Why is PX £1100 more than PR Pro?
- Thread starter billium
- Start date
Wojtek
New Member
- Mar 13, 2026
- 102
- 89
i was wondering the same and still haven't found the answer 
Paying more for smaller battery that is non removable. The win on Px is around 2kg, but not sure it has been officially confirmed?
The bike shop weighted PX Carbon and it came at 21.8kg without pedals for L size.
Paying more for smaller battery that is non removable. The win on Px is around 2kg, but not sure it has been officially confirmed?The bike shop weighted PX Carbon and it came at 21.8kg without pedals for L size.
Wojtek
New Member
- Mar 13, 2026
- 102
- 89
Frame what?
Wojtek
New Member
- Mar 13, 2026
- 102
- 89
Ok i see. But why/how would px frame be 1100 more expensive than pr with additional complexity over the removeable battery?
Perhaps they invested in the new 700wh battery but from consumer perspective it is more pricey for less whs.
There are very few full power ebikes with such a slim downtube as PX has and to have 1500w/150Nm motor, so you think they can't charge more for PX frames even though it may cost them less to produce it? Well, you are wrong ... I believe each bike will sell like a hot cake (PR for good price point, and PX for being so damn slim + more power) so they can charge as much as market will be willing to pay for it ...
Wojtek
New Member
- Mar 13, 2026
- 102
- 89
Yes, it is not justified better frame, hardware or components - thats why my point.
xtraman122
Well-known member
Not everyone is chasing capacity though, plenty of people would prefer dropping a little weight and having better looks if they simply never use the capacity of the 800Wh, which I suspect is a much larger proportion of the customer base than we see here. The average Joe doing leisurely rides for 60-90 minutes is probably never using more than about 400-500Wh or so, even on turbo all the time. I know there are lots of people who do much longer rides, but the fact that Bosch has the majority of their bike companies selling just the 600Wh platform is pretty telling. The 700 is a good sweet spot for a lot of people.
To someone who prefer the looks of the bike, PX frame is much better.
xtraman122
Well-known member
I think he was just trying to figure out why it's more expensive, his assumption was that it would be components.
Quick AI question - price difference seems to be mainly on components. And the PX Pro has an additional years warranty on frame & motor, SIM card, upgraded tubeless valves & frame-wrap.
| Component / Feature | Amflow PX Carbon Pro | Amflow PR Carbon Pro |
| Fork | FOX 36 Factory (Grip X2 Damper, Kashima) | FOX 36 Performance (Grip Damper, Black Stanchions) |
| Rear Shock | FOX Float X Factory (Kashima) | FOX Float X Performance |
| Drivetrain | SRAM X0 Eagle Transmission (Wireless T-Type) | SRAM S1000 Eagle Transmission (Wireless T-Type) |
| Brakes | Magura Gustav Pro (Next-gen heavy-duty eMTB) | Magura Gustav Pro |
| Wheelset | Premium Lightweight Carbon Wheels | Robust Alloy Trail Wheels |
| Cockpit | Integrated Carbon Handlebars/Stem | Standard Alloy Bar & Stem |
simonali19
New Member
- May 19, 2026
- 100
- 144
Wrong bike. You need to do PX Carbon vs PR Carbon Pro
xtraman122
Well-known member
I believe they were comparing the PR Pro to the base PX, not the PX Pro based on the cited price difference.
Amflow can price it how they like they don't need to justify anything. If they think that a simmer downtube and slightly more power is worth another €1,000 that's their choice. The market can decide if the price they have set is acceptable.
- Thread starter
- #17
Correct. And yes the frames are different but is the PX frame really £1100 more complicated to produce?
It's not about complicated to manufacture. It's about aesthetics and weight. You're paying more because the bike is slimmer, lighter and on paper can deliver the higher power levels for longer, so it's technically more advanced - real world the technology difference will make zero difference to most people.
That's not going to be what everyone wants, but for those that do and are willing to pay more for it, then they'll buy that bike.
For everyone asking the question, clearly it's not the bike for you.
xtraman122
Well-known member
The battery itself may also cost them more money to produce, with them being some special kind of new cell, I’m sure the unit economics aren’t as good as they are on the 21700’s in the other packs that they’ve been mass producing for over a year now.
Roughshod
Member
Doesn't the PX come with the 12A fast charger and the PR the normal 4A charger? That's a couple hundred quid difference?
PR Pro has the 12A charger…I think.
Just because both utilize carbon frames doesn't mean their construction is the same. In theory, the PX could have a more complex and sophisticated layup that is more time consuming to produce. Look at golf; aftermarket driver shafts can be <$100, or they can be >$500, yet they're both composite and look identical. They don't act identically though.
Upgraded my head to a GT3 since I created this but you get the idea...
Upgraded my head to a GT3 since I created this but you get the idea...
Last edited:
Similar Threads
-
Why does Amflow say no coil shock on the new PX? What would really happen if I run an Öhlins TTX22m.2 Coil?
- Started by FlorianLanua
- Replies: 13
-
-
-
-