Originally Posted by
smd4
I think it summarizes the thread well.
I'm sure you do.
If I compare top of the line 1989 carbon with Dura Ace with top of the line 2024 carbon with Dura Ace, that somehow is an invalid comparison. And on it goes. Every proposed comparison is met with arguments about why it’s invalid.
And many folks insist that today’s bikes aren’t any more expensive than bikes from previous eras.
No, I think my summarization is quite accurate indeed.
You seen to be a very binary thinker. Yes/no, black/white, valid/invalid. Instead, realize how the comparison is complicated by not only technological improvement, but even more by the fact that you're looking at the extreme end of the bell curve of bikes - a small segment of the market, not the market as a whole. You seem to want to make that comparison a stand-in for the entire market, which is questionable at best.