On Female Frame Builders…

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by unterhausen

If you want to stay in business long term, a frame with a wet paint job should cost somewhere around $5k. Someone just starting out can't charge that much for a frame. So it's a conundrum. A lot of builders don't see that going in, they think they can charge too little because they haven't totaled up how much they really need to charge in order to actually make money. When I see someone charging too little, I just figure they are going to be gone in 5 years or less. And I suspect they don't have insurance, because paying that bill is a significant amount of money per frame. The problem is there are lots of people volunteering to work too cheaply for reasons, so people can't charge enough. It has always been this way, and I doubt it will change.

The builders that have been doing it a long time that charge too little are likely to have a long suffering spouse supporting them. Or are doing it as a second job. I'd rather ride my bike than have a second job building frames. That's why it's a hobby for me.

The business side of things sure is something that confounds many male and female builders alike. I was struck by this in the article that originally prompted this thread:

Back when her main goal as a custom frame builder was to get as many people on bikes as she could, Megan Dean was cranking out 20 to 25 bikes a year.

“That’s kind of what broke my hands down,” says Dean, 37. “It’s a lot of repetitive motion. Sometimes after working, I couldn’t hold onto anything with my right hand. I thought I was done for at one point.”

She’s since dialed it back, right-sizing her business, Moth Attack (so named after a long-ago kitchen infestation when she lived in Los Angeles). That move—plus a good chiropractor, a lot of ice, and switching to a mill to cut tubes—toned down the tendinitis that threatened her livelihood.

Nothing against her personally, but 20 to 25 bikes a year, as a maximum output, is just not going to cut it. It seems like a lot of builders try to start a business with little-to-no capital expenditure. But that's just not how businesses work. Outside of a few niche things, starting a small business generally requires a 6 or 7 figure initial investment. If you skimp on the capital expenditure, you're going to be much less efficient with labor, and permanently behind the curve.

When people think small framebuilding, Richard Sachs is often the prototypical example, and this is probably to the detriment of the industry. Mr. Sachs is excellent at what he does, his is a bad model to emulate. I think Co-Motion would be a much better example of how to be successful. Admittedly I don't have an insider view of their finances, but they've been in business over 30 years, have employees whose salaries get paid on time, and can churn out a steel frameset with custom geometry and wet paint for under $3k.

If you want it to be a hobby, or hobby business, sure go ahead and buy some files and set something up in your garage. I'm a hobby builder, it takes me 50+ hours to build a frame. If I did nothing but build nonstop, never had to spend any time on sales, marketing, accounting, etc. and sold ever frame for $5k, I'd be making less money than I make at my job now. But for anyone who actually wants to do this professionally, you need to treat it like a real business. That means investment, that means scale, and for god's sake, that means putting prices on your website!

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by Hellgate

This paragraph caught my eye:



“For years, bikes were designed around a man’s body, reflecting—at least in part—who was doing the designing. Then many of the major bike manufacturers began targeting the women’s market with “women’s-specific” bikes. But the approach had its limits. “Women’s-specific bikes are supposed to fit this average or maybe idealized woman’s body. But a woman’s body can look like a lot of different things,” says Jackie Mautner, a Philadelphia bike builder who creates custom frames under the name Untitled Cycles. “I don’t think that [marketing] speaks to the diversity of gender, to the diversity of actual bodies.”

Either Trek or Specialized (I don't recall which) now offer only "Gender Neutral" bikes. IE: The same thing for everyone.

If you read between the lines, it seems the route that a lot of the bicycle brands is taking could be summed up as "our bikes are designed around the traditional target market of men, but some of the smaller sizes might fit women".

On the other hand, the quoted paragraph seems to be at odds with itself. It seems to be saying that it is okay to design a "men's" bike around the average man, but it is not okay to design a "women's" bike around the average woman. All the morphological data I've seen indicates that both genders have wide variations within their populations, and that the variation within each gender is actually larger than the difference between the average of each gender.

Take for example, the old idea that "women's bikes need shorter top tubes because women have a longer legs in proportion to their torsos". Now, it may be that many women prefer shorter top tubes - but it isn't because they have longer legs then men. There are plenty of men with proportionately long legs, and plenty of women that have proportionately short legs. It turns out the average leg/torso ratio for men is barely any different than it is for women. This suggests there may be some men that would benefit with shorter top tubes and some women that may benefit with longer top tubes.

Bike companies might actually be able to get away with designing larger size frames for "average" men and smaller size frames for "average" women, but a big problem I see is that components also affect fit, these are often not made for typical women's proportions (who are typically smaller than men). This includes things like lever size/reach, crank lengths, handlebar widths, etc., but the biggest issue is wheel size. Wheel size plays a major role in bicycle design and fit. The 700c wheel is well suited for riders between about 5' 6" and 6' 3" - which is the majority of male riders. But that size range encompasses only a fraction of the entire population of women. There's only so much one can do with frame design to try to work around wheel size limitations, so many (if not most) women have to ride frames whose geometry and fit are compromised (even with custom frames)

So is the bicycle industry biased against women? Based on the sizes and shapes of the components being made, clearly yes.

