Giant changes tack

[[email protected]]

Giant Australia appears to be in the process of upgrading their
website for the 2008 line.
So far the only road bikes listed are the OCRs.

http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-AU/bikes/road/

Over the last few years Giant has gradually upgraded the components on
these bikes and kept the prices constant. This had proceeded to the
point where the main difference between the 2007 OCR2 and OCR3 was a
27 speed Tiagara drive train.

Now they have downgraded the components on them all. The OCR3 goes to
a 2200 drivetrain, cheaper rims and a Cro-mo fork. The OCR2 becomes a
9 speed Sora and the OCR1 a compact 34x50 Tiagra.

Given that the dollar has gone up and prices in China are still going
down presumably Giant are going down market with these bikes so it
will be interesting to see the pricing for them. "Cycling has never
been so cheap" rather than Giant's look at the goodies you can get
this year for the same price appears to be the marketing strategy.

The 2007 OCRs were pretty good value for recreational road bikes,
especially as you could often pick up an OCR2 a couple of hundred
dollars off at the end of the year. It has been suggest before that
Shimano were going to make the Sora a 9 speed system so I guess it is
finally happening. Though what the difference is then between it and
the Tiagra, other than artifically created market points, is hard to
see.

dewatf.

[Michael Warner[_2_]]

On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 22:54:41 -0700, wrote:

> Now they have downgraded the components on them all. The OCR3 goes to
> a 2200 drivetrain, cheaper rims and a Cro-mo fork. The OCR2 becomes a
> 9 speed Sora and the OCR1 a compact 34x50 Tiagra.

First I've heard of a 2200 group, or 9-speed Sora. I assume the 2220 is
just rebadging of the current Sora. But why a steel fork rather than alloy,
which is what my 2004 OCR3 has? Even cheaper?

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

[TimC]

On 2007-06-06, Michael Warner (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 22:54:41 -0700, wrote:
>
>> Now they have downgraded the components on them all. The OCR3 goes to
>> a 2200 drivetrain, cheaper rims and a Cro-mo fork. The OCR2 becomes a
>> 9 speed Sora and the OCR1 a compact 34x50 Tiagra.
>
> First I've heard of a 2200 group, or 9-speed Sora. I assume the 2220 is
> just rebadging of the current Sora. But why a steel fork rather than alloy,
> which is what my 2004 OCR3 has? Even cheaper?

Steel gives a more forgiving ride than aluminium, but less than good
carbon fibre forks and stays. Perhaps they found that at the price we
pay for an OCR3, the CF forks they make are just not as good as good
steel forks that can be made cheaper?

--
TimC
Disclaimer: Due to feline interference, this post may contain typographical
errors.

[Bleve]

On Jun 6, 10:39 pm, TimC -
astro.swin.edu.au> wrote:
> On 2007-06-06, Michael Warner (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> > On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 22:54:41 -0700, wrote:
>
> >> Now they have downgraded the components on them all. The OCR3 goes to
> >> a 2200 drivetrain, cheaper rims and a Cro-mo fork. The OCR2 becomes a
> >> 9 speed Sora and the OCR1 a compact 34x50 Tiagra.
>
> > First I've heard of a 2200 group, or 9-speed Sora. I assume the 2220 is
> > just rebadging of the current Sora. But why a steel fork rather than alloy,
> > which is what my 2004 OCR3 has? Even cheaper?

2200 is their 'non series' stuff, ie: cheaper than sora.
9sp sora is shimano '08.


>
> Steel gives a more forgiving ride than aluminium, but less than good
> carbon fibre forks and stays.

"all else being equal".

which it rarely is. Carbon forks can be as "forgiving' (whatever that
means?) or as stiff as the manufaturer makes them. Steel is cheaper.
The OCR3's going to be around $700 or so?

[vintage]

"Bleve" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Jun 6, 10:39 pm, TimC -
> astro.swin.edu.au> wrote:
> > On 2007-06-06, Michael Warner (aka Bruce)
> > was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> >
> > > On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 22:54:41 -0700, wrote:
> >
> > >> Now they have downgraded the components on them all. The OCR3 goes to
> > >> a 2200 drivetrain, cheaper rims and a Cro-mo fork. The OCR2 becomes a
> > >> 9 speed Sora and the OCR1 a compact 34x50 Tiagra.
> >
> > > First I've heard of a 2200 group, or 9-speed Sora. I assume the 2220
is
> > > just rebadging of the current Sora. But why a steel fork rather than
alloy,
> > > which is what my 2004 OCR3 has? Even cheaper?
>
> 2200 is their 'non series' stuff, ie: cheaper than sora.
> 9sp sora is shimano '08.
>
>
> >
> > Steel gives a more forgiving ride than aluminium, but less than good
> > carbon fibre forks and stays.
>
> "all else being equal".
>
> which it rarely is. Carbon forks can be as "forgiving' (whatever that
> means?) or as stiff as the manufaturer makes them. Steel is cheaper.
> The OCR3's going to be around $700 or so?
>
>

