wphamilton

Seriously, I doubt it. Not trying to be snarky, but my honest blunt opinion is that the typical $700 bike is almost 100% as likely to be in line with a person's needs as the $3000 bike, including most people who race them.

It's a minority opinion I know, and unpopular with literally anyone who bought a $3000 bike because I'm implying that they overpaid for "what they need" (I'm not trying to say they overpaid), but if we're laying out honest opinions, there's mine.

johngwheeler

124Spider

Wow, now that's impressive, aggressive ignorance (or arrogance, if you prefer)!

Who are you to decide what another person's "needs" are? And it's just plain silly to pretend that one doesn't get more for paying more (assuming due diligence, of course)!

I have no problem with anyone being happy with a $700 bike; one can get a lot of bike for $700. But to denigrate those who want more is obnoxious.

Mark

DanBraden

Wow! The Seinfeld one I saw coming, but the second one REALLY captures the essence of Richard Jeni and Steve Martin.

Clever stuff!
/not Steve Martin and Jeni
//there was NOTHING clever about their stand-up...

ksryder

Good thing this forum doesn't have a lot of talk about Dutch earthworks...

Random shows that I watched as a youth that literally no one remembers:
Square One (educational program on PBS that was supposed to teach you math through humorous skits. The skits were pretty funny even though I hated math. They did a Dragnet spoof called Mathnet where Kate Monday and George Frankly solved crimes through math.)

The Steven Banks show. I'm pretty sure this was PBS's only attempt at an original sitcom. The guy sang a lot of funny songs. He played an immature man-child. Ahead of its time, really.

The Edge or Edge TV or something like that -- shortlived sketch comedy show on fox.

Grand -- I think this was on after Wings for a couple seasons? Satire of soap operas I believe. I think it had Bonnie Hunt in it.

Sister Kate -- all I remember is that Millie Vanilli had a guest appearance in one episode, before the scandal.

There are others, I'm sure. But I don't remember. Did I actually watch these? Who's to say?

Maelochs

I think wphamilton means most riders coud do allthe riding the wanted or needed on a $700 bike---needs in the sense that the bike will shift well enough, pedal well enough, stop well enough .... and that most riders rarely if ever get into the last few performance percentage points where another two percent performance would make a difference.

It's like people who own Ford Fiestas and never really drive to the limit who want Porsches ... they could go three times as fast as they do in the Fiesta, and they will never use more than ten percent of the performance of the Porsche. Do they Need a Porsche, when they don't even use the Fiesta?

I think wphamilton well understands the difference between needs and desires ... and all the people who prefer to be arrogant (and accuse him of arrogance) instead of making any effot to understand what he says ... well, that is revealing, isn't it.

124Spider

Wow, another one!

I fully understand what he said. If he meant something other than what he said, that's bad on him. If he meant what he said, that's also bad on him. To insinuate that "need," as in absolutely-have-to-have-or-die, is the only legitimate reason to buy something is, yes, arrogant.

Stratocaster

I get what you're saying - but I think it really gets down to how close your "needs" are to your "desires".
In other words, if you're in a hilly area and want to get up hills faster so that you can hang onto your riding group - I imagine a bike that's 7 lbs lighter with the appropriate gearing ($3000 bike) will be a much better option than a heavier bike with less appropriate gearing options ($700).
Sure, being a better cyclist can make up a lot (or all of that difference)...but then what's the point? You're already trying to be a better cyclist.

Having typed that...I'm not sure anyone really NEEDS a $3000 bike when a $2000 bike would likely get you very close to what you need for that example. So yeah, a $3000 bike is probably more of a "desire" than a "need".

Doctor Morbius

Yup. Perfectly summed up.

wphamilton

Actually it was the guy I responded to that decided he knew what another person's needs were. I'm the guy who said that was wrong.

And given the specifics mentioned ""performance", feel, characteristics" yes you can quantify those, even feel to some degree, particularly given a "particular pursuit" From where I sit, the arrogance and ignorance here is presuming that someone, particularly myself, is incapable of doing so.

wphamilton

7 pounds is seven pounds. That's quantifiable and that's what I'm talking about. Project that 7 pounds into 3% faster up that hard hill, that's also quantifiable. That 3% might be .3 mph up a really hard hill, also quantifiable. I submit that for almost everyone the 97% of that speed for the short distance fulfills their particular need in a riding group for instance, because the time difference isn't enough to get dropped. And honestly, 7 pounds is stretching the difference to the $3000 bike.

The gearing isn't necessarily any better for the climb on the $3000 bike. That's also something we can objectively quantify. You've typically got the same range, sometimes even more range, on the $700 bike, just with fewer increments, and it's the range that counts on the hill. Those smaller jumps may feel better in general, but again I submit that it's largely a matter of specificity of training, and most people's needs are fulfilled with 8 gears rather than 11.

There are lots of reasons to prefer the $3000 bike. I just don't agree that requiring better performance and needs for higher component quality are among them

Maelochs

I have a Fuji Sportif---ready to roll, racks and bottles, about 30 pounds. 50/34x11-32 gearing, about $800 on sale.

