Cheapman Finds a $25 Bike!
05-17-21, 05:27 PM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,232
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 15,525 Times
in
7,325 Posts
I had three days of it before I took that photo, including one day climbing the Bitterroot range. Fortunately, I was still in camp when the hail storm hit later in the trip.
05-17-21, 06:39 PM
#52
Veteran, Pacifist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 13,328
Bikes: Bikes??? Thought this was social media?!?
Mentioned: 284 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3898 Post(s)
Liked 4,831 Times
in
2,229 Posts
At 70, HTFU is for those who have something to prove.
I have nothing to prove to anyone.
Including myself regarding masculine feats on or in the company of a bicycle.
Safer and more enjoyable my way - for me.
I have nothing to prove to anyone.
Including myself regarding masculine feats on or in the company of a bicycle.
Safer and more enjoyable my way - for me.
__________________
Vintage, modern, e-road. It is a big cycling universe.
Vintage, modern, e-road. It is a big cycling universe.
Likes For Wildwood:
05-17-21, 07:28 PM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,232
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 15,525 Times
in
7,325 Posts
05-17-21, 07:55 PM
#54
SE Wis
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 10,509
Bikes: '68 Raleigh Sprite, '02 Raleigh C500, '84 Raleigh Gran Prix, '91 Trek 400, 2013 Novara Randonee, 1990 Trek 970
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2744 Post(s)
Liked 3,390 Times
in
2,053 Posts
05-18-21, 02:36 AM
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 639
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 346 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 396 Times
in
259 Posts
There is nothing necessarily wrong with a cheap inexpensive bicycle.
Not everyone needs to go fast or have the latest-greatest technology!
I think many of you have set forth some comparative analogies that are way off the mark and totally unrealistic.
For example, generally a Motown product like any automobile from General Motors or FORD is a POS by the 160,000 mile mark or 12 years of age, whichever comes first. Generally, this is not the case with TOYOTA-LEXUS-SCION brands, HONDA-ACURA, KIA-HYUNDAI, NISSAN, MAZDA, and SUBARU.
Current Cadillac(GM) and Mercedes products and Jaguar products (both from the improved Ford era of nineties and 2000's and todays TATA motors ownership) were & are POS by the 130,000 mile mark or ten year mark because the maintenance-operating costs of said prestige luxury cars will far exceed (about six times) what the maintenance-operating costs of say a ten year old Honda Accord or ten year old Kia Optima, or ten year old Toyota Camry, or ten year old Mazda 6 or even a ten year old Nissan Altima------------------------the other thing is that the ten year old Accords/Optimas/Camry/mazda6/Altima generally have a greater used car market value than the ten year old MERCEDES, JAGUARS & CADILLACS that may have sold new for more than three times the price of those more humble but bulletproof Asian sedans.
The depreciation curve is huge and historically those three prestige marques have shown consistantly to be a costly hunk of junk once you reach a certain mileage and relatively young age. Some aren't as pitiful as they once were, but you still can bet on them to likely be a money pit and far less reliable than certain humble but bulletproof Asian sedans.
I'm not saying that expensive-prestige marque bicycles become costly problem children with age as prestige marque automobiles do...........because the bicycles do not!
Bicycles are relatively simple, even if they are state of the art with the latest technology and components...........................there just is not the complexity of an automobile...........and unless the state of the art bicycle's frame is damaged severely due to accident, individual components can be changed as necessary due to wear or age or the rider-owner's desire for something more suitable in terms of gear ratio or number of gears, or the close ratio relationship from gear to gear...etc....
Due to the complexity of automobiles, it becomes extremely labor intensive to repair and replace certain components on some vehicles..... The cost to rebuild an engine in something such as a Mercedes, Jaguar, and current Cadillac sedan could easily reach $20,000 , no matter if you bypass the dealer and choose an indepent repair specialist. The cost to rebuild an engine in those Asian marque cars mentioned will also easily exceed $10,000 but the mechanical engineering design and engineering execution and the build quality is far superior thus allowing those Asian marque sedans to generally rack up almost twice as many miles than those three prestige marques above, before the vehicle needs serious repairs.
I don't mean to necessarily pick on Mercedes, Jaguar, or Cadillac because there have been many equal-opportunity offenders past and present that certainly could be mentioned here. One can argue certainly that there are certain year/certain models that were worse and improved. Jaguar and Cadillac in particular have a long distinguished reputation for junk, particularly Cadillac from the mid 1970's through the early 2000's , and Jaguar from 1960's through the 1970's and most of the nineties and into the 21st century with a few exceptions The series III, Jaguar XJ-6 (1979-1986) remains on of the most beautiful sedans inside and out. The 1972-1989 Mecedes "450 SL" actually 350SL/450SL/500SL/560SL..........IS A BEAUTIFUL AND COMFORTABLE AND FUN VEHICLE WITH A GREAT HARDTOP & SOFTOP.
