GerryinHouston

An extra wheel and a better seat! Where is @rydabent when we need him?

Day6

To be more fair in my response to the original question, you'll see more difference between a Wal-Mart $129 bike and a $700 bike than you will between the $700 and a $3000 bike. I have Wal-Mart bikes (2 mountain bikes); they are tweaked and in tune and I like them .But my Trek hybrid and my Day 6 Dream are "sweet rides" in comparison .
Buy what you can afford, get it in good tune, and ENJOY!!

wphamilton

I thought it meant "nothing", but I like how you tied that to your idea of the "pre-rational" decision making. Our expressed logic and reasoning may be perfectly valid, yet are still not how we arrived at the decision. We frame it that way after the fact. In that sense it's "nothing" as to why, yet when rigorous and impeccable it is "everything".

Somewhere in there is the reflection of the actual priorities in choosing a $700 bike or a $3000 one. A lot of people think that the former is only for beginners, or the latter provides no additional value, and of course both are untrue but *I* think that both opinions are just inadequate expressions of possibly unknown priorities. That you're driven enough to want the best level of equipment, ie, self-image, could be part of it. Or spending hours at a time, you need it to be as pleasant as possible. Or the flip side, when choosing the former.

When I graduated HS, my mom bought me a motorcyle, my choice, and I shamelessly chose a Kawasaki KZ1000. The handling, raw power, sheer exuberant emotion of it, I was incapable of not wanting it. So I've got nothing to argue about, with anyone choosing a higher end bicycle even if, now, I see no compelling reason for one. I understand when there's more to it than just turning the pedals.

wolfchild

I can't speak for "certain people" but I can speak for myself... I've ridden many 100 mile centuries and done many recreational rides on my $ 700 dollar fixed gear bike. Plus I've been a commuter cyclist for the last 11 years and logged many thousands of miles over the years. I have also done a lot of single speed mountain biking in very hilly terrain on my $ 1500 dollar MTB....Despite not using the "proper tool for the job", I never experienced any problems and enjoyed every minute of it and the memories of those great experiences will be with me forever. I feel great satisfaction of being able to ride 100 miles on a cheap bike with one gear.

wolfchild

I can easily afford to purchase a $ 5000 dollar bike or even $ 10 000 bike, but what's the point ??

Colnago Mixte

I guess you must have missed that other thread on "What's the Difference Between a $300,000 Bike And a $700,000 bike?"

Machka 

Then maybe it was the proper tool for the job.

Ya think??

I-Like-To-Bike

The BF corollary of course is that those who buy tools that "we" don't think are the "best" for the job don't know what they are doing.

Maelochs

As opposed to all those other "century" distances?

rydabent

But then this thread begs the question------------------what is the difference between a $3000 and a $15,000 bike?

Caliper

About enough to buy my current car three times over...

Caliper

I keep hearing them funny guys in Europe calling 62 miles a "century"...

Maelochs

I did a Florida -to-Washington D.C. tour--fully loaded, 1,100 miles in 11 days---on a 32-pound Schwinn I bought at a garage sale for $65. I replaced the crank with an equally cheap crank ((175-mm 52/42/30 triple) and slung a wide-range cluster (not a cassette as it was a freewheel bike) and a pair of MTB derailleurs (had to make some brackets.) Probably the best bike I have ever built. I would still be riding it except it was stolen.

I did an LA-to-DC supported tour riding that aforementioned $500 Dawes most of the way. Worked just fine. Maybe if I had done 200 miles per day instead of 100 or something, some glaring deficiencies would have surfaced. Somehow though, I think that 42 days and however many thousand miles on the Dawes left me with a pretty fair understanding of the bike.

The idea that either More or Less is always better is prima facie absurd.

Most of the bikes people used for the original Grands Tours were garbage by today's standards, but those original Grands Tours were ridiculously long, with riders on the road all day long. The kind of tech we think is below us ... was cutting edge back then. We forget that an "entry-level" bike from a major manufacturer nowadays probably had better frame tech and components that the bikes the Tour winners rode in 1960 .... and that $1500 bike has better stuff than they were using in the '90s.

In a lot of ways you are The best, and I have huge respect for you ... but I could have spent a lot more for any of my bikes and Chose not to. I could have bought Dura-Ace instead of Ultegra, got $3000 Miele wheels, could have ordered custom-built titanium .... And i chose not to because I had to look at rising investment and diminishing returns.

