Originally Posted by
WhyFi
Definitely agree that the top end has gotten higher. On that note, Spec *just* released their new uber fiber - I don't think that it's fair to hold that against their other CF bikes at this point. For that matter, it's probably most fair, when talking about value, to look at it from the other direction, not down from the top carbon offering, but rather looking at the entry carbon offerings (which are, again, considerably better that a few generations ago). Typically the frames for a manufacturer's 105 and and more affordable Ultegra offerings are just one step below their their very best, but not always.
What kinds of builds are you pricing up? I have a fair idea of your tastes - you might see more price point deviation with smaller/boutique manufacturers, so for the purposes of comparison and with the lens of value, it's probably best to stick to the big players; whether you look at it from the top down or the entry level and up, players like Cervelo, Factor, Wilier, or whomever, is going to skew things, typically towards the more expensive. So no, I don't think that it's fair to categorize a Caledonia as entry-level, even though there's the Cal5 above it.
I would love to see the original MSRP of that Ridley. When I'm actively in the market, I'm a world-class hand-wringer and smaller brands appeal to me - I wouldn't think that pricing like that would escape my attention.
It's been 10 years since I got that Ridley Damocles, but i just checked it out - the MRP of the bike was $3600, CC had it on sale for $2400 and I think i got them to knock a little more off for me. Mea culpa, it wasnt $1500 (that was a different Ridley - my X-Fire with all Rival, which had an MRP of $3000 and was on closeout for 50% off). It was around 7.5kg, a mix of Force/Rival and at the time, it was frame that Pro Continental teams were using to race in the Belgium circuit. Slight reminiscing mod - that was such a lively bike and an absolute joy to drope the hamer. In , I should have just kept it.
Getting back to prices: over the last year, I have been looking at Di2 builds mostly, and there definitely was a big sticker shock for me, after 5+ years of not considering bikes. I was used to seeing top-end specs for $6k and seeing pretty much every brand's top range for $10k+ was an eye-opener.
At present, I am looking to get a nice race bike build for my wife and it seems that I need to spend a lot more to get something that is one notch below the top. And you are correct - because i have been looking more at the smaller brands - eg, a 5-series Cervelo with Ultegra - that could be skewing my perspective. $3k gets me the most-entry level spec in a Caledonia or Aspero. But even a $3k Spesh Tarmac is atleast 2 levels lower in carbon layup than their top end model and so feels like a big step down.
Now that I think about it, i think it is not so much the availability of what it at the $3-3.5k price point that is the issue, but how far it is from the top. Earlier, $3-3.5k would get you a bike that was a small rung or two down from the top frame (eg, I remember the Madone 9 top-spec being a then-eye-watering $6k or something). These days, that bike is significantly removed from the top-end build and in fact closer to entry-level. Eg, off memory, a $3,5k Emonda almost 8kg - which is pretty bad for a "lightweight climbing bike". So that probably affects how it is perceived.
Probably not fair to let the existence of higher-end models skew my perspective though - so from that point of view, you are correct. But perception is what perception is - and these days, my internal pricing has re-calibrated to think of $3k bikes as entry-level.