Shimano set to profit from disc brake demand

overshoot wrote:

A. Deore Hydraulic MTB brakeset circa £80.00
B. Shimano 105 STI levers circa £110.00
C. Shimano R785 Hydraulic STI system circa £450.00

A + B << C

This is how Shimano are set to profit.

Yep, agreed. Even though your example gives a better picture of Shimano's margins, here's to crossing the i's and dotting the t's :

A. Shimano SLX M675 Brakes £80.95
B. Shimano Ultegra 6800 STI Levers £144.95
C. Shimano ST-RS685 Hydraulic Disc Brake STI's & BR-RS685 Disc Brakes £389.95

A + B < C

Even though C is a packaged deal in both senses.

However you look at it Shimano is probably making a pretty penny from its road disk brakes, while cornering the market at the same time. SRAM and Campagnolo (and Rotor/FSA/whomever) have a lot of catching up to do.

700c wrote:

...
The term 'upgrading' to disc brakes is misleading, since it requires a completely new bike (frame, fork, wheels and half the groupset!) - hence the increase in profits for the company, more complete units sold, more perfectly good components into obsolescence.

...I have to get extra components/ adapters and tools and introduce play and most likely creaking into the whole system. Trying to fathom the ten different BB 'standards' is a nightmare.

Frame manufacturers are reacting by sticking with BS 1.37"x24TPI outboard - even on very high-end bikes. With Ultegra-spec bearings hovering around the £20-mark there is simply no need to look anywhere else. Anyone saying they can notice the difference between BB30 and a 24mm Hollowtech II can Get In The Sea.

700c wrote:

The points about standards is well made in the comments here by Mrmo & FlyingScot. Trying to fathom the ten different BB 'standards' is a nightmare. Some manufacturers specify a completely different frame if I want electronic gears compared to if I don't (and I don't).. and don't get me started on 1.25" steerers - WTF!

The whole system is designed by manufacturers to make me get rid of perfectly good components, not to repair and service parts but to replace them completely on a 2 year lifecycle. Who here can properly service/ adjust a disc brake? (bet not as many as who can fix a rim brake!).

While I agree with you concerning the scourge that is the proliferation of BB standards, discs are a bit simpler to service and adjust and loads of people are familiar with them thanks to over a decade of use on mountain bikes. Your first bleed is typically a nervous, messy affair (or maybe that's just me) but it's gets easier. Also, set up is very easy because hydros are self adjusting. Bolt on, back bolts off, squeeze lever, tighten bolts to 8Nm, that's it. Easier than side pull callipers and a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay easier than cantis.

Rotor size isn't a big issue - I think some manufacturers seem keen on pushing 140mm for road use. This may be optimal from a performance perspective (bigger rotors weigh a bit more and the extra braking power probably not needed on road) but 160mm is pretty ubiquitous and I would be surprised if this isn't the most specced size when the dust settles. In any event all wheels will take either size rotor as will most frames (and if they don't its a £9.95 problem).

Some lack of standardisation of mounting style. Post mount seems to have been superseded by "flat mount". This is a £2.95 problem (adapter to convert flat mount to post mount).

Axle standards still all over the place, although not helped by fact that mtbs also have plethora or difference axle standards (20mm for DH, 15mm for everything else; 135mm x 12mm; 142 x 12mm; boost). Wheel (and hub) manufacturers have decided to manufacture hubs with replaceable end caps rather than wait for manufacturers to reach a landing on a single standard. So again (usually) not a very expensive solution.

The real difference between road and mountain bikes is the effect of integrating your brake lever and your shift mechanism. I can run Shimano shifters and SRAM brakes on my mtb (or vice versa; or Hope, TRP, Magura, etc brakes) without giving up anything (other than maybe an extra clamp on the bars - and problem solvers can fix that as well). This isn't currently possible on a road bike, so if I want to run SRAM shifters then I need to use SRAM brakes. This isn't the end of the world, but it does reduce competition (which may explain why road disc brakes as still so ludicrously expensive when compared with their MTB cousins). So all of the manufacturers that make hydros for MTBs are essentially locked out of the road market because they don't also do shifters. Ironically, electronic shifting may be the answer for these firms. If you could develop a stand alone electronic (ideally wireless) shifting system that could be integrated into a pair of brake levers you could open up the market for more competition. Some combination of the shimano junction box under the stem and the remote buttons from SRAM's new e-tap system; all you would have to do is cut the right channels into your the body of your brake lever mount to allow the cables and buttons to be routed beneath the hoods so they are where you need them. No manufacturers have any incentive to do this because they want to sell an integrated system.