There was a front subframe recall for "cracking" on most of these cars through about the 1980 model. Interestingly enough the less expensive 380SL which had the same subframe was not... The 380SL of the early eighties had a single row timing chain that history showed that could be very problematic and required replacement much earlier than the miles initially specified by the factory........lots of engines self destructed........finally in about the 1984 or 1985 380 SL Mercedes saw to include a double row timing chain on 1984-1985 on models.
I would not recommend to anyone to even consider a 1972-1989 SL without a thorough understanding of them because the engine-transmission can be a minefield of a moneypit even with the best maintained one owner cars. The reason is these cars don't like to sit from lack of use, and conversely, once they reach a certain mileage and age, they need quite a bit of internal engine work that will easily be double or tripple their market value in excellent condition.
They were and are good cars up until a certain point. Beyond that the only way to cost effectively and reliably keep on roadworthy is to take the full frugal redneck approach and to swap a 302 v8 and C4 or AOD, -or- 350 v8 and Th350..........................................super simple and you can have a new rebuilt engine and completely rebuilt automatic trans ----either the FORD or CHEVY variety as mentioned for very little cash outlay........
You'll certainly be fine with 1974, 1973, and 1972 SL because you won't have any emissions etc,,,,,and depending on how far back your state goes with emissions etc you might be okay with any later one too. I AM NOT SAYING THAT THE FORD or CHEVY pushrod v-8 engines are BETTER THAN THE MUCH MORE TECHNICALLY ADVANCED Mercedes v-8, but certainly the FORD v-8 is proven much more reliable, much more durable and capable of much more power and much more fuel economy than the Mercedes v-8 seen in those SL models. The FORD v-8 is also lighter in overall weight at approx 465 pounds than the Mercedes v-8. The Chevrolet smallblock v-8 at about 550 pounds overall is slightly lighter in weight than the Mercedes v-8. The Chevrolet v-8 is proven more reliable and much more durable and also capable of far more power output than the Mercedes v-8 seen in those SL models. Certainly, both the C4 automatic and the Th350 automatic are bulletproof and among the lowest cost of any transmission to acquire and have fully rebuilt. The same is true for the old carburetted 302 Ford v-8 and the old carburetted 350 Chevrolet v-8.
Both powertrains easily fit in the engine bay and transmission tunnel with room to spare. It is incredibly simple. Bingo, you then make certain to run the 1976 and later factory FORD DURASPARK distributor-electronic ignition on the Ford v-8 , and the mid seventies and later factory GM AC-DELCO HEI distributor-electronic ignition on the Chevrolet V-8..................
..........True, it would lessen the marketvalue compared to the best condition roadworthy original but it would likely exceed the marketvalue of nearly all of them in average condition & roadworthy today as the factory made them. This could change. Currently the 1972-1989 SL models have relatively low market values. The pagoda style 1963 - 1971 SL models have had relatively huge market values for the past 30 years or so but that was not always the case until well into the nineties.
The greater number of 1972-1989 models produced largely has something to do with it because there were so many made and this 1972-1989 was more civilized and creature comfort cruiser and less of a nimble lightweight sporting roadster as the 1963-1971 model was,
The message of this is that you can still have fun on a low budget and still be "stylin" even if the drivetrain does not have the exclusive cache of the folks who favor pure breeds over mongrels that the riff-raff low rent crowd can attain.
---------------It is all about having fun! Do you really give a damn what some Jack Ash ole thinks about the pedigree or origin of the bicycle that you enjoy riding?
Ride On!
Remember: ----You Can't Please Everyone, So You Gotta Please Yourself, (a line from Rick Nelson's 1972 smash hit song called GARDEN PARTY).
Not everyone needs to go fast or have the latest-greatest technology!
I think many of you have set forth some comparative analogies that are way off the mark and totally unrealistic.
For example, generally a Motown product like any automobile from General Motors or FORD is a POS by the 160,000 mile mark or 12 years of age, whichever comes first. Generally, this is not the case with TOYOTA-LEXUS-SCION brands, HONDA-ACURA, KIA-HYUNDAI, NISSAN, MAZDA, and SUBARU.
