Paul Barnard

An odd resurrection to an old thread. There is unquestionably a point of diminishing returns relative to price. Go from a $300 bike to a $600 bike and you will feel a substantial difference. Go from a $600 bike to a $1200 bike, and again you will feel a substantial difference. You'll feel a difference going from a $1200 bike to a $2400 bike, but that difference begins to diminish. Then again from a $2400 bike to a $4800 bike. Sam got called a troll, but based on my experience he is right. Find a closeout bike in that $1200-$2500 range and you'll have a darn fine bike. That's how I got my Tarmac. A $3K bike for $2K. Ultimately though, you need only justify the expense to yourself.

mrodgers

$7k spent on a bike ridiculousness is entirely dependent on income of said person with the income, not the person stating the ridiculousness. Value is dependent on cost over income. If you can spend $7k on a bike, more power to ya. At 4% of my income, my $600 bike is probably more valuable to me than a $7k bike to someone who can afford that. I would never spend $7k on a bike even if I did have a home of my own and had income that didn't all go to someone else for her vacations.

The justification is simply, I want it, I can afford it, I bought it. My mother was curious and asked me. Told her my bike was $600 and that's a relatively inexpensive bike. She thought that was ridiculous.

Personally, I think threads like these are just the OP tossing it out there on the forum, "Hey look at me and how much I spent on a bike" self back patting. No one here asked how much he spent on a bike (I know, thread is old) so why the reason to mention twice the money value plus mention how much was spent on a previous bike and put a link to the bike it's self.

Duo

This is probably the best answer so far...why do we question the price of a bicycle which does us some good, and then think nothing of the vast truck loads of junk purchased that harms us or does nothing good?


Personally, i feel it best to buy quality used and bless others with the rest. My family has need of things and giving to the Lord would lay up treasures in heaven.

molten

You hated that price for a car?
That's after several recessions. You lucked out!!
"$10K" was a lot of money to pay for a car in the late 1960s.

molten

Start managing a 'used bike shop.'

molten

Until a cop stops to harass. Giving a reason for the stop; citation.
Bike citations can get very expensive.

molten

How many gears did the 'Montgomery Ward bicycle' have?

molten

What level of bike shops have you been working in?

Stucky

^Yes!

I'd look at that old Schwinn as something which has character, and as a challenge. Something to motivate me to pedal a little harder, and thus make me a better cyclist (And something I can blame when I realize that I am not very fast! )

When I had my Venge, it was like: "O-K, this is about as good a bike as I'll ever have....yet I am no faster, and the hills no easier, than on any other bike I've ever ridden".

All a bicycle is, is a couple of wheels and some cogs and a chain, held together by a frame. No matter what materials you make the parts out of, and no matter how much they cost....that's all any bike is. The magic is in how we ride them, and our own perceptions.

I'd find thaty old Schwinn more interesting than the Venge that I had. The Venge had all sorts of philosophy/research/development behind it, but other than being a few pounds lighter than the Schwinn, it couldn't of itself do anything that the Schwinn couldn't do. I guess maybe if I were the kind of person who buys into all the hype- "This here Venge is aerodynamically designed and tests in a wind tunnel blah blah blah....carbon fiber blah blah blah....internal cables blah..." my perception of the Venge may have been different- but I am a realist- and ultimately, the Venge did what any other bike does- what my $59 childhood Ross did; what various BSOs I've owned in times past did; what the Schwinn does: You pedal it, and it goes.

The Schwinn is more honest. It doesn't make any pretensions. It's likely been around for 40 years, and probably has not been treated gingerly all it's life; and will probably be around 40 years from now, as well. The steel and few extra pounds probably give it a ride/road feel that no bike of any price can match today. For the weight penalty, you get the solid feel in all the components of real metal; the peace of mind that the bike will not asplode or be ruined if you ride over a curb or pot-hole; and the freedom to just be able to ride, without having to worry about your bike. IMO, a bike should not be a delicate precision instrument...it should be a vehicle for the real world. It's like the difference between a light flimsy Toyota Corolla and a big old Cadillac- only in the cycling world, you pay a lot more for the Corolla.