Nobody's forcing you to buy anything.

The downside, riding a bike may become a lot less peaceful.

I've got discs on two bikes, and they've both had times when they screech badly in the wet. I'm not necessarily looking forward to riding in London on a rainy day, with all the bikes stopping together at junctions making that noise.

But I wouldn't buy a bike for commuting now without discs.

mrmo wrote:

before we get on to the benefits of disc brakes, and there are some. This article bascially sums up the problem and it is more relevant to the MTB market at the moment, change for the sake of change, to simply drive sales. It is nothing about the end user experience and all about selling units. The money is in OEM so make it that you can't upgrade easily, that you have to replace the entire bike.

Yes and no.

Clearly most things the bike or indeed any other industry come out with is to drive sales - that's hardly a surprise. However, out of all these innovations come some that are definitely worth having - the debate in my view is more about when to upgrade, not if. i.e. upgrade when you existing stuff wears out or when there is a very clear and fairly significant advantage.

What slightly goes against your argument is that disc brakes result in less wear on brakes and rims, so for example if everyone switched to discs the wheel companies will in theory sell fewer wheels, cause we won't be wearing them out by using them as a braking surface (shimano being one of those wheel companies). So disc brakes could only be a short term gain in sales, and longer term loss.

joules1975 wrote:

Clearly most things the bike or indeed any other industry come out with is to drive sales - that's hardly a surprise. However, out of all these innovations come some that are definitely worth having - the debate in my view is more about when to upgrade, not if. i.e. upgrade when you existing stuff wears out or when there is a very clear and fairly significant advantage.
So disc brakes could only be a short term gain in sales, and longer term loss.

Which is solved by launching a new wheel size/hub width...

We just seem to be entering a period where there are NO standards, what headset do you need? What bb do you need, what is the hub width.... Basically getting to the point that if something has worn out it will mean new bike and not new component.

mrmo][quote=joules1975 wrote:

Clearly most things the bike or indeed any other industry come out with is to drive sales -

We just seem to be entering a period where there are NO standards, what headset do you need? What bb do you need, what is the hub width.... Basically getting to the point that if something has worn out it will mean new bike and not new component.

You've got that right, back in the day only Peugeot and Raleigh used odd standards,you could fit just about anything to most frames with no compromises.

These pages are littered with bottom bracket and headset noises,failures and all sorts, that simply never used to happen.

These new systems are usually designed to be faster for the factory to install without adjustment and are generally made of low rent materials that can't stand long term fatigue ....oh but when new they're stiffer and are lighter ! ( unit you start adding shims and washers)

Let's face it, bikes are a mature technology, the industry is farting about scratching for a 'new' offer constantly, but other than the use of carbon and power meters. nothing has made road bikes any better.

Di2/ EPS ....weight!
Discs.....more weight, pointless in the peloton.
Aero.....been there, we all know these don't really work other than in a TT constant position if you don't move your head.
STI's Shimano didn't think about the 'over the top' going across the cassette, thankfully, Campag did.

Yes, I am still on friction, I miss the odd gear, but can go across the cassette in a heartbeat.

il sole wrote:

as a side issue to this, i wonder what the difference is in sales between newbies choosing disc road bikes over caliper braked models specifically on their first bike and 'experienced' roadies choosing a disc braked model as an upgrade from an older caliper model?? I would imagine it's somewhere in the region of 80-20...my LBS says disc brakes are the easiest sell in the world to a new customer, even though they really aren't that necessary...I find my campag brakes on aluminium rims are as good if not better than a disc set up...

You clearly can't have tried a decent set of bedded in disc brakes then (TRP spyre or hydraulics, cause with the exception of a couple of others, the majority of cable discs brakes are indeed no better than a decent rim brake).

joules1975 wrote:

il sole wrote:

as a side issue to this, i wonder what the difference is in sales between newbies choosing disc road bikes over caliper braked models specifically on their first bike and 'experienced' roadies choosing a disc braked model as an upgrade from an older caliper model?? I would imagine it's somewhere in the region of 80-20...my LBS says disc brakes are the easiest sell in the world to a new customer, even though they really aren't that necessary...I find my campag brakes on aluminium rims are as good if not better than a disc set up...

You clearly can't have tried a decent set of bedded in disc brakes then (TRP spyre or hydraulics, cause with the exception of a couple of others, the majority of cable discs brakes are indeed no better than a decent rim brake).