Current Cadillac(GM) and Mercedes products and Jaguar products (both from the improved Ford era of nineties and 2000's and todays TATA motors ownership) were & are POS by the 130,000 mile mark or ten year mark because the maintenance-operating costs of said prestige luxury cars will far exceed (about six times) what the maintenance-operating costs of say a ten year old Honda Accord or ten year old Kia Optima, or ten year old Toyota Camry, or ten year old Mazda 6 or even a ten year old Nissan Altima------------------------the other thing is that the ten year old Accords/Optimas/Camry/mazda6/Altima generally have a greater used car market value than the ten year old MERCEDES, JAGUARS & CADILLACS that may have sold new for more than three times the price of those more humble but bulletproof Asian sedans.
The depreciation curve is huge and historically those three prestige marques have shown consistantly to be a costly hunk of junk once you reach a certain mileage and relatively young age. Some aren't as pitiful as they once were, but you still can bet on them to likely be a money pit and far less reliable than certain humble but bulletproof Asian sedans.
I'm not saying that expensive-prestige marque bicycles become costly problem children with age as prestige marque automobiles do...........because the bicycles do not!
Bicycles are relatively simple, even if they are state of the art with the latest technology and components...........................there just is not the complexity of an automobile...........and unless the state of the art bicycle's frame is damaged severely due to accident, individual components can be changed as necessary due to wear or age or the rider-owner's desire for something more suitable in terms of gear ratio or number of gears, or the close ratio relationship from gear to gear...etc....
Due to the complexity of automobiles, it becomes extremely labor intensive to repair and replace certain components on some vehicles..... The cost to rebuild an engine in something such as a Mercedes, Jaguar, and current Cadillac sedan could easily reach $20,000 , no matter if you bypass the dealer and choose an indepent repair specialist. The cost to rebuild an engine in those Asian marque cars mentioned will also easily exceed $10,000 but the mechanical engineering design and engineering execution and the build quality is far superior thus allowing those Asian marque sedans to generally rack up almost twice as many miles than those three prestige marques above, before the vehicle needs serious repairs.
I don't mean to necessarily pick on Mercedes, Jaguar, or Cadillac because there have been many equal-opportunity offenders past and present that certainly could be mentioned here. One can argue certainly that there are certain year/certain models that were worse and improved. Jaguar and Cadillac in particular have a long distinguished reputation for junk, particularly Cadillac from the mid 1970's through the early 2000's , and Jaguar from 1960's through the 1970's and most of the nineties and into the 21st century with a few exceptions The series III, Jaguar XJ-6 (1979-1986) remains on of the most beautiful sedans inside and out. The 1972-1989 Mecedes "450 SL" actually 350SL/450SL/500SL/560SL..........IS A BEAUTIFUL AND COMFORTABLE AND FUN VEHICLE WITH A GREAT HARDTOP & SOFTOP.
There was a front subframe recall for "cracking" on most of these cars through about the 1980 model. Interestingly enough the less expensive 380SL which had the same subframe was not... The 380SL of the early eighties had a single row timing chain that history showed that could be very problematic and required replacement much earlier than the miles initially specified by the factory........lots of engines self destructed........finally in about the 1984 or 1985 380 SL Mercedes saw to include a double row timing chain on 1984-1985 on models.
I would not recommend to anyone to even consider a 1972-1989 SL without a thorough understanding of them because the engine-transmission can be a minefield of a moneypit even with the best maintained one owner cars. The reason is these cars don't like to sit from lack of use, and conversely, once they reach a certain mileage and age, they need quite a bit of internal engine work that will easily be double or tripple their market value in excellent condition.
They were and are good cars up until a certain point. Beyond that the only way to cost effectively and reliably keep on roadworthy is to take the full frugal redneck approach and to swap a 302 v8 and C4 or AOD, -or- 350 v8 and Th350..........................................super simple and you can have a new rebuilt engine and completely rebuilt automatic trans ----either the FORD or CHEVY variety as mentioned for very little cash outlay........
You'll certainly be fine with 1974, 1973, and 1972 SL because you won't have any emissions etc,,,,,and depending on how far back your state goes with emissions etc you might be okay with any later one too. I AM NOT SAYING THAT THE FORD or CHEVY pushrod v-8 engines are BETTER THAN THE MUCH MORE TECHNICALLY ADVANCED Mercedes v-8, but certainly the FORD v-8 is proven much more reliable, much more durable and capable of much more power and much more fuel economy than the Mercedes v-8 seen in those SL models. The FORD v-8 is also lighter in overall weight at approx 465 pounds than the Mercedes v-8. The Chevrolet smallblock v-8 at about 550 pounds overall is slightly lighter in weight than the Mercedes v-8. The Chevrolet v-8 is proven more reliable and much more durable and also capable of far more power output than the Mercedes v-8 seen in those SL models. Certainly, both the C4 automatic and the Th350 automatic are bulletproof and among the lowest cost of any transmission to acquire and have fully rebuilt. The same is true for the old carburetted 302 Ford v-8 and the old carburetted 350 Chevrolet v-8.
