Giant is one of the most powerful bike companies in the world.They make their own frames as well as frames for other companies. They can do this very well in steel, carbon or aluminium.

Giant seems to concentrate only on the larger and more lucrative family touring, mountain, and roadie markets. If they ever decided to to take the tri market seriously then watch out.

I thought Merida made all the frames



hmmmm

I have often wondered if there should be some labeling requirements on who makes what. It is a respectful understanding within the industry that most of that infomation does not wind up in customer's hands. Suffice it to say, if people knew where some brands of bikes are really made, it would be different than where they thought they were made. I don't see overt attempts on the part of manufacturers to willfully mislead consumers, but I think there is a tacid attempt to not make it an issue or to somehow supress the origin of the bikes. The biggest issue is: Are the bikes the best possible quality at the lowest possible price? Within the world of global commerce, there are no political boundaries.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Back in the early-mid '90s Giant made a lot of the cheap bikes for a lot of companies. As far as Trek goes, Giant never made anything over the 830 or 850 if I remember correctly. Most of Trek's bikes say "made in the US," and none of those were made by Giant. They also made a bunch of bikes for Specialized as well as many others. As far as I know, they stopped doing that many years ago when they started selling under the "Giant" name. They haven't made any Treks for a long time.

I'm actually about 98% sure Giant made the SL aluminum frames for Trek in the late 90's/early 200X's. However, once they switched to ZX??? I'm not sure.

Not being in the industry anymore, I can't say for sure. What I can say for sure is that if it's one of their mid to upper end bikes, and it says "made in the US" on it, it's not made by Giant.

And my gut feeling is that even if it's made overseas, it's not likely made by Giant. Trek wasn't happy many years ago that the contract company (Giant, but at the time completely unknown) that made their cheap bikes was now starting to market bikes under their own name. Maybe things changed again later after I was out of the industry, but I'm pretty sure Giant and Trek had severed ties by the mid 90s. Who knows what deal they've got going now. Possibly Merida.

Regardless, this doesn't likely affect anyone on this board as I assume anyone here interested in a Trek would be looking at their better bikes which are all made by Trek.

"From the little experience that I have with the importation of consumer products, the nation of manufacture _must_ be disclosed to the end user. "

Yes, but isn't it true that different countries have different standards for determining what is "made" in their country? For example, Italy. Don't some Italian bike companies have a large number of their bikes manufactured in Taiwan and then do some "finishing" work, like painting in Italy? It's enough work to be able to say "Made in Italy" but the bike isn't actually "made" there.

There is a choice of two terms that came to us with NAFTA. In case #1 (made) the product must be manufactured in the USA. In case #2, parts made elsewhere are assembled here. When our (e)steamed politicians created that "giant sucking sound" of money and jobs leaving this country, many manufactureres, especially high tech, started setting up assembly plants in border towns just south of the TX border. PC boards and other elements would be built or assembled (from chips brought from various Asian nations) in Mexico, then shipped across the border for "final" assembly. The difference between $2/day for Mexican child labor and $27/hour for union labor made enough of a difference to keep companies competitive, since we're so damned liberal about letting foreign companies dump cheap products made without the burden of OSHA or EPA regs.

Group sets and accessories would NOT be considered part of the manufacturing process for bikes, so adding an Italian made gruppo, Chinese bar tape and French tyres (sic) to a US made frame would still constitude "manufactured in USA." Assembling from parts all imported would require "assembled in USA."

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

it is like this, fellas. "made in" refers to where the MOST VALUE was put into the frame or bike. this is needed, as you could have an italian tubeset, chinese rear triangle and fork, welded in taiwan, with finishing gluing in mexico, and painted here in the states.

now, for the fun part. what, exactly, contributes to which or what part adds the most value to the finished good ???

dunno?

neither does anybody else. however, there is at least one major us brand who is known to claim that it is - i am not joking - the DECAL with said manufactuerer's name which gives the bike its largest chunk of value. thus, they have frames made overseas, painted overseas, shipped here, where a DECAL is put on and then the sticker " proudly made in usa". it is funny world, and you never do know. :)

"there is at least one major us brand who is known to claim that it is - i am not joking - the DECAL with said manufactuerer's name which gives the bike its largest chunk of value."

