Hongfu FM-066/Chinese open mould frame thread

[HillRPete]

I will repeat : patents exist to allow innovation.

You can only patent what you have "innovated", so I don't get your argument.
Patents exist to make money from inventions.

[jordo99]

IP theft is still theft.

Copying a whole bike is lame. The so-called difference is not because they are trying to keep it different, but because it's a bad copy job. If they can get original drawings of the Venge, they would not be shy to use it.

...sigh...this sort of idiotic crap is what gets me annoyed with the open mold debate.

The FM098 alone has the internal cable routing flipped...you think that something so obvoius is unintentional and that after their 3rd revision of the frame they still haven't figured this one out yet?

The same thing goes for nearly all of Dengfu's frames...they use internal cable routing even when the "copy" does not. You think they do that on accident?

...I'd suggest you only comment on things you have a good grasp of it and stop posting this filth.

There are many carbon factories in China. Some are good. Many of them suck. Any generalization beyond that simply is dillusional.

Open models can be good, or can be crap.

Same with name brands...nothing new here

Big brands can lose business if they are knocked off heavily, because customers would be pissed if they spend $5K and be mistaken for riding a fake. Some knock-off buyers can also afford higher end stuff (see earlier Di2 FM015).

Yes...because Rolex and Oakley are so hard up for business because of all the crappy street vendor knock-offs right? Feel free to post back a bike that has suffered because of knock-offs if you can come up with one. It's certainly not even close to being at the level of counter fitting that Oakley has fended off without much trouble.

This mob-mentality is dangerous.

*** - I edited this retort out...I was getting a on a role and it turned a bit hostile by this point and as a fairly new WW member (although a lurker for a few years) I should probably keep a decent reputation around here.

[jordo99]

I will repeat : patents exist to allow innovation.

You can only patent what you have "innovated", so I don't get your argument.
Patents exist to make money from inventions.

If you can't copy my patented design what do you do? You innovate, invent or give up...technically you can still copy but that is evading the purpose of patents.

[jordo99]

I frankly don't understand the urge to buy a near-replica of something and try to pass it off as the original... but I'm probably missing the poser gene. Are Pinarello or Specialized suffering because there are cheap replicas of their top frames out there? I think they are. It dilutes the exclusivity of the brand for sure. The posers with lots of money are hesitant to lay down the big $$ when there are all these *poor* posers riding something that looks identical to the untrained eye.

So... basically I think copying a top frame to try and capture the "poor poser" market is lame. But then again the only ones suffering are rich posers... and big companies that can afford it anyway, and won't stop doing what they do. Nobody is missing out on any innovation as far as I can tell.

I really don't think that the big companies are missing out much on sales of their "top frames". It's the same reason why Oakley and Rolex (as I just mentioned) still sell their products and do very well...However, Rolex and Oakley have it even rougher because their customers have almost nothing to gain from purchasing the real deal whereas bike frames have performance benefits...certainly their watches still tell the same time and their sunglasses still shade your eyes (albeit, there are polarized lens and such that can make a difference...yet a good knockoff would allow a legit lens to be installed in a fake frame/body)


I think that most buyers who get knock-off and trying to pass it off as the real thing are either too cheap to buy it in the first place or unable to afford it. It's possible that there are a few people who would rather "test" the knockoff to see if they like the geometry or something first...but I'd assume that someone who's putting that much thought and effort into making an informed purchase would also realize that the quality of the frames will be different so it's really not going to prove much at all.

The only rational (and some people certainly aren't rational) reason why a person who's willing to spend $5000 on a Venge or Dogma frame would buy a knock-off is to race on so that if they crash and damage the frame it's far less costly to replace and they are able to protect an investment. It doesn't make a lot of sense to go out and buy one the best racing bikes available only to leave it at home and ride something inferior but it's the only option I would even consider to partake in (if I had the finances for such bikes this early in life).

[milroy]

I will repeat : patents exist to allow innovation.

You can only patent what you have "innovated", so I don't get your argument.
Patents exist to make money from inventions.

Patents are about motivating and distributing innovation. They are actually a kind of contract. Inventors are given a monopoly right for their invention in return for disclosure of that invention to the state. That’s why patents must include a detailed description as well as an enabling requirement. At the end of the patent term, the invention becomes public property.

One of the earliest know patent Statutes we know of comes from Venice (1474). It neatly demonstates the rationale of the patent system.
WE HAVE among us men of great genius, apt to invent and discover ingenious devices; and in view of the grandeur and virtue of our City, more such men come to us from divers parts. Now if provision were made for the works and devices discovered by such persons, so that others who may see them could not build them and take the inventor's honor away, more men would then apply their genius, would discover, and would build devices of great utility and benefit to our Commonwealth.