Both powertrains easily fit in the engine bay and transmission tunnel with room to spare. It is incredibly simple. Bingo, you then make certain to run the 1976 and later factory FORD DURASPARK distributor-electronic ignition on the Ford v-8 , and the mid seventies and later factory GM AC-DELCO HEI distributor-electronic ignition on the Chevrolet V-8..................
..........True, it would lessen the marketvalue compared to the best condition roadworthy original but it would likely exceed the marketvalue of nearly all of them in average condition & roadworthy today as the factory made them. This could change. Currently the 1972-1989 SL models have relatively low market values. The pagoda style 1963 - 1971 SL models have had relatively huge market values for the past 30 years or so but that was not always the case until well into the nineties.
The greater number of 1972-1989 models produced largely has something to do with it because there were so many made and this 1972-1989 was more civilized and creature comfort cruiser and less of a nimble lightweight sporting roadster as the 1963-1971 model was,
The message of this is that you can still have fun on a low budget and still be "stylin" even if the drivetrain does not have the exclusive cache of the folks who favor pure breeds over mongrels that the riff-raff low rent crowd can attain.
---------------It is all about having fun! Do you really give a damn what some Jack Ash ole thinks about the pedigree or origin of the bicycle that you enjoy riding?
Ride On!
Remember: ----You Can't Please Everyone, So You Gotta Please Yourself, (a line from Rick Nelson's 1972 smash hit song called GARDEN PARTY).
05-18-21, 05:18 AM
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6958 Post(s)
Liked 10,959 Times
in
4,686 Posts
I’m still waiting to hear about the $1500 Surly and the $3000 road bike that LifeNovice1 has owned.
05-18-21, 05:26 AM
#57
Zip tie Karen
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fair Oaks Ranch, TX
Posts: 7,004
Bikes: '13 Motobecane Fantom29 HT, '16 Motobecane Turino Pro Disc, '18 Velobuild VB-R-022, '21 Tsunami SNM-100
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1465 Post(s)
Liked 1,542 Times
in
806 Posts
A propos to this thread, my wife returned from a luncheon at the Tyson's Galleria mall yesterday. She said that there was a substantial line of people outside the Louis Vuitton store to purchase this season's newly introduced handbag for $1000. The OP would have been apoplectic, when one can carry one's personal items in a grocery bag.
Likes For Phil_gretz:
05-18-21, 05:37 AM
#58
Expired Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,526
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3661 Post(s)
Liked 5,408 Times
in
2,747 Posts
There is nothing necessarily wrong with a cheap inexpensive bicycle.
Not everyone needs to go fast or have the latest-greatest technology!
I think many of you have set forth some comparative analogies that are way off the mark and totally unrealistic.
For example, generally a Motown product like any automobile from General Motors or FORD is a POS by the 160,000 mile mark or 12 years of age, whichever comes first. Generally, this is not the case with TOYOTA-LEXUS-SCION brands, HONDA-ACURA, KIA-HYUNDAI, NISSAN, MAZDA, and SUBARU.
Current Cadillac(GM) and Mercedes products and Jaguar products (both from the improved Ford era of nineties and 2000's and todays TATA motors ownership) were & are POS by the 130,000 mile mark or ten year mark because the maintenance-operating costs of said prestige luxury cars will far exceed (about six times) what the maintenance-operating costs of say a ten year old Honda Accord or ten year old Kia Optima, or ten year old Toyota Camry, or ten year old Mazda 6 or even a ten year old Nissan Altima------------------------the other thing is that the ten year old Accords/Optimas/Camry/mazda6/Altima generally have a greater used car market value than the ten year old MERCEDES, JAGUARS & CADILLACS that may have sold new for more than three times the price of those more humble but bulletproof Asian sedans.
The depreciation curve is huge and historically those three prestige marques have shown consistantly to be a costly hunk of junk once you reach a certain mileage and relatively young age. Some aren't as pitiful as they once were, but you still can bet on them to likely be a money pit and far less reliable than certain humble but bulletproof Asian sedans.
I'm not saying that expensive-prestige marque bicycles become costly problem children with age as prestige marque automobiles do...........because the bicycles do not!
Bicycles are relatively simple, even if they are state of the art with the latest technology and components...........................there just is not the complexity of an automobile...........and unless the state of the art bicycle's frame is damaged severely due to accident, individual components can be changed as necessary due to wear or age or the rider-owner's desire for something more suitable in terms of gear ratio or number of gears, or the close ratio relationship from gear to gear...etc....