My7 ex-Venge would look like a piece of plastic crap next to a shiny old Schwinn.

Doohickie

If you're going around telling people who don't ride how much you paid for your bike, it's going to come across as bragging. No amount of explanation will justify your purchase to people who think you're bragging.

Lupine

Can't believe I read all this.

Two guaranteed internet behaviors in these threads, and this one did not disappoint on either front- 1) without knowing anyone else's priorities & financial situation, telling each other how they should value and budget purchases, & 2)... car analogies!

mapeiboy

I don't see this as a bragging thread . $7k is not the most expensive bike on the market these days . I am looking at a Colnago C60 which costs $6k alone . Campagnolo Super record EPS $4k . I know lot of people here think its crazy to spend this kind of money on a bike but that is fine with me . The only person I have to justify to is my wife .

skye

That's a shallow opinion. My bike is my daily driver. I'm on that thing more than anything else. It needs to be durable, reliable, comfortable, capable of hauling loads, going fast going slow, going through snow...I could spend $25k plus insurance plus gas for a car that will last me half as long as a $7k bike. Or, I can be stupid, and pedal cheap crappy BSOs that suck to ride and last maybe a year. If you want to go for the latter, do it, but it sounds like the decision of a high-schooler.

wide45

You wanted the bike more than the money. Done.

rekmeyata

I knew when I wrote $250 amount there would be someone who would challenge it. I was referring to buying a NEW bike and not a used bike. My friend that gives me that argument is saying that buying a new Walmart bike is just as good as buying a new Lynskey for example.

twodownzero

Too bad it took 17 pages to have someone explain "marginal cost"

jefnvk

I've actually got a much more pragmatic reason: I bought the Peugeot, and found out I couldn't fit anything but skinny tires on it. I wanted to ride gravel/dirt/limestone trails comfortably, found the Schwinn that fit me one day, and bought it to do exactly that with the Paselas I had sitting around that I had bought for the Peugeot! Of course, I love the fact it does have that character and gets looks ranging from longing remembrance to wild bemusement, and while some people get their pleasure from having the best things their money can buy, as I said earlier I love seeing what I can make things that other people don't want do!

True, but neither of those bikes were exactly the top of the line bikes of their day. The Peugeot possibly more than the Schwinn, but neither were in the top half of their catalogs, or anywhere near to the OPs price point. It is a point I like to refute as often as possible, you don't need a top of the line bike to go out and enjoy yourself. When I got back into biking last spring, I almost said screw it and gave up, exactly because no LBS wanted to sell me a bike under four digits. Substitute any of the sub-$300 Bikes Direct downtube shifter bikes, and in all likelihood I have the same experience as I've had with my current bikes.

I'm certainly not arguing that a more expensive bike isn't better depending on the paritcular application, just that for my enjoyment, it is not necessary. I can't maximize the potential of the bikes I have, until I can do that buying something better is not worth spending my money on. FWIW, I have this argument with other hockey players (i.e., my brother) all the time, too, the limiting factor on my $15 wood stick is my abilities, not the materials of the stick, going out and spending seven times as much on a carbon stick is silly to me.

blue192

Guessing he would have to buy a cheaper bike in that case. And of course the price of bicycle would have to depend on what kind of beer and if it is Mexican or the nice Canadian BC bud weed. hehe

rekmeyata

You do have to remember that even middle of the line bikes, like the one you have and the Schwinn which back in those days was just above low end were built better and they lasted a very long time. Though with the Schwinn I would seriously get rid of those steel rims due to the safety issue in the rain, you can get aluminum rims for about $300 for the pair and if you look long enough I've seen them for as low as $150. Not only would the AL rims be safer when wet but you would lose a lot of rotational weight which is the most important weight to lose in regards to performance.

Jim from Boston

Well I’ll try to ‘splain. I previously posted to this thread,’Do you tell strangers how much your bike costs?”

jefnvk

Oh, they are atrocious in the rain, that charity ride was in a downpour. I've got a set of old alloy wheels I got off CL for $5 that'll go on it if they don't end up being used for another project. I'd love to have an unlimited bike budget, but I have many hobbies, bikes only get a slice of my spare cash.

