Frame and Wheel on the difficulty of spelling

Frame and Wheel discovered in the attic an old Ecology text book and quickly leafed through it. Frame and Wheel cannot remember when this course was taken, but it must have been soon after becoming an owner of an Austro-Daimler, perhaps 1985. 

Scribbled in the lower corner of page 13, is a failed attempt to spell Austro-Daimler. Indeed, Frame and Wheel is not surprised to see that spelling the name was a struggle then: many consumers still struggle with the first part of the name, inevitably saying or writing "Astro" Daimler. Frame and Wheel does remember being very pleased with the hyphenated and European nature of the brand, and longing for a jersey covered with the logo and the lettering. This was not to be as clothing that had the lettering and logos of the brand seemed not so readily available. 

Frame and Wheel did not get much further into the textbook; the highlighting and marginalia peter out in chapter two, although there are some highly original doodles later on. Frame and Wheel remembers enjoying the class and is certain that at some level, there was a benefit from it. It is not surprising that Frame and Wheel's handwriting has not improved over the years.

The business plan: consumer concerns with new frames

There are a number of concerns that the consumer might have with Frame and Wheel framesets. 

1) Quality: the consumer wants the frameset to be well made, easy to work on and reliable. A superficial measure of this is the finish of the frameset. The graphics need to be neat and the workmanship has to be perfect. Shoddy paint jobs are the first thing that the consumer notices. Frame and Wheel is ordering sample frames so that it can have a measure of More Choice's work.

2) Support. The consumer wants to be able to return the frame to the manufacturer in case the frame cracks as a result of a defect. This is understandable because the premium price of a carbon frame set reflects its low weight rather than its durability. Recourse to the manufacturer through the IBS is an important consideration for the consumer of carbon frames. Frame and Wheel offers the standard three year limited warranty and a crash replacement program, but believes that there is much room for innovating these programs. Frame and Wheel also recognizes that the IBS is the key part of any support program and that is why Frame and Wheel has sought to include the IBS from the very start.

3) Safety. The consumer clearly wants a frameset that has been tested for safety. Strangely enough, manufacturers do not explicitly show the tests that their frames have been through.  Frame and Wheel is unable to find anything about  safety standards (CPSC 16 CFR Part 1512 or EN 14781) on the website of Trek, Giant, Specialized or  Cervelo. This suggests that the consumer assumes that because the frame is available for sale in the US, it has passed all the requisite tests, or the consumer is assuming that because the frames are ridden by the pros in the big races (or b y others), it is strong enough. The lead paint and tainted milk scandals in China a few years back demonstrate that establishing regulations is one thing and following them is another. Manufacturers instead emphasize their recall programs, which suggests that they expect some of the frames or forks to fail (one IBS told Frame and Wheel that the reason for the increased recalls over the years is that the manufacturers are spitting the frames and forks out as fast as they can, while the ridership is getting progressively heavier, or not lighter; the nexus of the two trends being cracking steerer tubes and frames). Frame and Wheel will be completely transparent about the safety testing of its frames and plans on testing them in the US. There is nothing to hide here, but a lot to gain.

4) Prestige. Consumers think of prestige when it comes to any high priced item. Consumers are signaling information about who they are by what they buy. A premium brand frameset suggests that the rider is among other things knowledgeable and committed to the sport. Consumers do not want to appear to others to have spent a large sum of money on something that is not prestigious in some way. Brand, trademark, name, etc. is the primary barrier to entry in the industry and explains why Frame and Wheel is attempting to revive the Autsro-Daimler trademark. Having a name in place will make things easier, but if it does not work out, it will not be the end of the world.

5) Sustainability. All three of the voters on Frame and Wheel's poll about sustainability prefer some kind of sustainability program, either a credit towards a new frame (2 votes) or a deposit scheme (1 vote). None of the existing manufacturers have any such program, which means that Frame and Wheel will be able to differentiate itself from the competition in that way.

6) Comfort and appearance. The frame sets are clearly a racing geometry, but perhaps not as extreme as some the geometries that are  in the market. This means that the frame will be slightly more comfortable and thus more accessible to a broader and older market. The voters on this blog prefer that the frames be built up with SRAM Red and Zipp Wheels and Frame and Wheel is happy to oblige. The frame will certainly have a strong voice and a fast appearance (as well as a fast ride). 