Due to the complexity of automobiles, it becomes extremely labor intensive to repair and replace certain components on some vehicles..... The cost to rebuild an engine in something such as a Mercedes, Jaguar, and current Cadillac sedan could easily reach $20,000 , no matter if you bypass the dealer and choose an indepent repair specialist. The cost to rebuild an engine in those Asian marque cars mentioned will also easily exceed $10,000 but the mechanical engineering design and engineering execution and the build quality is far superior thus allowing those Asian marque sedans to generally rack up almost twice as many miles than those three prestige marques above, before the vehicle needs serious repairs.
I don't mean to necessarily pick on Mercedes, Jaguar, or Cadillac because there have been many equal-opportunity offenders past and present that certainly could be mentioned here. One can argue certainly that there are certain year/certain models that were worse and improved. Jaguar and Cadillac in particular have a long distinguished reputation for junk, particularly Cadillac from the mid 1970's through the early 2000's , and Jaguar from 1960's through the 1970's and most of the nineties and into the 21st century with a few exceptions The series III, Jaguar XJ-6 (1979-1986) remains on of the most beautiful sedans inside and out. The 1972-1989 Mecedes "450 SL" actually 350SL/450SL/500SL/560SL..........IS A BEAUTIFUL AND COMFORTABLE AND FUN VEHICLE WITH A GREAT HARDTOP & SOFTOP.
There was a front subframe recall for "cracking" on most of these cars through about the 1980 model. Interestingly enough the less expensive 380SL which had the same subframe was not... The 380SL of the early eighties had a single row timing chain that history showed that could be very problematic and required replacement much earlier than the miles initially specified by the factory........lots of engines self destructed........finally in about the 1984 or 1985 380 SL Mercedes saw to include a double row timing chain on 1984-1985 on models.
I would not recommend to anyone to even consider a 1972-1989 SL without a thorough understanding of them because the engine-transmission can be a minefield of a moneypit even with the best maintained one owner cars. The reason is these cars don't like to sit from lack of use, and conversely, once they reach a certain mileage and age, they need quite a bit of internal engine work that will easily be double or tripple their market value in excellent condition.
They were and are good cars up until a certain point. Beyond that the only way to cost effectively and reliably keep on roadworthy is to take the full frugal redneck approach and to swap a 302 v8 and C4 or AOD, -or- 350 v8 and Th350..........................................super simple and you can have a new rebuilt engine and completely rebuilt automatic trans ----either the FORD or CHEVY variety as mentioned for very little cash outlay........
You'll certainly be fine with 1974, 1973, and 1972 SL because you won't have any emissions etc,,,,,and depending on how far back your state goes with emissions etc you might be okay with any later one too. I AM NOT SAYING THAT THE FORD or CHEVY pushrod v-8 engines are BETTER THAN THE MUCH MORE TECHNICALLY ADVANCED Mercedes v-8, but certainly the FORD v-8 is proven much more reliable, much more durable and capable of much more power and much more fuel economy than the Mercedes v-8 seen in those SL models. The FORD v-8 is also lighter in overall weight at approx 465 pounds than the Mercedes v-8. The Chevrolet smallblock v-8 at about 550 pounds overall is slightly lighter in weight than the Mercedes v-8. The Chevrolet v-8 is proven more reliable and much more durable and also capable of far more power output than the Mercedes v-8 seen in those SL models. Certainly, both the C4 automatic and the Th350 automatic are bulletproof and among the lowest cost of any transmission to acquire and have fully rebuilt. The same is true for the old carburetted 302 Ford v-8 and the old carburetted 350 Chevrolet v-8.
Both powertrains easily fit in the engine bay and transmission tunnel with room to spare. It is incredibly simple. Bingo, you then make certain to run the 1976 and later factory FORD DURASPARK distributor-electronic ignition on the Ford v-8 , and the mid seventies and later factory GM AC-DELCO HEI distributor-electronic ignition on the Chevrolet V-8..................
..........True, it would lessen the marketvalue compared to the best condition roadworthy original but it would likely exceed the marketvalue of nearly all of them in average condition & roadworthy today as the factory made them. This could change. Currently the 1972-1989 SL models have relatively low market values. The pagoda style 1963 - 1971 SL models have had relatively huge market values for the past 30 years or so but that was not always the case until well into the nineties.
