Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
99 Spokes is a hobby project (no ads, originally posted here) we put together to make it easy to compare bikes from multiple manufacturers in a single location. We just finished a new feature that we're really excited about, making it super easy to see at a glance how the bikes in your comparison stack up against the rest of the market with respect to spec and cost.

Basically, we break down everything we know about a bike's specs-- frame, fork, wheels, groupset components, brake type, suspension system, features like dropper posts, etc. and assign weights to each component or feature based on the intended use of the bike. We use this to estimate the overall "spec level" of the bike, which we can then use to find bikes that look like good deals.

Here's an example comparison of three different Enduro bikes (rear travel 150-170mm) in the $4k range - https://99spokes.com/compare?bikes=trek-slash-9.7-2018,specialized-enduro-elite-29-2019,cannondale-jekyll-29-3--2019

The chart below plots the bikes in the comparison against other 2019 Enduro bikes. The Cannondale Jekyll (green) really stands out as a good value here with the highest spec value at the lowest price. You can see why if you glance at the summary table -- the bikes all have very similar specs, the main difference is the Cannondale has a Fox Performance Float front fork.




Another interesting exercise is to drill into the grey dots in the chart. Hovering reveals the bike name and clicking will take you to the bike's detail page. Looking at the dot to the left of the Cannondale we discover a CUBE that has a slightly better spec level than the Cannondale for less money.

Of course, we can't capture every unique detail or feature that makes a bike awesome, nor can we capture personal preferences. So bikes that land low on the scale are not necessarily bad bikes or bad deals. We hope a tool like this is useful to the community and would love to hear your feedback if you find cases where we may have missed the mark on scoring a particular bike or feature.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,098 Posts
Really cool. I was just thinking about how needed this tool is yesterday, and here you are.

I played on my phone for a minute, but will probably really get into it on my laptop.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 

·
U sayin' Bolt ?
Joined
·
1,364 Posts
Looks great, but I wonder how you assign weights to each part. I know xtr>xt>slx, and suspension>drivetrain for downhill focus, but by how much?

The only way I can think of accomplishing objective weighting would be to first determine current market pricing of all parts. Then use that to figure the cost of the frame in a given complete. You could stop there and deliver that to the user.

Otherwise if you wanted to determine an objective value of a build on the trail, the only way I can think of is to mine Strava data. ( Does strava include build specs?? )

Once your program goes through thousands of rides, rider skill should come out in the wash ( asssuming skilled riders don't tend to gravitate to some particular part for reasons outside of performance ). You will be left with the performance per dollar for thousands of builds, and you can determine which parts correlate with high performance per dollar on different types of segment.

You could even go further and look for complimentary effects like between brakes and tires, or suspension design/cost and the unsprung weight of the wheels.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top