[HenryA]

If you think the bike business is bad, take a look at the jock strap industrial complex. Its almost like women don’t exist.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by HenryA

If you think the bike business is bad, take a look at the jock strap industrial complex. Its almost like women don’t exist.

I know you're trying to make a joke, but I would expect the most jock straps are sewn by women.

[Bruce K]

Let’s get this out if the boys high school locker room, please.

BK

[Doug Fattic]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Bike companies might actually be able to get away with designing larger size frames for "average" men and smaller size frames for "average" women, but a big problem I see is that components also affect fit, these are often not made for typical women's proportions (who are typically smaller than men). This includes things like lever size/reach, crank lengths, handlebar widths, etc., but the biggest issue is wheel size. Wheel size plays a major role in bicycle design and fit. The 700c wheel is well suited for riders between about 5' 6" and 6' 3" - which is the majority of male riders. But that size range encompasses only a fraction of the entire population of women. There's only so much one can do with frame design to try to work around wheel size limitations, so many (if not most) women have to ride frames whose geometry and fit are compromised (even with custom frames)

So is the bicycle industry biased against women? Based on the sizes and shapes of the components being made, clearly yes.

I also blame the 700c wheel to being a major contributor to women fit problems on a bicycle. And if anybody is not really comfortable on their bicycle they don't like to ride it much. In my 40+ years of building custom frames, more than half of my customers have been recreationally riding fit women. The purpose of their bikes was typically to do club and century rides. I would design their frames based on their pedal/handlebar relationship found from a fitting session. The number of times that design worked well with 700C wheels was in the minority. Big problems come up trying to keep rotating toes from striking the front wheel. The average height of an American women is just over 5" 4". Using 650C is a good option except for tire choices. And there is the rub. The bicycle with those size wheels actually looks more proportional on women whose height is at or below the 50th percentile.

[NHAero]

It's even easier today with 650b tires. Conti GP5000 come in 650b in both 25 and 28 widths, for example.

Originally Posted by Doug Fattic

I also blame the 700c wheel to being a major contributor to women fit problems on a bicycle. And if anybody is not really comfortable on their bicycle they don't like to ride it much. In my 40+ years of building custom frames, more than half of my customers have been recreationally riding fit women. The purpose of their bikes was typically to do club and century rides. I would design their frames based on their pedal/handlebar relationship found from a fitting session. The number of times that design worked well with 700C wheels was in the minority. Big problems come up trying to keep rotating toes from striking the front wheel. The average height of an American women is just over 5" 4". Using 650C is a good option except for tire choices. And there is the rub. The bicycle with those size wheels actually looks more proportional on women whose height is at or below the 50th percentile.

[charliedid]

Originally Posted by prototoast

The business side of things sure is something that confounds many male and female builders alike. I was struck by this in the article that originally prompted this thread:



Nothing against her personally, but 20 to 25 bikes a year, as a maximum output, is just not going to cut it. It seems like a lot of builders try to start a business with little-to-no capital expenditure. But that's just not how businesses work. Outside of a few niche things, starting a small business generally requires a 6 or 7 figure initial investment. If you skimp on the capital expenditure, you're going to be much less efficient with labor, and permanently behind the curve.

When people think small framebuilding, Richard Sachs is often the prototypical example, and this is probably to the detriment of the industry. Mr. Sachs is excellent at what he does, his is a bad model to emulate. I think Co-Motion would be a much better example of how to be successful. Admittedly I don't have an insider view of their finances, but they've been in business over 30 years, have employees whose salaries get paid on time, and can churn out a steel frameset with custom geometry and wet paint for under $3k.

If you want it to be a hobby, or hobby business, sure go ahead and buy some files and set something up in your garage. I'm a hobby builder, it takes me 50+ hours to build a frame. If I did nothing but build nonstop, never had to spend any time on sales, marketing, accounting, etc. and sold ever frame for $5k, I'd be making less money than I make at my job now. But for anyone who actually wants to do this professionally, you need to treat it like a real business. That means investment, that means scale, and for god's sake, that means putting prices on your website!

