There's arguments to be made for and against riders having similar "classed" equipment, but I'll play devil's advocate and offer why they should be equal or close to equal.

NASCAR popularity in the U.S. has a foundation in this simple fact: the cars are something people identify with. Ford, Chevy, Dodge. The piss on your car stickers you see in the windows. People are passionate about the cars as much as they are the races and drivers. Open wheel racing does not enjoy this zealous following in the U.S. at least, because, you won't find a car at a dealership that derives some sort of improvement or coolness from a Penske open wheel car. Right?

I think at present, it's the same in pro cycling. Hitchy, me, Maj. Taylor, or anyone else can with a little saving go and get the same bike Ivan Basso rides. Or just about another other pro rider's steed. And that is a huge value to the manufacturers and to pro cycling in my opinion. That creates brand loyalty and fanaticism, the kind that has made NASCAR wildly popular.

As soon as the weight limit gets dropped, prices for those bikes are going to skyrocket.

Who here wouldn't love a Pinarello Dogma? Everyone would. But as soon as the brain cells kick in, and you realize you're on a $6000+ island with no help in sight should something fail, you aren't going to buy that rig. If you even had the dough in the first place.

And I think that'd stratify and kill off a growing interest in the sport, at least here in the States. Look at the success Armstrong, USPS, and Trek have enjoyed the last few years. If Lance rode a super-advanced $10k Trek, would we still see as many Treks on the road?

Excellent points, Hitchy, about adding sinkers and chains and how that does not improve saftety though.