The greater number of 1972-1989 models produced largely has something to do with it because there were so many made and this 1972-1989 was more civilized and creature comfort cruiser and less of a nimble lightweight sporting roadster as the 1963-1971 model was,
The message of this is that you can still have fun on a low budget and still be "stylin" even if the drivetrain does not have the exclusive cache of the folks who favor pure breeds over mongrels that the riff-raff low rent crowd can attain.
---------------It is all about having fun! Do you really give a damn what some Jack Ash ole thinks about the pedigree or origin of the bicycle that you enjoy riding?
Ride On!
Remember: ----You Can't Please Everyone, So You Gotta Please Yourself, (a line from Rick Nelson's 1972 smash hit song called GARDEN PARTY).
Not everyone needs to go fast or have the latest-greatest technology!
I think many of you have set forth some comparative analogies that are way off the mark and totally unrealistic.
For example, generally a Motown product like any automobile from General Motors or FORD is a POS by the 160,000 mile mark or 12 years of age, whichever comes first. Generally, this is not the case with TOYOTA-LEXUS-SCION brands, HONDA-ACURA, KIA-HYUNDAI, NISSAN, MAZDA, and SUBARU.
Current Cadillac(GM) and Mercedes products and Jaguar products (both from the improved Ford era of nineties and 2000's and todays TATA motors ownership) were & are POS by the 130,000 mile mark or ten year mark because the maintenance-operating costs of said prestige luxury cars will far exceed (about six times) what the maintenance-operating costs of say a ten year old Honda Accord or ten year old Kia Optima, or ten year old Toyota Camry, or ten year old Mazda 6 or even a ten year old Nissan Altima------------------------the other thing is that the ten year old Accords/Optimas/Camry/mazda6/Altima generally have a greater used car market value than the ten year old MERCEDES, JAGUARS & CADILLACS that may have sold new for more than three times the price of those more humble but bulletproof Asian sedans.
The depreciation curve is huge and historically those three prestige marques have shown consistantly to be a costly hunk of junk once you reach a certain mileage and relatively young age. Some aren't as pitiful as they once were, but you still can bet on them to likely be a money pit and far less reliable than certain humble but bulletproof Asian sedans.
I'm not saying that expensive-prestige marque bicycles become costly problem children with age as prestige marque automobiles do...........because the bicycles do not!
Bicycles are relatively simple, even if they are state of the art with the latest technology and components...........................there just is not the complexity of an automobile...........and unless the state of the art bicycle's frame is damaged severely due to accident, individual components can be changed as necessary due to wear or age or the rider-owner's desire for something more suitable in terms of gear ratio or number of gears, or the close ratio relationship from gear to gear...etc....
Due to the complexity of automobiles, it becomes extremely labor intensive to repair and replace certain components on some vehicles..... The cost to rebuild an engine in something such as a Mercedes, Jaguar, and current Cadillac sedan could easily reach $20,000 , no matter if you bypass the dealer and choose an indepent repair specialist. The cost to rebuild an engine in those Asian marque cars mentioned will also easily exceed $10,000 but the mechanical engineering design and engineering execution and the build quality is far superior thus allowing those Asian marque sedans to generally rack up almost twice as many miles than those three prestige marques above, before the vehicle needs serious repairs.
I don't mean to necessarily pick on Mercedes, Jaguar, or Cadillac because there have been many equal-opportunity offenders past and present that certainly could be mentioned here. One can argue certainly that there are certain year/certain models that were worse and improved. Jaguar and Cadillac in particular have a long distinguished reputation for junk, particularly Cadillac from the mid 1970's through the early 2000's , and Jaguar from 1960's through the 1970's and most of the nineties and into the 21st century with a few exceptions The series III, Jaguar XJ-6 (1979-1986) remains on of the most beautiful sedans inside and out. The 1972-1989 Mecedes "450 SL" actually 350SL/450SL/500SL/560SL..........IS A BEAUTIFUL AND COMFORTABLE AND FUN VEHICLE WITH A GREAT HARDTOP & SOFTOP.
There was a front subframe recall for "cracking" on most of these cars through about the 1980 model. Interestingly enough the less expensive 380SL which had the same subframe was not... The 380SL of the early eighties had a single row timing chain that history showed that could be very problematic and required replacement much earlier than the miles initially specified by the factory........lots of engines self destructed........finally in about the 1984 or 1985 380 SL Mercedes saw to include a double row timing chain on 1984-1985 on models.
I would not recommend to anyone to even consider a 1972-1989 SL without a thorough understanding of them because the engine-transmission can be a minefield of a moneypit even with the best maintained one owner cars. The reason is these cars don't like to sit from lack of use, and conversely, once they reach a certain mileage and age, they need quite a bit of internal engine work that will easily be double or tripple their market value in excellent condition.
