REKMEYATA:
Someone else said now I will, this is all nonsense. First off, "immeasurable performance gain"? Really? Then why is it since 1963 to 2013 the Tour De France has only seen a 3 mph gain in average speed?

DUANE: Apparently, there's a comprehension problem here. My point was that, above $3,000 or so, spending even more money produces only or nearly immeasurable performance gains.

REKMEYATA: [snippy]
And the price gain upward in quality improves the pleasure found in riding? Are you really that moronic?

DUANE:
Well, I'm not "moronic" [sic] to the point that I insult other good men and women here.

I didn't say that a mere "price gain upward" improves enjoyment. I stated that, in the $500 - $3000 range, the quality components that DO increase riding enjoyment also tend to place the bicycle on the more expensive end of that range.

REKMEYATA:
You mean to tell me that a person riding a Walmart bike in a park isn't having any fun because they're not on a $15,000 bike?

DUANE:
Wow. Please find any quote from me in which I recommended that ANYONE purchase a $15,000 bike? You won't, because I never wrote it. Why are you repeatedly posting something that simply isn't true?

I DID, at one point, suggest $1,000 as an approximate starting point for a new commuter bike. Not $15,000. And a Walmart rider may well find enjoyment riding in his/her local park bike path, until he/she climbs a hill and/or until the bike breaks . . . which probably won't be long. At that point, the victim will probably put the bike back in the corner of their garage and try not to think about it. That's a sad ending that doesn't need to be.

REKMEYATA:
Besides, expensive CF bikes are racing bikes not intended for comfort like a touring bike is, so technically if a person want's to ride a bike for pleasure they need to look at a $1,600 or so touring bike not a $15,000 race bike. A bike only has to cost a person $50 and they could find pleasure in it.

DUANE:
You keep repeating this fantastical "$15,000" number, something I've never said. I stated $1,000 as a reasonable starting point for a quality commuter bike. You've suggested $1600. I won't argue, I just personally think you can get a quality commuter bike for a bit less than that. My new steel Surly Crosscheck, purchased for $1200, accepts bag frames, is reasonably lightweight and best of all has quality components. Not as expensive, lightweight or fun to ride, it is nevertheless a good, all-round commuter bike. You get what you pay for. Surly provides incredible value.

REKMEYATA:
4 years you been riding for, and that bike has done that for you? Tell you what puppy, when you've been riding consistently for 40 or more years as I have and others then come back here and say that, it might have more juice behind it then.

DUANE:
Why didn't you just yell at me to get off your lawn? :-) Honestly, I've been riding for, I don't know, around 35 years I guess. But I didn't discover top quality components or carbon frames until about 4 years ago, and it re-awakened my joy for cycling.

Yes, the heavier steel Surly provides a better commuter bike, but only because it can accept my lunch pail. The thing is, they BOTH run on quality components . . . They're both a pleasure to ride, but at a certain minimal cost . . . because YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR.

Sigh. :-)