The business plan: can the frame be supported after it is sold

Frame and Wheel appreciates that support of the independent bike store (IBS) is essential to the success of a bike brand. Not only does the brand have to be good quality, current in its technological offerings, appealing to the eye, customized options etc., it must also have the acceptance of the IBS. The manufacturer supports the IBS by assembling the bicycle well, delivering undamaged products, using good and reliable shipping and packaging, and by being available to the IBS if there is a problem. A bicycle that is hard to assemble or that arrives with problems built into it will quickly sours the IBS' willingness to carry the brand let alone say good things about it. Indeed, Frame and Wheel has witnessed IBS salesmen dismiss their own brands.

Frame and Wheel envisages supporting its frames after they are sold with the standard features (two or three year manufacturer warranty, crash replacement) and complementing these offerings with innovative offerings such as refundable frames and package pricing models. Frame and Wheel recognizes that a key part of the support will begin at the IBS and that is why Frame and Wheel's strategy includes the IBS. 

Frame and Wheel racing Austro-Daimler Superleicht in 1985

Frame and Wheel spent the holiday weekend in the Hudson Valley and had some time to root around in the attic where some crumbs of Frame and Wheel's cycling past still linger. This series is from a contact sheet that shows Frame and Wheel on his way to winning the 1985 New England Road Championships "B" Category Road Race. Frame and Wheel cannot remember where the race was held.  New Hampshire or Western Connecticut perhaps. The date on the contact sheet says May 19, 1985. The sun was out, but it was still cool. Note that no one is wearing sunglasses or tinted lenses. No one seems to have road computers either.

Frame and Wheel believes that this is the start.  Frame and Wheel is in the center wearing a white Brancale helmet and riding an Austro-Daimler Superleicht. My team mate is on the right. His name is George. The field looks pretty big for a group of juniors (18 year olds). The rider in the foreground, who is adjusting his toe clip, rode for a school in New Hampshire and was very strong. He caused Frame and Wheel a lot of pain and anxiety.

It was a circuit race. George is still with me and appears to be saying something to me. It looks like it is still early on. Frame and Wheel recalls that there was a turn at the bottom of this descent, a flat, and then an uphill finish.

Frame and Wheel (No. 160) is followed by another rider into a turn. Frame and Wheel is tapping the brake (Campagnola Record). It could be the bottom of the final climb to the finish. Frame and Wheel appears to be shifting out of the big ring. The other rider is vaguely familiar; he is wearing a Bell Helmet. These helmets had just been introduced, and despite their cumbersome appearance, they were certainly more effective than the Brancales. The Brancale's had no lip and no Styrofoam lining; they were just plastic receptacles for the skull. Frame and Wheel is wearing Detto shoes. Frame and Wheel did not obtain Look clip less pedals until a few years later. Note the brake cables run outside the handlebars. Only one water bottle cage holder. Frame and Wheel is in the big ring (it was a 54). Fitting gurus would have a lot to say about this image.

This is the final sprint. Frame and Wheel vaguely remembers catching a rider on this climb and passing him. The chase group (the entire peleton) was not too far back either. Frame and Wheel is quite certain that there was no big break away. Frame and Wheel is in the small ring and out of the saddle. The expression has not changed much.

Frame and Wheel salutes with one hand. The spectator in the background is non-plussed. This race was perhaps the first victory for Frame and Wheel after three or four years of racing. It was certainly the first victory that rewarded a jersey and a trophy. The logo of the Austro-Daimler is visible. The "Champagne" finish on the frame is noticeable only because the frame appears to be white (it is really a cream or light yellow color). The wheels might have been the original tubular wheel set.

The business plan: can the market justify the cost of the frameset

Frame and Wheel runs a poll on the topic of pricing the framesets. The results so far suggest that the market is willing to pay between $500 and $1,000 for an unbranded 1,000 g frameset and between $1,500 to $2,000 for a branded 1,000 g frameset. This suggests that on average the market is prepared to pay about a 60% premium for a brand. Frame and Wheel believes that the market can justify the cost of the frameset if the following conditions exist: the market feels like the frameset represents good value relative to other brands in the market; the market can choose components and wheels, and the frameset has the support of the IBS and the manufacturer.