LOL says it all really

"..Oh and Glenn I can't believe you drive 8km to work everyday...Ride a
bike. It'll be quicker (even if you do stop at all the red lights), you'll
be fitter, you'll be able to set a good example to other cyclists & drivers
and you will have exercised out all of your frustration by time you get to
work."

I have two people at my GF's company in Windsor that live in Richmond and
drive to work every day. They bitch and moan about the traffic and cost of
it and every work do they get drunk and complain to me that they are fat and
un attractive and will find no one to love them.....

I just need to say I rode to the shops and back for them to give me a "WOW
you are so fit"...rolleyes...


It'll also help you overcome your 'bike envy'.

Had a taxi on my ass down little Collins st the other day with me doing
about 40km. He was on his horn and gesturing for me to move out of the way.
He even commented that i just don't get it? What clown does 50km plus down
there and thru the intersection of Swanston st in a car?? One that wants to
find a bunch of pedestrians on his bonnet thats who. Thing is the waiting
light at the bottom of the hil was red anyway and he just wanted to get
there before me as he has more right.

In the end there are two sides to a lot of this. Some laws have us stopping
and that agrevates drivers we hold up. And if we preceed when safe we are
breaking the law etc etc.

Its a no win argument and unless you put someone on a bike and make them
ride they rarely get it.

[Bleve]

On Jun 7, 10:16 am, "Vintage" > wrote:

> LOL says it all really
>


[chomp]


Did you followup to the wrong message, or did some NNTP server have a
spasm?

[Zebee Johnstone]

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 7 Jun 2007 10:16:06 +1000
Vintage > wrote:
>
> I have two people at my GF's company in Windsor that live in Richmond and
> drive to work every day. They bitch and moan about the traffic and cost of
> it and every work do they get drunk and complain to me that they are fat and
> un attractive and will find no one to love them.....
>
> I just need to say I rode to the shops and back for them to give me a "WOW
> you are so fit"...rolleyes...

Because cycling is hard and dangerous.

It has to be hard, why else do you need that special clothing, and why
do you only see fit people doing it?

And it must be dangerous, you have to wear a helmet, and besides
everyone knows other drivers are dangerous to share the road with.

I suspect the first one is a major factor in why people don't cycle.
They forget that kids do it, the ads they see (if they see any) are
all fit young men racing or doing downhill, the cyclists they see are
mostly thin young people.

I'm the heaviest cyclist I see on my commute, I hope I give others
reason to believe they can do it too...

Zebee

[Friday]

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

> I suspect the first one is a major factor in why people don't cycle.
> They forget that kids do it, the ads they see (if they see any) are
> all fit young men racing or doing downhill, the cyclists they see are
> mostly thin young people.
>
> I'm the heaviest cyclist I see on my commute, I hope I give others
> reason to believe they can do it too...
>
> Zebee
>

I'm eagerly awaiting my Fat Cyclist jersey. Should be here in about two
weeks.

http://www.fatcyclist.com/


Friday

[Terryc]

wrote:

> Now they have downgraded the components on them all.

When did they get plastic seat posts?
Met a guy in Mungo National Park that had an interesting 10km ride when
his snapped.

[DJ]

"TimC" > wrote in message
...
> On 2007-06-06, Michael Warner (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 22:54:41 -0700, wrote:
>>
>>> Now they have downgraded the components on them all. The OCR3 goes to
>>> a 2200 drivetrain, cheaper rims and a Cro-mo fork. The OCR2 becomes a
>>> 9 speed Sora and the OCR1 a compact 34x50 Tiagra.
>>
>> First I've heard of a 2200 group, or 9-speed Sora. I assume the 2220 is
>> just rebadging of the current Sora. But why a steel fork rather than
>> alloy,
>> which is what my 2004 OCR3 has? Even cheaper?
>
> Steel gives a more forgiving ride than aluminium, but less than good
> carbon fibre forks and stays. Perhaps they found that at the price we
> pay for an OCR3, the CF forks they make are just not as good as good
> steel forks that can be made cheaper?
>
> --
> TimC
> Disclaimer: Due to feline interference, this post may contain
> typographical
> errors.