I have been riding for more than five decades, and for many decades was car-free. I have been building bikes for a few decades. I Know what I am doing. I may not be The Best (I know I am not in your league) but I Know What I Am Doing. And at no time did i spend every cent I could afford to get the best I could afford. In every case I paid whatever it cost to get what I thought was a sufficient tool for the job. And the fact that all my bikes seem to be running well and doing the jobs I ask of them, says to me, I do indeed know what I am doing.

I no longer have the fitness for randoneurring ... I might get it back, depending on how the job and the health and the will cooperate. if I did .... i would probably go with a bike I already have, which cost about $2000 more or less .... CF endurance frame, 105 group with Ultegra rear derailleur, custom-built wheels (I splurged) and a mostly no-name cockpit. The geometry, the riding position, the saddle, and the gearing all work out very well for me (though I would slap on an 11-32---it has a long derailleur as I anticipated maybe wanting the bigger cassette (which I have waiting.)) I am sure I could ride that bike longer than my muscles could tolerate. It is already set up to carry a giant front and rear bag and has a top-tube bag, and room for four bottles ....

Why would this bike not be good for randoneuring? If I had spent more, gotten flashier paint of a full Ultegra group instead of 105 .... would it automatically be better? We both know the answer is "No."

That Dawes is one of the most comfortable bikes I won. With tis current 9-speed Tiagra set-up it is also pretty bullet-proof---and with full racks, it could serve as a randoneurring bike too, though I would put the Tiagra Hollowtech triple in, in place of the current Tiagra double. (That's another piece I have sitting on the shelf, should I decide to go that route.)

I'd say ... people who know what they are doing get the tools which they know will do what the tools Need to do, and spend what it costs . Anything else is just flash and glitter .... though if one is spending $2000 or $2500, why not spend a few hundred more for nicer paint and better bar tape?

Maelochs

Just the Brits ... the others all speak furrin languages.

wolfchild

The $ 15 000 bike will be at least 10 MPH faster than a $ 3000 bike.

Maelochs

At least. For $15 K I could get a low-end Ducatti.

ksryder

Thread has not disappointed.

superpletch

I enjoy riding bicycles, I enjoy looking at bicycles, I enjoy touching bicycles. Bicycles are not transportation or tools for me, I enjoy riding. I have an inexpensive bike and I have a more expensive bike that built up myself and some bikes in between. I am nowhere near a "1%er" nor am I part of the "industrial bicycle complex" and I'm a self proclaimed not a snob, I just enjoy bikes.


If I want to spend my money on a more expensive bike it is for my enjoyment not to trigger some of you judgemental people who claim to not be judgemental. It appears in this thread that the people in the less expensive camp are the most defensive and judgemental. I've seen people pay way too much for a $700 bike as well.


I personally can tell a difference in how equipment that costs more works better but not dramatically. I find some bikes are very beautiful to look at, some inexpensive and some more expensive, but usually the more expensive ones.

Maelochs

Thread is won.

badangel

different 2300 $

livedarklions

Snobbery is not spending a lot on a bike. Snobbery is saying someone else is doing it wrong because they didn't. Some of the most helpful people on BF have very expensive bikes but love helping people with their less expensive bikes. That's the opposite of snobbery. The posers who post "x expensive part is the only reasonable way to go" are pretty obvious and quickly make spectacular fools of themselves.

BTW I'm 34 miles into my second (real) century of the weekend on my $600 bike. Just taking a coffee break.If someone wants to give me a $3000 bike, I won't be insulted.

Maelochs

Dude, please. That's a $600 bike. This thread is about $700 and up.

eja_ bottecchia

Vegasclimber

Great one-post OP thread. Hehe.

I tend to agree with what was said upthread - if you can't tell the difference between the two, get the cheaper bike.

If you can, get the most bike you can comfortably afford, you probably won't regret it.

My wife ran a heavy hybrid for a long time but it was holding her back once we started doing longer rides. It did make her damned strong, I bought her a Langma for her birthday and now I am chasing her half the time. So it made a difference for her.
For myself, my more expensive bike is much better. Way less vibration, more responsive, more comfortable and better shifting - all of which make it so I can ride more miles in comfort. While the bike's ability is beyond my own, I really enjoy it a bunch. And I think that's what matters in the end.

That being said, my bikepacking bike was $600 and it works just fine for me as well, for what I bought it for.

Rollfast

Being in General Cycling Discussion, this is generally a $300 bike.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/ANTIQUE-VIN...bike.TRS0.TSS0



OUTSTANDING!