Frame and Wheel has learned from selling bicycles on eBay that for the most part, the market wants to pay a price that it feels is good value rather than the price at which the seller wants to sell. This is evidenced by the numerous bicycles with a fixed price or buy it now price that linger unsold while the bicycles that are on auction get snapped up. The point is that fixed prices are prices that are selected by the seller, rather than the market; these prices reflect arbitrary minimums, psychological factors and an unawareness about how fast bicycle equipment loses its value (30% per year).

Frame and Wheel will most likely auction some of the frames on eBay with a reserve price that ensures that that the company makes a reasonable profit. The premium above that amount will be determined by the market, and will reflect seasonality, availability of frame sizes and perceptions about the brand among other things. This will ensure that the consumer feels like they are getting value because they will be paying what the market believes to be a fair price, rather than an arbitrary number that is recommended by the manufacturer (as if they would know, which they do not). 

Frame and Wheel envisages sending the frame set to the auction winner's favorite local bike shop, where it will be assembled, using components or wheel sets the consumer already has or can buy from their favorite local bike store (Frame and Wheel envisages paying the IBS a small sum for receiving the bicycle and doing the assembly work). Although the IBS has a higher cost basis for components and wheel sets than the manufacturer, the IBS is nevertheless in a position to offer discounts on these items to its core customer base in order to keep a good relationship with their customers. Frame and Wheel believes that if the customer is paying a fair premium for the frameset, has some choice about what to put on it and the support of the IBS, then the consumer will be able to justify the cost. Of course, Frame and Wheel will know more when this theory is actually tested.

The business plan: will the market be satisfied

Frame and Wheel is frequently asked when the frame sets are arriving. The latest answer to that question is in December, which is very soon. Frame and Wheel is pleased to know that there some who are interested enough to ask. The real question is will the frames satisfy the target market once they are built up into bikes. Frame and Wheel is optimistic: the frames are light, stiff and distinctive; the selling price is competitive and driven by market demand; and the delivery system is a hybrid of the Internet and the traditional IBS retail distribution system. If Frame and Wheel is successful in reviving a trademark that has some lingering luster, that will be an additional bonus. If it does not work out, it will not be the end of the world, just an occasion for Frame and Wheel to ask blog followers for ideas about names. 

The point is that Frame and Wheel will use the newly built up bikes to test the market for things like price and delivery. The frames will also be used to find out more about what riders want from the frames or from the company. Frame and Wheel is committed to scaling out operations by using existing infrastructure and resources (eBay, Facebook, PayPal, etc.) in this adventure and focussing on the things that add value for the company's constituents (consumers, retailers, manufacturers and shareholders). 

Test results for front fork

Tests conducted on MCF-01 front fork

			Result
Fork Impact Test	22.5 kg 180 mm / 3 times	Non EN	Pass
Fork Impact Test	22.5 kg 640 mm / 3 times	EN 14781 4.9.5	Pass
Fork Fatigue Test	+ 650N - 550N/ 5Hz / 100,000	EN 14781 4.9.6	Pass
Fork Deflection Test	Loading 22.5 kg Front / Reverse 3mm	Non EN	Pass
Fork Deflection Test	Loading 22.5 kg Right / Left 5mm	Non EN	Pass

Frame and Wheel obtained the results of the testing conducted on the MCR-01 front fork (known as MCF-01). These are important tests, given that most re-calls Frame and Wheel is aware of are related to splintering stems and cracking forks. Frame and Wheel read recently about how Toyota has lost its leading market share position in the United States because of the repeated re-calls over the previous years. The point is that if a recall can weaken a company like Toyota, it will crush a small bicycle company. Frame and Wheel must take these results at face value for the moment, but as things proceed, Frame and Wheel will have the frames tested again in the US. It is not difficult to do, it is just an extra cost and a sacrifice of a few frames.

