Originally Posted by
SlimRider
In the end, the Walgooses will result in being the most economical commuters, due to the fact that their initial cost is so much cheaper than the others and if the commuter cyclist can handle a wrench, their savings will quadruple.
Well, that's just what I'm suggesting is false. It
seems like a Walgoose would be more economical, but
in reality what I'm suggesting is that it ends up being more expensive if you can afford another bike because no matter how well maintained the Walgoose is, it's always going to be a BSO (even if you sink a lot of money into hanging nice components on it).
Now, it's possible that someone who knows bikes can choose a neglected old gem and reasonably turn it into a great commuter (I'm thinking of Sixty Fiver's bikes here). I've also suggested in the past, and still believe, that newbies are best served by going cheap for a first bike with the understanding that they're paying to figure out what they really want. But once you buy that second bike, I really think it's more economical to "splurge" on the $1000 bike you really want (or whatever) rather than buying a $500 bike that you think will do the job nearly as well (since, let's face it, you're going to buy the more expensive bike eventually anyway, even if you do go through several $500 bikes before you admit that it's inevitable).