[RTW]

The thing most of you are overlooking with the patent argument (and I am enjoying this, there are some very valid views on both sides of the argument) is that there are some innovations which have very little barriers to entry. We aren't always talking about massively complicated concepts, but rather someone having the presence of mind to think outside of the box. Perhaps the thing which the patent applies to is very simple, and easily replicated, however the research behind this relatively banal thing to ensure it works and provides the benefits promised costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. Say it was an innovation which many people could benefit from, but the competition have shied away from investing in the research, believing perhaps that consumers aren't prepared to pay a premium in this area. Is it fair that once someone has paid and done the research, proven a viable concept, that others should be able to jump on the bandwagon, and essentially take the shortcut? I don't think it is, and patent protection is important.

On the other hand, with new concepts, often the imitators help establish the product in the first place. Many new ideas are met with conservatism and reluctance to take the risk by consumers and retailers alike. Often when something takes an accepted product and does it differently people react with "well, what was wrong with the way we have been doing it all these years?" When copies come straight away, people see a number of products, and thus feel the concept has more value, due to the multiple offerings. It helps things become established as viable in the eyes of consumers. It is a fine balance.

Patents need to be used sensibly in this instance, like in the car industry, and for the most part in the mobile phone industry, where they are swapped and traded for the 'greater good' to bring the whole industry forward.

[CharlesM]

We keep implying that open mold means the same care and quality of materials is used to stuff the mold...

There's a reason the R5CA is a lot more money than the base r5...

There's a reason the Top Mclaren Venge was 3 times the cost of the standard...


The quality of raw materials and the car in lay up make for massive cost differences in production for the actual reputable brands even in the same mold.


We're also ignoring the fact that molds degrade and get out of spec... Once that happens, the molds for a brand occasionally become "open"...


Visual similarity is creating a facade of quality and brand association way beyond what the reality is...

The busted chinarellos lined with newspaper were a great example...

Sorry, my post is a bit long, bear with me, but this post and some of the things stated are just plain wrong and misguided.

Are you trying to say that ................................................................................................................

One of the best ways to "win" an arguement in chat rooms is to speak for someone, push an off base interpretation of a post to an extreme and then tell them why what you've said for them is wrong...


I dont disagree with some of what you've said, but I would rather not get words put in my mouth and then taken out of context...


Not all open molds are from stand alone companies that don't also produce for major brands.

Not all molds stay at their point of original manufacture.

And the biggie in China is that there's virtually no patent protection for foreign companies who bring their designs to be either manufactured and or retailed in China... But RTW makes a fantastic point in that very frankly, as relates to cycling, the lack of IP/Design protection has advanced the quality of the products almost across the board.


I've walked the floors at a dozen manufacturers in both China and Taiwan. I understand where first hand knowledge and experience in the industry is a real downer in chat rooms so apologies...

[rruff]

I really don't think that the big companies are missing out much on sales of their "top frames". It's the same reason why Oakley and Rolex (as I just mentioned) still sell their products and do very well...However, Rolex and Oakley have it even rougher because their customers have almost nothing to gain from purchasing the real deal whereas bike frames have performance benefits...certainly their watches still tell the same time and their sunglasses still shade your eyes (albeit, there are polarized lens and such that can make a difference...yet a good knockoff would allow a legit lens to be installed in a fake frame/body)

IMO the real performance difference between fake Rolexes and Oakleys and the real thing is likely no less than the real performance difference between a fake Venge and a real one.

And in all these cases the original company's sales are surely hurt by counterfeits. They aren't going bankrupt, but they are losing some sales. A big reason to spend the money is to gain entrance to an exclusive club... and have everyone aware of it.

[rruff]

At the end of the patent term, the invention becomes public property.

And that term is very long... 14-20 years! A frikin generation! There are some inventions requiring very large R&D expenditures, and so a long term makes sense. But for most things this is not the case, and the patent system does more to stifle the pace of innovation than improve it. As I mentioned earlier, the largest players in any industry are the ones who are all about patents and defending their turf. It changes the game completely.

[jordo99]

I really don't think that the big companies are missing out much on sales of their "top frames". It's the same reason why Oakley and Rolex (as I just mentioned) still sell their products and do very well...However, Rolex and Oakley have it even rougher because their customers have almost nothing to gain from purchasing the real deal whereas bike frames have performance benefits...certainly their watches still tell the same time and their sunglasses still shade your eyes (albeit, there are polarized lens and such that can make a difference...yet a good knockoff would allow a legit lens to be installed in a fake frame/body)

IMO the real performance difference between fake Rolexes and Oakleys and the real thing is likely no less than the real performance difference between a fake Venge and a real one.

And in all these cases the original company's sales are surely hurt by counterfeits. They aren't going bankrupt, but they are losing some sales. A big reason to spend the money is to gain entrance to an exclusive club... and have everyone aware of it.

