In my capacity as Jim Boswell, Advice Columnist to the Hopelessly Bike-Addicted, I get a lot of mail from riders in their late twenties and early thirties who are coming back to our wonderful sport after anywhere from five to twenty-five years away. Nearly all of the gentlemen (and, occasionally, ladies) ask me what has changed about BMX since they "retired". My standard answer is usually something along the lines of, "Well, the jumps are bigger, the gates are taller... and, oh yeah, about once a National, somebody's head tube snaps off and lands them in the hospital."
As you can imagine, that last statement is the one that confuses them. "But, Jim," they say, "when I quit ten years ago you could buy a virtually unbreakable twenty-five-pound race bike for three hundred bucks or so. Why are more people being hurt by their bikes now, years of cycling technology later?" I could give them a long, technical/metallurgic answer for this sad state of affairs, but instead I give them the quick-n'-easy one: money.
In 1994, most BMX manufacturers were in a real financial pickle. Even though inflation had virtually halved the value of the dollar in the ten years between 1984 and 1994, good BMX frame/fork combos were still fetching the same kind of money - between $130 and $180. $130 for a frame was a good profit margin in 1984, but in 1994 it wasn't enough to get by, especially given the decline in ridership seen after 'eighty-nine. Something had to be done---but what could any manufacturer or shop do to raise prices without losing market share? After all, most folks don't like the idea of paying $200 for the same frame they paid $145 for last year.
The industry knew what it needed to successfully raise prices. It needed a gimmick. A good gimmick would get people to pay more money for something that didn't cost any more to make. A great gimmick would get people to pay more money for something that cost less to make.
Ya know, the Greeks believed that an audience should always be told the complete story of a play before the play actually began, because knowing the end ahead of time was the only way to experience a true appreciation of tragedy. To honor their immense cultural legacy, I'll tell you the ending now: The manufacturers found their gimmick---a cheaper-to-make product that could be sold for more money. That gimmick was the aluminum race bike. Since the Greeks also believed in taking their time when telling a tragedy, let's spend a moment or two examining what various companies tried before they found that gimmick, if only for fun:
Of the various strategies discussed above, the only one that worked was the last one - the charge-a-lot-more-for-a-slightly-different-frame strategy. Once it became apparent that riders would pay more for a "premium" frame, the manufacturers fell all over themselves trying to provide premium frames. The problem was that nobody could agree on what a premium frame was. Everybody knew that Standards were premium frames, because Rick and SNAP! said so. But what else was a premium frame? Marketing experts looked in vain for another company that sold frames successfully at high mark-ups... until they found SE Racing.
SE Racing has been around for more than twenty years. Their most popular frame, the "P.K. Ripper", is such a BMX standard that nobody remembers who "P.K." was. (The answer is... Perry Kramer.) More importantly, however, SE has consistently charged more for their frames than the competition, and they've been doing so since the Grands had wooden jumps.
Why did SE bikes cost more? Well, in my experience SE has always had excellent quality control and sound welding, and that costs money. Furthermore, they generally stand behind what they sell. Oh, yeah... and some of their bikes are aluminum. Not all, but some.
When SE began making aluminum race bikes, welding aluminum frames was a tricky business, so tricky that the other aluminum bike maker of the late seventies, RaceInc, went bankrupt trying to make and sell aluminum scoots. Aluminum frames can't be easily aligned in a jig after being built (to understand why, check out this column) so they have to be welded slowly and carefully. That costs money, and that's why P.K. Rippers were expensive.
Luckily for all the profit-seeking bike builders out there, welding aluminum is no longer particularly expensive, nor is it particularly difficult. The mainstream Taiwanese bike builders figured out some time ago how to cheaply weld and align aluminum frames. My sources tell me that it is now cheaper to have a Taiwanese factory build you a 6000-series aluminum frame than it is to have the same frame design built in 4130.
