Originally Posted by
Ritterview
If a properly designed and engineered Taiwan factory built carbon frame were available, we'd all want it. It would be light, stiff and comfortable. Makers of aluminum, Mg, titanium, hybrid ti-carbon, frames etc. would see their orders plummet.
No WE wouldn't. You might be, and so might many other consumers. But, don't assume too much about why others make the purchasing decisions they make.
Originally Posted by
Ritterview
In tandemland, things are different, as a Paketa frame is both lighter and less expensive than its carbon Calfee Dragonfly counterpart. This is likely due to carbon tandem frames not being made using modern factory techniques. If there was a factory in Taiwan making carbon tandem frames, these frames would be lighter and less expensive than Paketa's.
There's a back story here, but I don't care to know what it is. However, I'm reminded of this pivotal moment in US bicycle manufacturing.
Huffy Bicycles had a manufacturing and assembly facility in Celina, Ohio, at one time Celina's largest employer. In 1996, the bicycle division received a major blow when U.S. courts ruled that surging imports of low-cost, mass-market bicycles from China did not pose a 'material threat' to the last three major U.S. bicycle manufacturers - Murray Inc., Roadmaster, and Huffy.. In 1999, after it became apparent that continued U.S. production of low-cost, mass-market bicycles was no longer viable, Huffy closed down all remaining U.S. bicycle manufacturing operations. Murray and Roadmaster soon followed suit.
... And so have Trek and Cannondale with just a few exceptions. Short sighted to say the least.