Originally Posted by
Happy Feet
What I would not do is go out and spend 100's or thousands on more exotic materials without knowing there would be a corresponding exponential increase in performance just because they are "fancier".
Your bias is showing, the cranks may be better, you have already ruled them out with the correct conclusion that as the price steepens the return in performance does not, but that is true of current default appropriate bikes like the Surly. My wife toured happily on a 40 dollar bike for one whole summer before I met her. In going up to 1K plus bikes nobody is having a better time. Nothing broke.
Having toured I know those things will not greatly increase my experience cycling within the reality that I currently tour in.
Tautology
So, yes, if I see a Ti bike suitable for touring at a good price for me I'd buy it all day long. Would I go out and buy it new at today's prices... not unless I win the lottery.
I don't doubt it, but that is sorta weird. There is this sense that there must be something wrong with people who recognize the value in certain gear, and pay up for it. But for others they would only pay up, if they won the lottery, a state that would for a moment make spending money seem like getting stuff for free. So value is revealed to some, only when there is no need to pay for it... Where do we end up when we assume that getting better is worthless? The flip side is people who hunger for the best stuff in the world, and get it, but end up with stuff that arguably is garbage and silly. It does seem to be hard to nail this one.