Well maybe, but I'm guessing just like you don't know the financials of Co-Motion you probably don't know the financials of Megan and or Moth Attack. I know people who have businesses that only really ever break even or turn a tiny profit but because they are part of a double income family or personally wealthy. You as an example have additional income....so why I ask can't that be the scenario for Megan? You're assuming way too much IMO

Your life is your life.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by charliedid

Well maybe, but I'm guessing just like you don't know the financials of Co-Motion you probably don't know the financials of Megan and or Moth Attack. I know people who have businesses that only really ever break even or turn a tiny profit but because they are part of a double income family or personally wealthy. You as an example have additional income....so why I ask can't that be the scenario for Megan? You're assuming way too much IMO

Your life is your life.

Sorry, I thought it was clear in context I was talking about frame building as a business.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by prototoast

Sorry, I thought it was clear in context I was talking about frame building as a business.

Frame builders can have a variety of different business models. For example, Peter Mooney in the Boston area is a well regarded frame builder and has been in the business for more than 40 years. I'd guess that most years he builds less than 25 frames. But his business model is to be a partner in a full service bike shop in addition to being a frame builder.

[Blue Jays]

As far as the "asking for a mechanic when calling" question goes:
That is more of a question about the size of the shop than a sexism concern.

For example, if I call any BIG bicycle store around here, my assumption is the person answering is NOT a mechanic…regardless of their gender.

If telephoning a SMALL shop, then I will immediately ask:
"Hey, do you have a Campagnolo thingamajig tool to install a 1950s left-handed doohickey?"

The reality is with a BIG shop you probably ain't speaking with a mechanic unless you ask.
In a SMALL shop it is the exact opposite!

[benb]

Originally Posted by Toeclips

I wonder how many asian women are working in assembly lines building bikes for us.....if they can get parts of course

Exactly...

The truth is somewhere in the middle here.

Sometimes women want to do other things. Sometimes it's a problem with US/American culture.

In my field (Software) if you listen to the activists you would think we all take a 2 hour break every day after lunch and divide up and visit the schools in town and spend a couple hours harassing girls that math is hard and engineering is for boys.

The activists (most of which have never worked in the field) don't seem to understand that most of us have zero interaction with any of these school age girls, and the girls go to college and elect not to study computer science, math, and engineering. If they are being influenced it is not by office workers, it's by teachers, parents, peers, social media, and Hollywood. Hollywood has a very clear image it peddles of the industry which is a bunch of nonsense except maybe certain startups in California. The women who are actually in the industry that I know who work on this stuff do it totally different, they don't go around attacking men, they proactively work to encourage school age girls.

Meanwhile the same group of girls who would be good candidates for engineering have gone on to dominate biological sciences, medicine, etc.. those are not bad jobs.

Where I work right now we have the highest percentage of women on the team. But if you were too look at where the women grew up and where they went to HS and college you're looking at 10% at best who grew up in the US, went to high school in the US, and went on to study math, computer science, or computer system engineering in the US.

The bike industry could be the same. Women might be less interested in it. But it's also likely cultural and a US culture problem and a US bike culture problem. Bike culture isn't that great, it's dominated by anti-social men, I think it puts off a lot of men as well who decide it's not a good sport for them.

Also as has been said.. it's not like a lot of bike industry jobs in the US are good ones. But the situation could be very different in the places where bikes are made by the millions and the local culture is completely different.

[redir]

I read a stat the other day that college and university enrollment in the US today is 60% women and 40% men and it continues to shift in that direction. Interesting how things change. When I got my Geology degree in the mid 90's I didn't have one single women as a professor. There were more than average in STEM women in my classes though including my future wife who now is a PHD and works at a university where easily half the Geology professors are women. Race is an entire other issue and frankly that has not changed a whole lot it seems.

So things are going to be different in the future. I would imagine too that this would trickle down into other once gender majority type professions like auto mechanics, carpenters and so on.

[Tz779]

Well, *this* has certainly been entertaining!

-Robin (not a dude) ; )

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by redir

I read a stat the other day that college and university enrollment in the US today is 60% women and 40% men and it continues to shift in that direction. Interesting how things change. When I got my Geology degree in the mid 90's I didn't have one single women as a professor. There were more than average in STEM women in my classes though including my future wife who now is a PHD and works at a university where easily half the Geology professors are women. Race is an entire other issue and frankly that has not changed a whole lot it seems.

So things are going to be different in the future. I would imagine too that this would trickle down into other once gender majority type professions like auto mechanics, carpenters and so on.

.

Interesting to consider that the increase the population of women in college being followed by an increase in women in auto mechanics and carpentry as trickle down.

I think a likely reason for the gender imbalance in college actually has to due with the current gender imbalance in male dominated vocations like auto mechanics and carpentry. Male dominated non-degree vocations (like auto mechanics, carpentry, etc.) tend to be higher paying than female dominated non-degree professions (like cosmetology or food service). Males can often go into reasonably paying vocations straight out of high school, and so frequently they do. In converse, women may often feel that they need to get a college degree to be able to get a job that pays a decent wage/salary, so they go that route instead.