The rest is history. Once it became apparent that customers would pay more for frames that were cheaper to build, everyone from Mongoose to Clayborn focused their marketing efforts on selling aluminum. The average price of a racing frame today is more than a hundred dollars higher than it was six years ago, and all of it is extra profit.
The trail-riding market didn't buy aluminum, but that was okay - most trail riders happily pay between $250 and $350 for so-called "heavy-duty" trail-jumping frames. Most of these trail-jumping frames don't hold up any better than, say, a 1979 Redline Proline, but most of today's trail riders are too young to remember just how durable those old $150 frames were. In the end, the manufacturers got what they wanted - a much higher profit margin at virtually no reduction in volume.
That, in a rather large nutshell, is why most of the manufacturers are pushing aluminum. But why are we buying? There can't be anyone left who doesn't understand just how short-lived and dangerous aluminum can be. GT knows - that's why they had a massive recall on their aluminum race frames a while ago, and that's why their current models are so heavily gusseted they're actually heavier than the original GT Cr-Mo race bikes. The team managers know - that's why Diamond Back and some of the other major teams are reportedly swapping all their team frames every six months or so. Even parents and track operators are fairly clued-in about the dangers of aluminum - I recently heard the parent of an eight-year-old tell another parent that his little Bobby "would ride that Powerlite until the head tube breaks".
There are people out there who will tell you that aluminum frames are just as safe and solid as properly constructed Cr-Mo frames. These people are either paid liars or sorely misguided. Either way, it's not worth our time to listen to them. A season spent logging frame breakages at Nationals will demonstrate to anyone with half a cerebral cortex that aluminum breaks more often, and more dangerously, than Cr-Mo steel.
It is absolutely true that many aluminum frames are stiffer and lighter than equivalent Cr-Mo frames. It's also absolutely true that stiffer and lighter frames do not necessarily win races. A stiffer frame is, in fact, more likely to break traction in the corners. Nor is an aluminum frame the best way to save weight; most of us could cut a pound off our bikes by changing our seat and seatpost.
I cannot prove to you that an aluminum frame will not help you performance or your child's performance, any more than the manufacturers can prove that it will. Each broken frame I see at a National, on the other hand, is proof that using an aluminum frame can be hazardous to your health or the health of your children. Let's be realistic. Is it worth endangering your child to save a pound on his bike? Is it worth potentially ending your riding career to get third place in 25-29 Cruiser instead of fifth? If the answer is "yes", then perhaps a GT Speed Series or Haro Monocoque is the bike for you. If not, then do yourself (and me, because I can't afford to lose a single reader) a favor. Take a look at the various chromoly alternatives available from companies like MCS, Badd, SE Racing (yeah, SE sells a few Cr-Mo frames once in a while) and a few others.
I don't expect the big bike companies to stop selling aluminum any time soon. It may not be safe for racing, but if you read the warranty and fitness statements supplied with most frames closely, you will see that most companies specifically warn you against racing their bikes. They may know that you will race their stuff, but if they warn you against doing so they can avoid the liability problems of aluminum race bikes. Remember that cycling manufacturers are not legally responsible to their customers so much as they are legally responsible to their shareholders. By making aluminum frames, companies like Schwinn and GT satisfy their legal imperative responsibilities to maximize profit for their shareholders. There's nothing particularly "evil" about it - it's just good business. Since you are not responsible for helping these fine companies maintain their profit margins, I would suggest that you refrain from doing so.
I understand that many of my readers will be angered by this column. I would encourage you to email me with your questions and concerns. Before you send me a particularly angry piece of mail, try to keep in mind that:
The ever-advancing state of metallurgy being what it is, there is every chance that somebody, somewhere, will eventually create a safe, long-lasting, low-cost aluminum BMX frame. That day has yet to arrive. Until it does, I would recommend that you think twice before buying an aluminum frame. If it's for your child, think more than twice. I've warned you. My conscience, such as it is, is clear. The rest is up to you.