Maybe that they have found that the people who buy the lower priced model
are not in it for the racing aspect of cycling but for general fitness or
commuting so have no real concerns to the extra weight that steel forks
have, therefore making them more affordable for everyone...just an
assumption...not gospel!!

Cheers

DJ

[ratdog]

> Maybe that they have found that the people who buy the lower priced model

> are not in it for the racing aspect of cycling but for general fitness or

> commuting so have no real concerns to the extra weight that steel forks

> have, therefore making them more affordable for everyone...just an

> assumption...not gospel!!



Pretty much spot on there.



There's a lot of would be cyclists that would like to put a "toe in the
water" of the racing bike scene but are hesitant to outlay large sums of
money.

It only makes sense that if recreational and entry MTB riders can start on a
Giant Yukon at $795, so too should the entry level road rider.

Some will continue on up the racing ladder and move to a better bike, others
will be happy to ride for fun and stay with the OCR-3.



This bike will also allow the "Occassional" triathalete to be more
competitive than the usual slicked up MTB rider.





K



www.handlebarista.com carbon and coffee

[dewatf]

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 15:52:59 -0700, Bleve wrote:

> The OCR3's going to be around $700 or so?

The new OCR2 looks like being the $995 old OCR3 equivelent.
The new OCR3 must be somewhere between $700-800.

I don't know much about the 2200 but the flat bar Deore/Deore LXs 27s
around there are probably better value for that sort of riding, and would
be easier to sell to new cyclists. The margin between those and a similar
componented MTB has been dropping.

I guess the point is that instead introducing the 2200 as an OCR4 they have
ditched the old OCR2 in effect. The fact that you could pick them up at
$1200-1300 at the end of the year means they mustn't have been selling
fast. The clipless pedals with a triple ring was a bit of an odd
combination. There are two 2006s chained up around my work, both have been
fitted out as 20 speeds (one with an Ultegra the other with a Dura-ace
drive chain).

dewatf.

[Bleve]

On Jun 6, 3:54 pm, wrote:
> Giant Australia appears to be in the process of upgrading their
> website for the 2008 line.

On a similar vein, Trek's new '08 Madones are compact frames with
partial long seatposts.
Yuk.

[gplama[_133_]]

Bleve Wrote:
>
> On a similar vein, Trek's new '08 Madones are compact frames with
> partial long seatposts.
> Yuk.

How about their new 90mm BB? Out with the standards, in with the
profits!


--
gplama

[Bleve]

On Jun 10, 7:34 pm, gplama <gplama.2ry...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> Bleve Wrote:
>
>
>
> > On a similar vein, Trek's new '08 Madones are compact frames with
> > partial long seatposts.
> > Yuk.
>
> How about their new 90mm BB? Out with the standards, in with the
> profits!

and the 1.5 lower steerer tube. If we get one in, I'll testride it
and see if I can tell any difference. My 'old' madone is solid as a
rock ... I doubt it makes much difference except to the
uberweightweenies.

[dewatf]

On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 13:57:52 +1000, DJ wrote:

> Maybe that they have found that the people who buy the lower priced model
> are not in it for the racing aspect of cycling but for general fitness or
> commuting so have no real concerns to the extra weight that steel forks
> have, therefore making them more affordable for everyone...just an
> assumption...not gospel!!

The OCRs are targeted at people wanting to go abit faster or further than
on a MTB or flat bar but not to race. If you want to race you get a TCR.

As to how Giant are going to go selling a $700-800 2200 bike, Cell have an
$800 2200 bike that they sell for $450. Though sell seems to optimistic
since they never have any in stock and it is proably largely a marketing
device. I guess it will come down to how much the Giant brand is worth.

dewatf.

[Aeek]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 12:31:22 GMT, dewatf > wrote:

>On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 13:57:52 +1000, DJ wrote:

>The OCRs are targeted at people wanting to go abit faster or further than
>on a MTB or flat bar but not to race. If you want to race you get a TCR.

OCRs were a fine entry level race bike, less so now they've gone
compact.

[Michael Warner[_2_]]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 22:58:39 +1000, Aeek wrote:

> OCRs were a fine entry level race bike, less so now they've gone
> compact.

Why?

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw