Mason Cycles have announced the geometry and the pricing of the two initial disc-equipped road bikes in the range, the steel Resolution and the aluminium Definition.
We’ve run a few stories here on road.cc over the past few months on the development of these bikes. Our First Look gives you the basic details on each of the bikes, and our man Stu took the Resolution for an exclusive First Ride a few weeks ago.
Prices
• The Resolution frameset is £1,459. The frame is Columbus steel and the fork is a carbon monocoque, Mason’s own design. The price includes a Mason seat collar, Deda headset, a MultiPort cable stop set, and marine grade stainless steel bolts.
• The Definition frameset is £895. The frame is Dedacciai aluminium. The fork and all the other elements are the same as above.
• The Resolution will be available as complete bikes starting at £2,595 for a model with a Shimano 105 groupset and TRP Spyre mechanical disc brakes. The wheels are Hunt x Mason across the board, as are Continental tyres. The saddle and bar tape come from Fabric.
• A Shimano Ultegra Di2 build with hydraulic disc brakes is £4,195; a mechanical Ultegra model is £3,195; and a 105 model with hydro/mechanical brakes is £2,895.
• The most expensive Resolution complete bike is £5,595. That one is built up with a Shimano Dura-Ace Di2 groupset and hydraulic disc brakes.
• Complete Definitions start at £2,095 for a model with a Shimano 105 groupset and TRP Spyre mechanical disc brakes.
• You get the same build options with the Definition as with the Resolution, prices running up to £4,995.
Geometry
Here’s the geometry table for both bikes (yes, it's small!). As you can see, the 56cm model comes with a 561.1mm effective top tube and a 170mm head tube. The stack (the vertical distance from the middle of the bottom bracket to the top of the head tube) is 579.7mm and the reach (the horizontal distance between those two points) is 388.3mm.
The head angle is slack at 71.5° and the wheelbase is fairly long at 1019.7mm.
The Mason Cycles website is currently a holding page. The finished website is due to go live before the end of this month.
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
30 thoughts on “Mason Bikes announce pricing and geometry”
Let’s wait for the haters
Let’s wait for the haters then. “£1,500 for a steel frame, XYZ sell a complete carbon with 105 for that, blah, blah bloody blah”.
If I’d got the money I’d be placing my pre-order now.
Personally for frames built in Western Europe with the quality materials used and attention to detail I think these are reasonable.
Let’s wait for the haters
Let’s wait for the haters then. “£1,500 for a steel frame, XYZ sell a complete carbon with 105 for that, blah, blah bloody blah”.
If I’d got the money I’d be placing my pre-order now.
Personally for frames built in Western Europe with the quality materials used and attention to detail I think these are reasonable.
Lovely looking bikes,
Lovely looking bikes, geometry seems good, although I’m intrigued about the choice of relatively slack head tube angles across the range.
Maybe Dom will be along to explain why he’s made that design choice?
With Andy on the Haters. It would be nice if people could consider that people have a whole range of reasons for why they buy the bikes they do. And for some, price is not the first point.
Cheaper than a Donhou, better
Cheaper than a Donhou, better looking that a Donhou. Not outrageously priced.
Sorry though, I still hanker after the Ritchey Swiss Cross Disc…
So he isn’t going for volume
So he isn’t going for volume sales then! 🙂 Although given the level of detail anybody that thought they would be cheap was clearly deluded!
Nice looking bikes, i’d go for one of these over a custom build I think. I Simply don’t have that kind of money though 🙁
Bikes still look good, at the
Bikes still look good, at the top-end of what I’d been expecting for price and as mentioned a slacker Head Angle and longer Head Tube than I’d have predicted.
As someone with space for only one bike before this was announced I had been saving for a splurge and been thinking about the September Sabbath Disc – both for features and as they’re based a few miles from my home town 🙂
Now not so sure……..
Very nice, I do like them
Very nice, I do like them both. The steel one has to be pushing the upper limit of what you can charge for a stock-geometry steel frameset though. For over £200 less you could have a full custom Rourke in 853 Pro Team Super O/S tubing.
I guess you’d pay more for disk/Di2 compatibility with a custom builder (if they even offer it), but you’re getting something that should suit you perfectly.
andyspaceman wrote:Very nice,
Out of interest, if it was available as a custom geometry how much would you pay for one? There’s obviously extra time required for the setup of the tube cutting and fabrication as it’s not batch production process in that case.
thereandbackagain
Similar, or maybe a hundred quid or so more. Some brands obviously offer custom geometry at no extra cost, but a longer wait (e.g. Condor). That obviously depends on having a shop or dealership network with staff trained to take those measurements. So i don’t think it’s unfair to charge slightly more to cover those costs, but as you say, this isn’t a volume-produced frameset, so the fabrication, painting processes shouldn’t differ greatly.
Don’t get me wrong, hearing about what goes into a Mason frame, I don’t think the prices are outrageous. They definitely compare favourably against something like a stock-sized Cielo or Speedvagen (which I think are above what I’d consider a reasonable upper limit for a non-stainless frame).
I guess it all depends what you want and are prepared to pay.
Hi All,
Thanks for your
Hi All,
Thanks for your positivity towards the brand and the first models!
The Definition and Resolution aren’t race bikes, although they are designed to give a spirited and engaging ride. The idea is that they can go a long way in comfort and keep you amused along the way!
So, the relatively slack head angle with longer HT are great for distance and stability but combined with a slightly shorter stem length, still give excellent steering feel. It also allows a little more toe clearance for larger tyres and ‘guards without having excessive reach.
A lower BB height works better with larger volume tyres and means the bikes corner beautifully.
Hope this helps, back to e.mails…
And nowhere on that list do I
And nowhere on that list do I see a price for a casquette.
Come on now Dom, stop monkeying about with this frame making business and get some headwear sorted!
Still high on my list for
Still high on my list for perfect all-rounder, but I’ll need a little more work to come my way to afford it.
It would be interesting to know weight.
Still high on my list for
Still high on my list for perfect all-rounder, but I’ll need a little more work to come my way to afford it.
It would be interesting to know weight.
Any idea on frame & fork
Any idea on frame & fork weights for each model?
chewymk4 wrote:Any idea on
For a Columbus Spirit frameset with Carbon fork *finger in air*, 2.3kg?
kitkat wrote:chewymk4
Hi kitkat, chewymk4,
Frame weight for the 56cm Columbus Spirit frame is 1985g, the Dedacciai frame is 1530g. Fork is 365g.
As a guide, a complete 57cm Definition DuraAce Di2/Hydro bike is 17.13lbs, a 54cm Resolution Ultegra Hydro/Mechanical is 20.01lb.
Hope that helps.
Is the game up for the carbon
Is the game up for the carbon fibre hype?
Are we now officially back on metal bikes?
DublinPort wrote:Is the game
I think we are on whatever we want to be on. What are you on?
I would like to be on one of these but was optimistically hoping the alu frame might come in closer to £750 so it’s probably off my list for the moment.
Carbon Fibre is too precious
Carbon Fibre is too precious for me and presents more problems than a solution. Consider the creeks, chips, cracks and shattering; or even just the torque wrench required to set it up, or for road-side fixes. Of course, the Carbon paste also needs to be considered with the torque wrench.
Yes, Carbon Fibre is lightweight and offers a stiffer frame with a smoother ride. However, these gains are marginal over some quality Aluminium frames produced by Canyon and Rose. In fact, some Ultegra Aluminium assemblies are weighing just 7.5kg, so that gap is closed.
I agree that the price is a bit steep but they know that the market can absorb it.
Titanium is probably the way to go, bot there is still a way to go for me before dropping €5,000 on a bicycle.
