So I have “new” bike (subjectively) about 9 months. And I spent about 2000 € on it (bike, and some accessories - rack, bags…) and I can tell that it is lot of bike for not that much money.
So now when I look back I can’t see it as “expensive” bike, just as reasonably priced for its purpose. I use it every day to commute and as bikepacking/touring bike so now it has ~6000 km.
So how much are you willing to spend on bike?
Edit: So I read your comments and I probably need to clarify little bit.
- I use the bike for everything instead of car so even nicer more expensive bike for me is justifiable.
- I also think that the bike industry is bonkers right now about shiny new expensive things.
- For me there is few types of riders and all parties try to upsell them some shit, there aren’t any 500€ bike with flat bars and rigid fork where I am. All of the bikes at this price point have shitty suntour fork, bad saddle, useless pedals and shitty tires. From my perspective they are expensive on the parts that don’t matter and cheap out on stuff that matters. If someone sell something like that (flat bar gravel with quality parts where it matters) it would be gamechanger.
- I had to build my bike, nothing like that (full steel gravel/bikepacking/do it all bike) wasn’t on the market/second hand market. It add to the price a bit. And it was about month before the prices get down to reasonable levels after pandemic.
You’re wrong. A $2000 bike will be better in every way. If you only ride occasionally, the difference might not be immediately apparent. If you ride regularly, you’ll definitely know.
@Diplomjodler3 @retrospectology Diminishing returns apply to bikes, just as they apply to everything else: the $15k pro-spec Specialized SL8 isn’t more than ‘twice as good’ as the $6k SL8 at the bottom of the range. But $400 doesn’t buy you much bike these days, and a $2k bike will be measurably better in every single way. Depends on what you’re doing really. If you’re riding to the shops a couple of times a week, not worth spending extra. If you’re doing 1,000 miles a month, definitely is.
@Diplomjodler3 @retrospectology Everyone will have a tipping point, where they couldn’t justify spending more on a bike for the improvement you get. Mine’s around $4k: I couldn’t really justify spending more for better components, lighter weight, etc. Much as I’d like to. But I could easily justify a $2k bike. It’s a different number for everyone though.
I never said anything about really expensive bikes. Of course on those you get diminishing returns and they’re not worth it for most people. But if you cycle regularly for anything longer than a few kilometres, spending on a decent bike is very much worth it.
@Diplomjodler3 yeah, i absolutely agree. diminishing returns applies from dollar zero, though, and everyone’s tipping point is going to be different. someone saying they couldn’t justify spending $2k on a bike is entirely reasonable. Someone saying they don’t think it *can* be justified is wrong, though :-)
@wav3ydave @Diplomjodler3 experience in other domains makes me wonder if that’s necessarily true though. I’ve seen plenty of people but “better” computers, appliances, cars that were more expensive but not better for their purposes.
Like spending more on slightly lighter parts isn’t really an advantage if those lighter parts break more often than cheaper heavier parts. Or are harder to repair or replace in the field from non specialist ships. Or make your bike attract thieves…
@stark @Diplomjodler3 yeah, there’s an element of that: a $10k superbike isn’t as good for getting the shopping as a $500 city bike, if getting the shopping is all you’re doing. I’m more talking about performance bikes for enthusiast cyclists here, be they roadies/mtbers/gravel riders/whatever. I’ve reviewed a *lot* of bikes over the years, and for the most part you genuinely do get what you pay for, but with diminishing returns the more you spend.