the garage an only take it out to races or for circular training rides.
I have a friend that commutes on his TT bike as a form of training. Mine will last longer than his.
It's on the low end, but certainly not "extreme". A nice steel frame like Surly or Soma is $500-600. "Extremely cheap" would be something like Huffy that is under $200 for the complete bike.
> $400 for just some tubes, glue, and dropouts, plus another $800-$2500 for the other parts needed to turn the frame into an actual bicycle, plus however much you value several days of labor
$400 is extremely cheap for a bike frame, not to mention a custom one. And the "labor" is a selling point -- this a niche product is for customers who _want_ to build their own frame. The DIY assembly isn't a cost-saving measure like with furniture.
The $800-$2500 is just a catch-all range for the rest of the components. It's doesn't have anything to do with their specific frame.
> Care for your bike like a musical instrument?! They can't be serious. That instrument had better be a steel triangle.
I'm not sure what your issue is with their statement. Regular maintenance is important, and will extend the life of the components. That's true for all bikes. People that spend time & money on a quality bike are willing to maintain them.
> Is that 10 miles each? That's not very reassuring.
I agree with you that their statement doesn't give any indication of the durability of the frame. They should have quoted some kind of actual statistics, either real world or from factory testing.