Frame and Wheel believes that the Fork Deflection Test conducted by the manufacturer's third party testing service meets the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission requirements for front forks. That test requires that 350 in-lbs (29.1 ft-lb) or 39.5 Joules of energy be applied against the fork until it bends 64 mm or 2.5 inches. It can't show evidence of fracture. Clearly, this test was originated in the 70s, when steel was the primary material for bike frames and forks. A carbon fork would break long before bending 2.5 inches. Nevertheless, the MCF-01 fork passed a deflection test where 22.5 kilograms (50 lbs.) was pressed forward against the front fork until it deflected 3 mm and backwards against the back of the fork until it deflected 3 mm (and moved back into its original position each time).  Frame and Wheel calculates that 350 in-lb of force required by the CPSC is about 4 kilograms per square meter. This means that the front fork passed a test that used 5.6x more force, but 58 mm less deflection. Frame and Wheel suspects that a close examination of the Non EN standard tests conducted on the frame and fork will exceed the CPSC standards in this way.

The CPSC out dated standards explain why all bicycle brands test according to EN or European Union standards. These standards are comprehensive and explain how to test for carbon frames and forks. Frame and Wheel notes that the MCR-01 meets two out of the three EN standards for front forks and two out of the four tests for frames and forks. 

Standard	Description	Test	Conducted
EN 14781 4.8.2	Frame and fork assembly - impact test (falling mass)	22.5 kg / 212 mm / 1 times	Yes
EN 14781 4.8.3	Frame and fork assembly - impact test (falling frame)	70 kg / 75mm	No
EN 14781 4.8.4	Frame - fatigue test with pedaling forces	1100 N / 100,000 cycles	Yes
EN 14781 4.8.5	Frame - fatigue test with horizontal forces	+ / - 600 N / 100,000 cycles	No
EN 14781 4.9.4	Front fork - static bending test	1,200 N for 1 min	No
EN 14781 4.9.5	Front fork - rearward impact test	22.5 kg / 640 mm	Yes
EN 14781 4.9.6	Front fork - bending fatigue test	+ / - 620 N / 25Hz 100,000 cycles	Yes

Geometry analysis of six sizes

Frame and Wheel took a closer look at the geometries of the six sizes of the frame. Frame and Wheel had to estimate stack and reach based on the measurements from the schematics. 

Cm	47	50	53	56	59	62
Seat tube (C - T)	47.0	50.0	53.0	56.0	59.0	62.0
Top tube (effective)	51.5	53.0	54.0	56.5	57.5	59.0
Head tube	10.5	11.5	14.0	15.5	18.5	21.0
Chain stay	41.0	41.0	41.0	41.0	41.0	41.0
Front center	57.2	58.4	59.0	59.6	60.6	61.5
Wheelbase	97.2	98.4	99.0	99.6	100.6	101.7
Head tube angle ⁰	71.0	71.5	72.0	73.5	73.5	73.5
Seat tube angle ⁰	74.5	74.0	74.0	73.5	73.5	73.5
Bottom bracket drop	68.0	68.0	68.0	68.0	68.0	68.0
Stack *	50.8	51.6	54.7	56.5	57.8	62.1
Reach *	36.2	37.0	37.2	38.9	39.6	40.6
Fork rake	4.5	4.5	4.5	4.5	4.5	4.5

The conclusion is that the geometry is a fairly standard race geometry, even at the larger sizes, but not as aggressive as some of the thoroughbred geometries that are out there. This is makes the frame perhaps more comfortable for the enthusiast or the aging racer who believes that he is still twenty-five years old, when in fact he is forty-five years old. For an IBS, a frame that offers a different geometry from the other brands that it carries is important because it gives them more options when trying to fit a bicycle to a customer. Additionally, many of their customers are over age forty years old, enthusiast riders rather than dedicated racers, and less flexible than they used to be.

Comparative geometry analysis

Frame and Wheel knows that the month of November is the best time to talk to independent bike store owners: the weather is cooler, customers are slipping into hibernation and new inventory for 2011 has not yet arrived. IBS owners provide Frame and Wheel with good information and guidance about how things work, and what does not work, and provide Frame and Wheel with important anecdotes about IBS life.