That's too funny, though I think they have a point. It all comes down to the definition of "value". Are we talking about the component or process that provides the most quality, or the one which most dramatically increases the amount consumers are willing to pay for the finished product? If we use the latter definition, then sadly, I agree that the decal or logo does add the most "value".

I used to ride motorcycles. I no longer do because I couldn't keep the speed down, and I wanted to find out what I was going to be once I grew up.

Anyway, I rode Hondas, BMW's and Harleys. Did you know that BMW and Honda are almost entirely made parts manufactured in the respective countries that you'd suspect, as well as assembled in the same country. In the mid 1990's Harley Davidson, on the other hand, had something like 25% of it's parts made overseas, and then assembled here. I seem to recall that the tail-light lenses were from Finland, all sorts of bits and pieces from here and there go into the "American" icon. Harley had a politically correct spin put on it, of course, but I bet they wish they never had to publish that data.

What does that have to do with bicycles? I want very good quality, I don't care who made it. I do care if the place of manufacture or assembly abuses the environment or populace, so I try to know something about the countries that make the things I buy. But, the United States certainly isn't without it's own sins in these areas...just look at the pollution (literally...you can actually SEE it in the air) and some of the workers...Black Lung disease from coal production, myelomas from working in nuclear power plants, disfigurement injuries from poultry processing plants, etc.

But if Kestrel, or Cervelo, or X, Y, and Z all use various countries of manufacture and/or assembly, and if these companies show a willingness to make sure their suppliers are reasonable in their treatment of the environment and workers, it matters zero to me.

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

Sorry to disappoint you, but any companies building anything outside the US are abusing workers and polluting far more than the worst you can find in this country. That's why we'd be brain-dead to sign on to Kyoto...

Sorry, didn't mean to get political, but if your criteria is decent pay, worker safety and environmental kindness, buy American. If those things are important to you, then you'll have to pay for them.

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

 
>any companies building anything outside the US are
>abusing workers and polluting far more than the worst
>you can find in this country


I find this not to be the case here in Switzerland. I suspect your claims about worker abuse and pollution are likewise untrue in a few other european countries [at least].

I agree that manufacturing in most other countries suffers in comparison to the US wrt treatment of workers and environment, but not all.

although it may sound that way!

Switzerland isn't exactly an emerging threat to the economic stability of the US, simply because yooz guys don't pollute and don't abuse workers. With that and socialized medicine, European countries aren't flooding the US market with cheap products.

There really aren't any countries (AFIK) in Europe that are contract manufacturing sites for such things as bike frames, forks, electronic circuit boards, chips, etc.

My comment was directed at the "made in US" but actually made elsewhere thread. I'd be surprised if Switzerland was part of that picture, precisely for the reasons you cite. That's also why Switzerland shouldn't be interested in the Kyoto accords.

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

Altthough I've never had the opportunity to visit the Cervelo frame manufacturing plant, I think the people there would be found to be treated as well as workers in the US. That's not saying it would be all roses. One summer, I worked in a foundry here in the US as a grinder. 2 minutes instruction, and I was put in front of a gigantic spinning grinding wheel that could take your fingers off in a fraction of a second, or actually disentigrate into shrapnel if you jammed it with a part. Some of the workers didn't keep thier masks on tightly, and even with a mask, I bet you inhaled lots of bad stuff working there. It was dangerous, dirty, back-breaking work. But, would I want to spend extra money just to make sure some worker in a union got paid more compared to someone in another country that did the same job? No. It may be the only employment the other worker could find.

In the US, if you have half a brain, you can find other employment utilizing your brain instead of your body. I know this discriminates somewhat against the marginally intelligent, and we need to protect those people (I hope we do, that's what I have to count on for my own self-protection!). High-priced complacency about killed car building in the US in the 70's. There were definite functionality and quality differences between autos built elsewhere and those built here. US autos were trash compared to most of the other manufacturers. Now, not so much. Competition is good for everyone.