I have a couple Workswells .... both about 22 pounds with bottles and bags and lights and food and everything .... both probably worth $3000 if they had "Trek" or "Specialized" on the down tubes. Both have 50/34x11-28 gearing.

Not a huge difference. If I can make it up the hill on one, I can make it up the same hill on any of them. The one percent less effort or whatever, isn't noticed. I ride a few "hilly" loops ( I live in Flatahoma, so a four-percent hill half a mile long is considered a "big climb.") But i find my times both up the hills and through the whole loop are always comparable ... and depend more on how I feel on a particular day, than on which bike i was riding.

I also have a steel '84 Raleigh which just got a 50/34 to go with its 12-28 cassette. Same deal on the climbs, though it is about 28 all up. Basically, how well I slept the night before, what I had for lunch, and how many miles I have already ridden that week are the real factors in determining speed and ease on the hills. The bikes .... no quantifiable difference between them.

Sure ... if I bought a $700 bike with 53/39- and an 11/23 cassette ... yeah that would suck. In fact, I have a $500 Dawes with a 52/39 and a 12-25 cassette, and it has killed me on a couple climbs---not because of the price tag, and not because of the weight, but because of the gearing. 39x25 is significantly tougher to turn than 34x28 on a steep climb. But ... I could buy a $5000 bike with 53/39 and 11-23 gearing and even if it weight 20 pounds fully loaded, it would be really hard to do that same climb.

I could ride a $300 bike with 48/32 and a 12-36 cassette and it would climb better, likely, than the $5000 bike on those really tough climbs.

I am not opposed to spending more on bikes. But having spent more ... I can still enjoy my old 1983 Cannondale ST-500 which weighs like 33 pounds loaded, and has Alivio 48-38-28 gears with an 14-34 cluster/freewheel---not even a cassette and freehub. And it has Claris shifters, an Acera rear derailleur, and a Claris front derailleur. Probably easier to climb with than any bike I own---with 28x34 gearing i can haul groceries up a hill I couldn't climb at all in 34x28 on my light CF bikes.

Here is an interesting concept which no one has been willing to broach---All This Is Subjective.

"Better" is what you think is better. If you think a $3000 bike is always and automatically "better" than a $700 bike, then it is. If you think the bike which brings you more joy on a given ride is "better," then it is. If you think the most expensive bike you can fit in your budget, or the cheapest bike you can buy, is "better," then it is.

I have bikes (the Raleigh and the Cannondale) which together cost me $135 and I mostly built from part I took off other bikes---some EBay, much of it used. I have my Workswells, where the frame and wheels alone cost a grand or more per bike---and I got bargains.

In my opinion, the price tag is irrelevant. if all systems work, the bike is good. If something is broken, the bike is not good. I ride whatever I feel like riding on a given day, and somehow I always enjoy it.

But that is me and my point of view. I know that everyone else's mileage will vary.

livedarklions

It is possible to deliberately impart an absurd meaning on anything anyone says, and it's a cute rhetorical trick to do so. But that interpretation is completely your own creation, and very obviously not what he meant given the context.
You paraphrased him into a straw man, mazel tov. His meaning was quite clear, and you took the word "need" out of context, and put a completely irrelevant definition on it. Like most English words, "need" has multiple definitions, and the context of what the need is for is vital. "I need $12 to go to the movie" does not imply that if I don't get $12, I will die, does it?

tagaproject6

This thread delivers!

Maelochs

I love it when people at BF call each other on obvious crap--deliberate misinterpretation, etc. For one thing, it keeps me honest. i am willing to lie and cheat like a madman ... but not willing to be exposed. And it raises the whole level of discourse. people can say things they might otherwise not say, and others can Try to figure out what thy guy meant ... some call it "thinking,"----- I hear it is fun---never tried it myself.

Of course, anyone who disagrees with me is still wrong.

SharonS

I love your pun!

superpletch

a Chavette will certainly get you where you want to go, but I would rather get there in a Corvette......because I can.

rossiny

Chevy Chevette it will drive you happy!!!🎶 remember that commercial years ago ..hee
heehe

Maelochs

Ford Pinto: "It will light up your day!"

Danhedonia

Suggestions welcome, as that's my next target budget / combo.

Being a diletantte and old and out of shape as well, I will politely disagree that you must be riding at elite levels to sense the difference. Road feel, responsiveness, smoother shifting, are all improvements I felt when I moved from a $700 bike to just a $1,200 bike (Novara Trionfo, feel free to point and laugh). I have a friend who lets me ride his $2,500 bike, and geez, it's nice.

2pedals5

AT A WALMART? They don't sell that kind of price. I'm having hard time believing that.

Maelochs

But the 24 wheels and twelve frames part was alright with you?

livedarklions

If I had said "and it weighs 350 pounds", do you think he'd have gotten the joke?

Maelochs

"Twelve Walmart bikes would weigh more than that," he'd have protested.

CAT7RDR

If you like Ebay here is an example. What size are you?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/2015-Trek-E....c100010.m2109

Be patient and look at Performance Fuji selections amongst others on sale.

My brother recently won a bid on a 2017 Emonda SL-6 full Ultegra for $2,100. Beautiful bike! Only thing wrong a few light scratches touched up.

Pros and rec cyclists rolling in $ dump their top bikes on Ebay.