Recumbent - Why are aluminum bents more expensive?

I've noticed that a number of bent manufacturers charge a premium for having a lighter, aluminum frame. This premium seems to be a $200-$300 premium, once one accounts for component differences. Why is this?

I'm wondering because on DF bikes, there is no apparent upcharge for aluminum. Indeed, aluminum frames are commonplace even on cheap department store bikes. And it is hard to find a $200-$300 hybrid bike that doesn't have an aluminum frame.

So why are aluminum frames commonplace and inexpensive on DF bikes, but more expensive for bents?

I realize there is an extra charge for building low volume bent frames, but that factor holds true for steel, cro-moly, or aluminum.

Seems you are comparing the boutique pricing and in this case you are right. I have a Tiawaneze trike that is aluminum and is still cheaper [read: less expensive] than all the other trikes. Maybe these bent designers are being raked over the coals by their frame suppliers. Maybe these bent manufacturers don't have good ties with Tiawan [or orient in general] for getting as good a deal as a Asian builder... Whatever the answer, Tiawan is the number 1 builder of both volume and quality frames whether steel or aluminum. It's a hard industry for a manufacturer to make the grade. I really doubt the bent manufacturers are making much on their bikes. They are simply paying the premium which of course means we pay double that.

IMO an aluminum frame is harder to implement on a recumbent, and more to the point, a SWB. I'm just picturing all the punishment a boom takes, and I'm just picturing just how much money is spent on research into how to provide an aluminium recumbent frame to the public, that will last for a lifetime. It has to be tough :o . I think that recumbent manufactures are passing on all the reasearch $'s to the buyer.

There's probably more costs on top of that. Material costs, heat treating etc. Alot of extra stuffing around over a steel or cro-mo frame....

Perhaps they are being taken to the cleaners a bit by manufacturers. But it is puzzling.

Consider the case of the Raleigh Gruv crank forward. This frame is built in Taiwan for Raleigh. It is a unique design not used by any other company. Sales were low, so low that production has now been halted. The crank was moved forward moreso than that of several other companies, like Trek, Electra, and Giant. The frame is made out of aluminum.

http://www.raleighusa.com/items.asp?deptid=6&itemid=270

Yet they were able to sell a complete bike based on this frame for a list price of $305. Now granted the frame isn't a lot different than a typical bike, but it is a custom build. The cost of the frame couldn't have been very much given the cost of the bike. And it couldn't have been more than a few dollars more than making the same frame out of steel.

there weren't any cheap, good-quality aluminum-framed bikes available in the US 20 years ago, were there?

That shouldn't be a huge factor. They had to develop the proper aluminum alloys. Bents use the same aluminum as do today's bikes.

I agree that there had to be a bit of R&D on the first aluminum bent frames, but they have to do R&D on each new steel frame too. It can't be much different and I don't know why it would take a lot longer to recover it.

Aluminum bike frames and tubes have been around for a while now. And they've been using the same alloys in planes, cars and construction materials. The popular 6061 aluminum alloy has been around since 1935. This should be pretty simple stuff by now.

I'm not doubting that companies are paying more. I just don't know why it would cost more to make them.

And I'm not talking about finely tuned/honed high-end racing machines where every ounce is being shaved off. I understand why those are expensive, just like on high-end road bikes. I'm thinking more along the lines of bents like the Sun EZ-1 series, where the AX model is so much more expensive than the component upgrades can possibly explain. There are some other low-to-mid priced bents where the same is true.

Two reasons:

1. Aluminum costs more to buy, and is a more labour-intensive material to work with.

2. Dealers can charge more for aluminum because it's lighter than steel, therefore the value to the customer is higher. It's like charging more for a better derailleur; it doesn't cost more to make, but it works better than a cheap one.

But the aluminum is more costly argument flies in the face of how cheap aluminum bikes are. I can buy a brand-name, thick aluminum tubing hybrid for $225. If it is any more expensive than steel, then the difference has got to be very low, as being in the $10-$20 range at Taiwan pricing.

Consider this bike from Wal-Mart:
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=3596787

A big aluminum frame bike, complete with a 3-speed hub, for just $109. Now I know W-M buys in large quantities and this is a pretty standard frame, but it illustrates that aluminum bike tubing is not expensive.

Maybe it is just the case that the quantities are SO low that the cost to setup a custom manufacturing line drives up the unit price by a significant amount.

Let's say that the cost to startup a custom process is $50,000. If I sell 100,000 bikes, that adds 50 cents to each. If I sell 500 bikes, that's $100 each.

But what about grades of aluminium? I don't think those walmart pustrals are made from 6005 or 7050 grade aluminium. There's a very large price difference between those materials and "aluminium alloy". Plus, the fusion process is much more labour intensive as the grade goes up. Aluminium alloy is a sinch to weld up (not from personal experience) compared to 7005 for example.

And opening up on Jeff-o's point, Aluminium is double the price of mild steel (over here).

But what about grades of aluminium? I don't think those walmart pustrals are made from 6005 or 7050 grade aluminium. There's a very large price difference between those materials and "aluminium alloy". Plus, the fusion process is much more labour intensive as the grade goes up. Aluminium alloy is a sinch to weld up (not from personal experience) compared to 7005 for example.

And opening up on Jeff-o's point, Aluminium is double the price of mild steel (over here).

I don't think it's how much they buy as much as it is where it comes from. Where the material is purchased. Someone mentioned Tiawan is the number 1 builder of both volume and quality Frames whether Steel or Aluminum and that's partly true but only for volume. Quality of there material Alum. like their Steel is of lower grades, that's why you can buy there product cheaper than most. Look at the Apoyo from AB, it's an average trike, weighes in at 38lbs, there other Tadpole Alum.Alloy 37lbs and I would guess it's mostly in frame weight. Now if you look at Catrikes Alum. trikes, there weights start at 29lbs. and it's a difference in grades of materials and it effects cost of the product, and I believe most companys today are jumping on the wagon and using higher grades of material costing more to produce and thats the reason for Higher Prices.
So at this point it comes down to the individual and if he's willing to carry the extra weight to save money. I think anyone who has been around cycling for any time knows that cycling has always been about weight or the lack of, and knows about cost, and that is less always cost more.