US productivity is still rising...that means some people with good brains are figuring how to make things more cheaply...not just getting cheaper labor to do the tasks. Since the 70's, pollution has generally been lessened, even though there are more people here. So, the US is moving in the direction they should be, even if it is a slow movement, and unless other countries demonstrate they aren't moving the right direction with regards to safety and employee treatment, I do not deny their people's right to work more cheaply.

These reasons are also why I refuse to buy gas-guzzling vehicles...I don't agree with the human-rights policies of many of the countries from which that oil originates, so I want to lessen my support for them in my own small way. Besides, I like the Honda Element...its sort of like me; ugly, but functional, and more efficient than most others of my size and performance. 65% US/Canadian Parts Content, 25% Japan. That means another 10% made elsewhere. Engine made in US, transmission in Japan. Assembled in Ohio. It's a good compromize. Just like Cervelo, Kestrel, and Harley. The US "worker" doesn't seem to me to deserve better pay only by virtue of their birthright. I think everyone ought to be given the chance to earn their pay.

As someone with a Native American ancestry, I'd have to strongly disagree that the US has been good at treating the environment and workers well. Other developing countries may seem as bad as the US was when the US was in the same stage of development. Unless each country moves toward cleaner/safer/less wasteful/more worker friendly production techniques, the countries better at these things will thrive as the others fail. Either way, better manufacturing techniques eventually help everyone in the world. It doesn't make sense to me to temporarily reward someone with higher wages just because they happen to live in the US, when someone else is trying just as hard, or harder, and doing it more cheaply in another country, as long as they are progressing toward these goals. It is a process, not just a snapshot.

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

 
I'm not offended at all. I thought you had a very good point to make, but were swinging your axe so broadly that maybe your point was getting partially lost. I'm also an American, just living in Switzerland at the moment, so I'm flooding the Swiss market with my auslanderness. But hey, anytime the Swiss want to flood me with cheap Assos stuff is fine with me.

I do try to be a responsible consumer. I'm sure I'm a hypocrite on a daily basis, but I try to improve nonetheless. It's quite a problem, really. On the one hand, the US regulates domestic work practices, including labor laws and environmental concerns, and this is (I think, on the whole) a very good thing. It wasn't always this way -- a lot of people had to die in the US before they stopped putting children into coalmines, for example -- nor is it some sort of workers' utopia (there's always room for improvement), but it's really pretty good at the moment relative to the much of the rest of the world. [Plus US workplace laws also benefit consumers of US-made goods (haven't had rusty nails in our sausage for a while).]

On the *other* hand, imported goods are produced without any of this scrutiny/regulation/oversight. That is, the free market is expected to regulate that side of the equation. This depends on consumers caring enough about such issues as treatment of workers and environmental practices to purchase (and, often, spend more) accordingly. But US consumers don't much care. Many US consumers started caring about quality (only) and the market responded. Many overseas manufacturers make high-quality product. So in the absence of government policy changes, the onus is on the consumer as far as protecting the world's workers and environment. Is that an unfair burden on the individual consumer?

>Unless each country moves toward cleaner/safer/less
>wasteful/more worker friendly production techniques,
>the countries better at these things will thrive as the
>others fail. Either way, better manufacturing
>techniques eventually help everyone in the world.

This depends on how you define "better". To many (maybe most) consumers, better simply refers to quality (and value). I'd like to believe in your theory that developing nations are on a one-way path of improving workplace conditions, but so far, the evidence doesn't seem to support it. Many developing nations have improved quality of the end product, but there is not much evidence that I've seen of systemic improvements in worker treatment and environmental practices at these same places (I'd be happy to be proven wrong). Countries producing the best quality products at the cheapest prices are thriving. This is not the same as treating their workers and the environment (which impacts the treatment of the populace in general) better. I wish it was, but it's not. *Rationally* it is sound to treat workers and the environment responsibly for the long term, but the short term view trumps this more often than not.