They were and are good cars up until a certain point. Beyond that the only way to cost effectively and reliably keep on roadworthy is to take the full frugal redneck approach and to swap a 302 v8 and C4 or AOD, -or- 350 v8 and Th350..........................................super simple and you can have a new rebuilt engine and completely rebuilt automatic trans ----either the FORD or CHEVY variety as mentioned for very little cash outlay........
You'll certainly be fine with 1974, 1973, and 1972 SL because you won't have any emissions etc,,,,,and depending on how far back your state goes with emissions etc you might be okay with any later one too. I AM NOT SAYING THAT THE FORD or CHEVY pushrod v-8 engines are BETTER THAN THE MUCH MORE TECHNICALLY ADVANCED Mercedes v-8, but certainly the FORD v-8 is proven much more reliable, much more durable and capable of much more power and much more fuel economy than the Mercedes v-8 seen in those SL models. The FORD v-8 is also lighter in overall weight at approx 465 pounds than the Mercedes v-8. The Chevrolet smallblock v-8 at about 550 pounds overall is slightly lighter in weight than the Mercedes v-8. The Chevrolet v-8 is proven more reliable and much more durable and also capable of far more power output than the Mercedes v-8 seen in those SL models. Certainly, both the C4 automatic and the Th350 automatic are bulletproof and among the lowest cost of any transmission to acquire and have fully rebuilt. The same is true for the old carburetted 302 Ford v-8 and the old carburetted 350 Chevrolet v-8.
Both powertrains easily fit in the engine bay and transmission tunnel with room to spare. It is incredibly simple. Bingo, you then make certain to run the 1976 and later factory FORD DURASPARK distributor-electronic ignition on the Ford v-8 , and the mid seventies and later factory GM AC-DELCO HEI distributor-electronic ignition on the Chevrolet V-8..................
..........True, it would lessen the marketvalue compared to the best condition roadworthy original but it would likely exceed the marketvalue of nearly all of them in average condition & roadworthy today as the factory made them. This could change. Currently the 1972-1989 SL models have relatively low market values. The pagoda style 1963 - 1971 SL models have had relatively huge market values for the past 30 years or so but that was not always the case until well into the nineties.
The greater number of 1972-1989 models produced largely has something to do with it because there were so many made and this 1972-1989 was more civilized and creature comfort cruiser and less of a nimble lightweight sporting roadster as the 1963-1971 model was,
The message of this is that you can still have fun on a low budget and still be "stylin" even if the drivetrain does not have the exclusive cache of the folks who favor pure breeds over mongrels that the riff-raff low rent crowd can attain.
---------------It is all about having fun! Do you really give a damn what some Jack Ash ole thinks about the pedigree or origin of the bicycle that you enjoy riding?
Ride On!
Remember: ----You Can't Please Everyone, So You Gotta Please Yourself, (a line from Rick Nelson's 1972 smash hit song called GARDEN PARTY).
Likes For shelbyfv:
05-18-21, 05:59 AM
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6958 Post(s)
Liked 10,959 Times
in
4,686 Posts
05-18-21, 07:08 AM
#60
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1549 Post(s)
Liked 941 Times
in
504 Posts
I tried, but decided it wasn't worth my time once I got to the part that said my 6 year old Mercedes (which has NEVER been in the shop for anything) would be a POS at 130,000 miles or 4 more years, whichever came first. 
I'm pretty sure he knows a lot about old Schwinn's though.
I'm pretty sure he knows a lot about old Schwinn's though.
05-18-21, 08:41 AM
#61
Banned.
Thread Starter
I’m still waiting to hear about the $1500 Surly and the $3000 road bike that LifeNovice1 has owned.
I did own a carbon fiber Fuji road bike for a while. It was a nice bike but I am enjoying the $25 steel hybrid just as much. That must really bum you out, sad man.
05-18-21, 08:45 AM
#62
Banned.
Thread Starter
This wasn't exactly the "Welcome back to the world of cycling!" I was expecting. My! What an inclusive, non-judgmental not-at-all-snobby group. I'm so glad this is as close to some of you as I'll ever get.
05-18-21, 08:55 AM
#63
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1549 Post(s)
Liked 941 Times
in
504 Posts
Several posters have offered you sound advice regarding the issues you mentioned you had with your bike, and several have expressed support for low cost bikes. Maybe just go with that and make the most of it instead of attacking those you feel have slighted you.
I still would like to see a picture of the bike that makes you happy.
I still would like to see a picture of the bike that makes you happy.