DublinPort wrote:Carbon Fibre
I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but the safety critical component is the fork, and pretty much all frames nowadays have carbon fibre forks….
DublinPort wrote:Titanium is
My one and only experience of riding a titanium framed bike is that it was dull and lifeless (it was an Enigma Esprit, so geometry may have had something to do with it).
It would be interesting to try the two Mason frames side by side. I decided never again for aluminium after commuting on a Pearson Touché for a year, but perhaps that was just that bike. Bigger tyres should take some of the harshness out of an aluminium frame and there’s the weight saving a greater stiffness (potentially) to consider. But then steel is a little special.
DublinPort wrote:Carbon Fibre
Without any qualifications about what context the carbon fibre is being used in, this is all a bit ridiculous… frame, bars, fork, wheels… what ?
Carbon fibre tubes, in common with a lot composite constructions, aren’t typically very robust against certain sharp / ‘pointed’ impacts but are far more resistant to plastic deformation under slower, compressive loads than most metal tubes. Stainless and alloy frames don’t degrade like shit resin in composites can, CF can be tuned to provide ride characteristics in a way that is difficult or (practically) impossible to do with metal. You get creaks and groans from some metal frames, but so what…. you can over-torque things on any material you care to mention, composites can shatter if you do but what – on a frame – would you be doing that to ? ..and so on and so on…
Different materials provide different benefits and trade-offs depending on how they’re used and what they’re used for – don’t discount carbon fibre just because of your apparent ignorance of its properties or adulate metal for similar reasons. In the end, they’re all just bikes and there are a plenty of mules and marvels made out every construction type you can think of.
Why ? What, exactly, do you think the issue might be ?
Quote: I don’t necessarily
I like my Carbon forks; too precious to ever attach a disc brake to. If discs were the priority the carbon forks would have to go on any bike I would purchase.
Been running rigid Pace
Been running rigid Pace carbon forks with disk brakes for the last 7 years on my mtb. No problems. And in that time I’ve weighed between 105 and 93 kg.
Hurrah for cyclists and their
Hurrah for cyclists and their medieval approach to frame material… ~X(
Andy,
I thought it was
Andy,
I thought it was obvious that I was referring to frame material. My concerns around carbon fibre relate to their brittle nature. I wasn’t saying that your beloved bike was inferior, only that there are advantages to using metals in bike frames.
Aluminium frame processing has seen some big developments; reeling in the advantages once held by CF frames.
The carbon fork, as with all CF elements, is designed and formed to withstand stresses in a particular direction.
Applying additional torsional stress from a small road bike rotor to a road bike fork requires that fork to be significant in bulk.
I’ve never needed a torque wrench or bonding paste with aluminium and I’ve never damaged any metal components or assembly.
My experience with CF has been great until I tightend a slipping seatpost that I didn’t apply bonding paste to. With just my hands I smashed the seatpost.
I’ve seen more broken fibre than I have metal. I’ve seen broken CF forks and frames, more than with metal.
A metal frame will withstand impact better than a carbon fibre frame. At least I can still confidently ride my aluminium frame after the bike takes a fall. I can’t say the same of my Carbon Fibre.
DublinPort wrote:
The carbon
I think it’s apparent from that comment that you really don’t understand the engineering side of things that well or are abusing the word ‘significant’.
Again – it depends on what type of impact.
Quote:I’ve seen more broken
…and yet, I’ve broken more steel frames than anything else. The famed ‘reparability’ of steel is only true for 531 and the like; try taking a top of the range steel frame for a repair and watch the head get shaken…
Material of bike frames is relatively inconsequential, CF can be lighter, but even that is over-rated by the numpties. It’s all about the construction, the angles, the bike as a whole rather than what it gets built out of.
I heard that the magnetic
I heard that the magnetic vortex created by a spinning disc rotor at 33.3 rpm can actually change the molecular structure of the carbon fibres into graphite, leaving you with a useless fork but a large, if somewhat cumbersome, double ended pencil.
.
.