One IBS mentioned to Frame and Wheel that the geometry of a frame determines the target market. For example, a traditional racing geometry is characterized by steep head tube angles and steep seat tube angles, a short wheelbase and a short head tube. These features make for aerodynamic positioning of the rider on the bike with more weight on the handle bars (and nose closer to the stem); a responsive  or a "twitchy" ride, where the bike turns the moment the rider turns his head, and a "rougher" ride or a ride that is less comfortable over long distances because the bike is not absorbing the shocks in the road, but delivering it straight to the rider. The traditional road racing geometry offers a seat tube angle of between 72 and 75 degrees and head tube angles range from 72 to 75 degrees. The steeper the angles or closer to 75 degrees, the more responsive and twitchy the ride; the slacker the angle or the closer to 70 degrees, the more stable and comfortable the ride. Additionally, the shorter the wheelbase, the more responsive the ride (the rider always has to steer the bicycle); the longer the wheel base the more stable (the bicycle will more readily steer itself).

Comparative geometry analysis

Brand	Austro-Daimler	Cervelo	Cervelo	Felt	Felt
Model	2011 Superleicht	2011 S2	2011 RS	2011 Z2	2011 F1
Frameset MSRP	$2,500	$2,800	$2,600	n/a	$3,500
Size	47	48	51	51	48
Seat tube (C-T)	47.0	47.0 *	50.0 *	47.0	44.0
Top tube (effective)	51.5	51.5	53.2	52.5	51.0
Head tube length	10.5	10.0	14.0	14.0	10.0
Chain stay length	41.0	39.9	41.0	41.7	40.3
Front center	57.2	54.7	58.8	58.4	57.7
Wheelbase	97.3	95.0 *	97.3 *	99.1	96.9
Head tube angle ⁰	71.0	72.5	71.0	72.0	71.0
Seat tube angle ⁰	74.5	73.0	73.0	74.5	74.5
Bottom bracket drop	68.0	68.0	68.0	70.0	72.0
Stack	50.1	50.2	53.1	54.1	50.0
Reach	36.0	36.1	36.9	37.4	37.0
Stand over	n//a	70.9	74.2	72.9	68.1
Trail	n//a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Bottom bracket height	n//a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Fork rake	4.5	4.3	4.0	5.0	5.2

The Cervelo S2 has a steep seat tube angle (73 degrees), a steep head tube angle (72.5 degrees) and a short wheelbase 96 cm). This makes for a responsive ride and positions the rider aerodynamically on the bike. The Cervelo RS has an identical seat tube angle (73 degrees), but a slacker head tube angle (71 degrees) and a longer wheel base. The head tube is also much taller (14 cm compared to 10 cm on the S2). This makes for a more stable ride and allows the rider to be positioned more comfortably (less aerodynamic) on the bike. Meanwhile, the Felt F1 has a steep seat tube angle (74.5 degrees), a slack head tube angle (71 degrees) and a short wheelbase (96.9 cm). Presumably, the ride on this bike is closer to stable and comfortable. By contrast, the Felt Z2 has an identical seat tube angle (74.5 degrees), a steeper head tube angle (72 degrees), a longer wheelbase (99.1 cm), and a taller head tube (14 cm compared to 10 cm on the F1). This makes for a more stable and comfortable ride and also allows the rider to be positioned less aerodynamically on the bike.

The Austro-Daimler Superleicht has a steep seat tube angle (74.5 degrees) and a slack head tube angle (71 degrees). The seat tube angle is steeper than the Cervelo S2 and identical to the Felt F1; the head tube angle is more slack than the S2 and identical to the F1. The Superleicht's wheelbase is 97.3 cm. It is longer than the S2 and essentially the same as the F1. The Superleicht's head tube length is 10 cm and it is essentially the same as the S2 and the Felt F1. The Superleicht is a racing geometry frame, which means that its target market is the racing market, rather than the enthusiast market; however, its geometry is not as aggressive as the S2, which means that its ride and handling characteristics are more stable and comfortable. In terms of price, the Superleicht is positioned at the low end of the premium market.