05-18-21, 08:55 AM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6958 Post(s)
Liked 10,959 Times
in
4,686 Posts
I was objecting to your claims about your $25 bike compared to a $1500 Surly or a $3000 road bike -- it seemed like you had no experience with either of the latter. And it still seems like that is correct, unless that Fuji cost $3k, in which case I will take your claim (partly) seriously.
Likes For Koyote:
05-18-21, 09:06 AM
#65
Banned.
Thread Starter
I mentioned owning a road bike before. Guess you missed that. I'm not sure what "claims" I made and I don't really want to scroll through the thread. Tell you what, I officially retract the claims I made. There. All better?
05-18-21, 09:21 AM
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,232
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 15,525 Times
in
7,325 Posts
05-18-21, 09:39 AM
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Boston Roads
Posts: 975
Bikes: 2012 Canondale Synapse 105, 2017 REI Co-Op ADV 3.1
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 507 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times
in
133 Posts
Why are there so many threads about cheap/light bikes around here this spring? Are people salty that good bikes are still sold out in many places? On the other hand, I am somewhat amused by the irony of these posters feeling smug and bragging about not buying an expensive or light bike. Good for you! Best of luck with the squealing brakes!
05-18-21, 10:25 AM
#69
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,232
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 15,525 Times
in
7,325 Posts
He's trying to go the "victim" troll route. Displays obnoxiousness, gets called out and then tries to sound innocent by claiming "You guys are mean." Quite transparent.
05-18-21, 11:58 AM
#72
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Menomonee Falls, WI
Posts: 1,833
Bikes: 1984 Schwinn Supersport, 1988 Trek 400T, 1977 Trek TX900, 1982 Bianchi Champione del Mondo, 1978 Raleigh Supercourse, 1986 Trek 400 Elance, 1991 Waterford PDG OS Paramount, 1971 Schwinn Sports Tourer, 1985 Trek 670
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 604 Post(s)
Liked 1,063 Times
in
535 Posts
So reading this entire thread, impressive novel VintageSchwinn, it would seem to me, that the cheap entity rides the 25 dollar bike, whilst the frugal one rides the 15 year old, 1000 dollar bike.
Thanks to Indyfabz for the cheap vs frugal posting.
Guess I’m really frugal, my newest ride is a 30 year old, 2000 dollar bike
Unlike the OP, I will post a pic of mine.
Tim
Thanks to Indyfabz for the cheap vs frugal posting.
Guess I’m really frugal, my newest ride is a 30 year old, 2000 dollar bike
Unlike the OP, I will post a pic of mine.
Tim
Last edited by tkamd73; 05-18-21 at 07:49 PM.
Likes For tkamd73:
05-18-21, 12:11 PM
#73
Live not by lies.
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,306
Bikes: BigBox bikes.
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 860 Post(s)
Liked 784 Times
in
582 Posts
So reading this entire thread, impressive novel VintageSchwinn, it would seem to me, that the cheap entity rides the 25 dollar bike, whilst the frugal one rides the 15 year old, 1000 dollar bike.
Thanks to Indyfabz for the cheap vs frugal posting.
Guess I’m really frugal, my newest ride is a 30 year old 2000 dollar bike
Unlike the OP, I will post a pic of mine.
Tim
Thanks to Indyfabz for the cheap vs frugal posting.
Guess I’m really frugal, my newest ride is a 30 year old 2000 dollar bike
Unlike the OP, I will post a pic of mine.
Tim
It does look clean with the down tube shifters.
05-18-21, 12:12 PM
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6958 Post(s)
Liked 10,959 Times
in
4,686 Posts
So reading this entire thread, impressive novel VintageSchwinn, it would seem to me, that the cheap entity rides the 25 dollar bike, whilst the frugal one rides the 15 year old, 1000 dollar bike.
Thanks to Indyfabz for the cheap vs frugal posting.
Guess I’m really frugal, my newest ride is a 30 year old 2000 dollar bike
Unlike the OP, I will post a pic of mine.
Tim
Thanks to Indyfabz for the cheap vs frugal posting.
Guess I’m really frugal, my newest ride is a 30 year old 2000 dollar bike
Unlike the OP, I will post a pic of mine.
Tim
05-18-21, 02:32 PM
#75
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Menomonee Falls, WI
Posts: 1,833
Bikes: 1984 Schwinn Supersport, 1988 Trek 400T, 1977 Trek TX900, 1982 Bianchi Champione del Mondo, 1978 Raleigh Supercourse, 1986 Trek 400 Elance, 1991 Waterford PDG OS Paramount, 1971 Schwinn Sports Tourer, 1985 Trek 670
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 604 Post(s)
Liked 1,063 Times
in
535 Posts