I have TRP spyre HyRd on my cross bike and they are inferior to my campag SR rim brakes. I rode a cannondale synapse with hydraulic ultegra brakes in gran canaria this year and wasn't overly impressed with those as it happened.
I wasn't arguing for/against, I was just curious as to whether most sales of disc brakes are going to people new to road cycling as opposed to those changing from rim brakes...

il sole wrote:

I have TRP spyre HyRd on my cross bike and they are inferior to my campag SR rim brakes. I rode a cannondale synapse with hydraulic ultegra brakes in gran canaria this year and wasn't overly impressed with those as it happened.

I have hydros on my MTB and cantis on my road bike and commuter. I can't get over the difference in feel between using actual devices engineered to achieve optimal deceleration versus what never ceases to seem like a very slightly evolved version of jamming a stick against my rim. But as always, to each his own, YMMV.

il sole wrote:

I wasn't arguing for/against, I was just curious as to whether most sales of disc brakes are going to people new to road cycling as opposed to those changing from rim brakes...

Well I went bike shopping a few weeks ago and MTBing friend tagging along asked for a quote on a carbon bike with hydro brakes. The clerk (nice, low key dude) was really surprised when he asked for an equivalent to a MTB 17.5" and actually advised him against spending that much on a first road bike. He said something to the tune of "why don't you start off with alu and cable brakes and if you feel like you really need them we have a 30-day return window for an upgrade". They had a pretty good selection of hydro-braked road bikes in that shop. So I'm guessing (from a really small sample of anecdotal evidence, to be fair) that a large chunk of the disc brake market is comprised of road veterans.

il sole wrote:

I have TRP spyre HyRd on my cross bike

The Spyre and the HyRd are two completely different brake models.

If you've got the HyRd and you think they're not as good as rim brakes then you've either got a crap mechanic or you're smoking something .....

Mungecrundle wrote:

If you could make the components robust and light enough, i.e a hydraulic servo, sensors and associated electronics, then why not ABS as a natural progression?

Whether cyclists 'need' it or not is certainly debatable but new features are generally good for sales.

Whether cyclists need it or not is not debatable it's irrelevant.

Mungecrundle wrote:

If you could make the components robust and light enough, i.e a hydraulic servo, sensors and associated electronics, then why not ABS as a natural progression?

Whether cyclists 'need' it or not is certainly debatable but new features are generally good for sales.

A large number of people don't think we need discs, so the idea of ABS will have some having major fits.

David Arthur @davearthur wrote:

surly_by_name wrote:

Read this article in the FT this morning - it's on front page. Seemed pretty shallow to me. Use in the pro peleton of itself will cause sod all difference to Shimano's margins (I imagine DA disc groupset while profitable on a per unit basis - doesn't move the dial in term of overall profitability for the Shimano group). Suspect when it feeds through to 105/Tiagra/Sora on an OEM basis uptick in profitability will follow. But not sure I'd be piling into Shimano stock on the back of UCI's decision.

It's not the money Shimano will make from the pro peloton using disc brakes, it's the uptake by amateurs upgrading to disc brakes. Disc brakes are pretty popular with non-racers at the moment, but if the pro peloton switches to disc brakes, it's likely many more people will also upgrade to disc brakes. Whether that's a good thing or not is another matter entirely

Kind of.

Purchases of individual components ("amateurs upgrading") are, I would wager, a rounding error when taken against OEM sales. (And amateurs aren't going to upgrade to DA in the quantities that will deliver the significant increase in profitability that apparently informed analysts seem to think.) OEM sales about negotiating with bike manufacturers, who don't want to/can't afford to spec DA in volumes required - sweet spot somewhere between 105 and Tiagra. So if I was putting my cash into Shimano stock, I'd be aiming to do so just ahead of release of 105/Tiagra 11 speed integrated hydro/11sp shifter.

surly_by_name wrote:

Read this article in the FT this morning - it's on front page. Seemed pretty shallow to me. Use in the pro peleton of itself will cause sod all difference to Shimano's margins (I imagine DA disc groupset while profitable on a per unit basis - doesn't move the dial in term of overall profitability for the Shimano group). Suspect when it feeds through to 105/Tiagra/Sora on an OEM basis uptick in profitability will follow. But not sure I'd be piling into Shimano stock on the back of UCI's decision.

The fact that you're reading the FT yet don't quite grasp what this article means is laughable.