The point I am making is that the counterfeits function well (knock off Rolex still tells time and looks good, knock-off Oakleys still look cool and shade your eyes, knock-off Venge still rides well and looks fast). Yes counterfeits miss out on the small gap of performance (durability in Rolex/Oakley and stiffness/weight/aerodynamics in the Venge) but the people buying the knock-off won't care about that and it's very likely that they wouldn't care about the real thing if the knock-off wasn't available.

Another slightly different way to look at it:
Joe is buying a knock-off...He buys it because he does not find enough value in the name brand item (costs too much for a small performance increase)...Bob buys the name brand and is buying it because he doesn't want a knock-off...if you remove the knock-off entirely how many people like Joe"will be willing to buy the real thing...These people don't find the extra "performance" that the name brand offers to be worth the money with a knock-off available so why would their views change when there isn't a knock-off. Certainly a small percentage of Joes would actually buy the real thing at this point but most are just going to move on to another cheap product that meets their needs without all the extra cost. In my opinion, counterfeits don't even appeal to the same demographic as the real thing...if they did then nobody would be buying the name brand at all.


On last way of looking at counterfeiting:
From my experiences...I've seen a handful of people, who would never purchase Oakleys, buy a knockoff and love them...but then they break a few months later after the person gets used to having them...at that point most just ordered the fakes again but a few actually went for the real Oakleys because they gained appreciation for the difference in quality. In this case knockoffs can be a gateway to build interest in the real thing.
The same thing happened to my brother with watches. He never wore watches and said they were a waste of money because cell phones keep track of time better but then he got a nice looking, but cheap (about $100-150) watch for a college graduation gift...he started getting compliments when he wore it and grew to like watches. When it broke a few years later rather than fix it or buy another cheap watch he went out and bought an expensive watch because he gained appreciation for them.


I realize that we will likely never see eye-to-eye on this sort of topic...but I think there is a lot more complexity to impact of counterfeiting than anyone willing to accept and I'm just trying to shed light on it so people can develop a more informed and well-thought opinion...I'm actually very much against counterfeiting but there is a definite lack of defense for it's side so I'm taking a step back to help tell the whole story instead of allowing the "facts" to be skewed.

The issues are far from black and white like many people here are suggesting.

[orbilius]

As someone who owns a dengfu FM098 roadbike, I wanted to share some thoughts/observations.

- I didn't buy it to be a venge replica. I wanted a slick looking, kinda aero, internally routed road frame to replace an aging pedal force frameset. I have had people ask me if it is a venge. When I answer no and tell them exactly what I am riding they appear more interested, not less. But in reality there are not that many people that know what a Venge is.

- The "replicas" with specailzed logos on them are kind of sad. I am not sure why someone would do this. I think these frames are cool for what they are.

- When you put the FM098 and a Venge side by side there are obvious differences. The tube shapes and sizes are different and the Specialized has that extra attention to detail that shows it is of superior quality - chainstays & headtube specifically.

- There are some manufacturing issues with the FM098 that make the build a bit tricky. On mine then fork steer tube is very slightly smaller than it should be. I had to tighten down my stem a bit more to account for this.

- It was totally worth it! Mine built up to 14.25lbs with 1500gr carbon clinchers, SRAM red/force, and a few weight weenie parts. I am extremely happy with the ride. I am sure there is better, but I am very happy.

- I ride a specialized stumpjumper EVO mountain bike, purchased and serviced from a specialized dealer. Those guys have always taken care of my Chinese noname project bikes. They don't seem threatened by these. I think they purchaser of a dengfu FM098 and a venge are completely different buyers.

Happy to answer any questions on the frame.

[tharmor]

Is it worth pointing out that I have yet to see anyone post a picture of their OEM build with the name DentFu (etc.) on the frame? It's obvious that no one is necessarily proud of that enough to support the brand name on the bike.

[jordo99]

Is it worth pointing out that I have yet to see anyone post a picture of their OEM build with the name DentFu (etc.) on the frame? It's obvious that no one is necessarily proud of that enough to support the brand name on the bike.

For what it's worth...I'm on the fence between leaving my bike black/blue or adding Dengfu decals...
I really like the look of my frame right now so I'm hesitant to start adding decals that might take away from the clean look of it. If I were to go with something sentimental on the downtube and headtube I'd still be putting Dengfu on the chain stays and seat tube or fork tube...regardless, if I add decals, Dengfu will be on my frame.

[rruff]

Is it worth pointing out that I have yet to see anyone post a picture of their OEM build with the name DentFu (etc.) on the frame? It's obvious that no one is necessarily proud of that enough to support the brand name on the bike.

No... but I'd put Wu Tang on my bike in a heart beat.

Some advantages of generic Chinese framesets:

Cheap... ~$500 shipped.
No logos or custom logos.
Finish options (UD, 3k, 12k, etc)
Paint options.
BB options (BSA, BB30)

[racingtiger]

I have on question about the FM-098

How does it ride and corner compared to the Venge? I'm a crit-monkey and I'm looking for a new crit frame and right now I don't have the cash for a real Venge.