The way I look at it, if someone thinks they'll never need a bike that costs more than $250, one of three things are relevant: 1) they aren't going to ride it, or any bike, with any frequency and spending more is silly, 2) they ride it and are happy, and if it is meeting their needs, why would you spend more to get something better, or 3) they ride it, hit a wall in its abilities, and then go buy something better that suits their needs.

Everyone is different in what they value. I still ride my mountain bike that I got for Christmas going on 20 years ago from Dicks Sporting Goods, I'd be surprised if that cost my parents $200 at the time. The frame is probably a bit small, it is far heavier than MTBs today, but it works and I'm happy on it, I've simply got no reason to go out and spend money to get something better at this point.

D1andonlyDman

I made the argument about the knee in the cost curve and diminishing marginal returns 10 pages back, about a year ago.

twodownzero

Diminishing marginal utility and marginal cost aren't quite the same same thing. In this instance, the relevant question isn't really whether the bike is worth $7k in a vacuum, but really whether the op can explain why it's worth over twice as much as a $3k bike. I've put down a few miles in my day and once bikes get past about the $3k mark, I struggle to find any additional benefits that would justify increased cost. It may just be that I don't know any better because I don't have the experience to appreciate features that a pro bike would have.

Stucky

I'm the same way. I don't want the latest-greatest "best money can buy"- I want things which are durable and of good quality, and which do what I want them to do, without being festooned with a lot of extra junk which I don't need. It's getting to the point where only old stuff fits my criteria.

Heck, my two tractors are 25 years old now (bought used, more recently) and I view them as "late model"
For a riding mower, I have a 1970 Cub Cadet.
My vehicles are 1998 & 1999.
I have an easy chair which I found in the garbage (Still had the tags on it- sitting next to a dumpster- Looks like someone had cleaned-out their deceased relative's apartment...)

Back in the 90's I had a car that I paid $125 for, and drove for 2 years! Not because I couldn't afford more...but because I liked it; it did what I needed it to do; and like yourself, I took pleasure in knowing that I could get good use out of something that someone else was throwing away, and it was fun seeing how long I could keep it going without spending any money on it. Heck, I wish I still had that '79 LeSabre!


Sadly, the area where I live now, people tend to buy crap- and even if they have something good, you can bet they'll use it fully up before selling it or otherwise getting rid of it- so it's slim pickings now, and for the first time in my life, I'm being forced to buy a lot of things brand-new- and quite frankly, I enjoyed things more when I was able to get most things used, or from a scrap pile or even from a dumpster.

HAhaha! This just made me think: I used to know this old man (Ironically, he was the person who taught me to ride a bike when I was a kid!) who used to go gem-picking at a scrap-metal place. He'd refer to the scrap place as his "warehouse"- If you needed a part for a lawn-mower, or a tool or just about anything made of metal, he'd say "Let me see if I can come across something at my warehouse" -I still have some ancient Milwaukee power tools he resuscitated from that place! And back when he was still alive, if you needed a lawn-mower, ...just let him know- He'd find some ancient relic at "the warehouse"- which he'd resuscitate, usually with only minor work- and you'd have a sturdy 20 year old mower- and quite frankly, I'd enjoy mowing with such a mower 100 times more than with some plasticky fancy new one. The guy was like a white Fred Sanford- in fact, his name was even Fred! Having known the guy since I was about 5 years old, you might say that I was brought up around the re-use it/recycle mentality- and it completely suits me. I feel like a tool when I'm forced to bnuy something new, because it seems that I'm paying a high price for something that isn't half as good as something from "the warehouse" .

With the old stuff, it's fun to see how long you can keep it going. It's near the end of it's life, but with a little knowledge and care, if it was made well to begin with (as many old things were) you might well get another 10 or 15 years out of it. With new stuff, you expect it to last a long time bec ause it's brand new; cost good money; has a good reputation; and you're the only owner, so it's never abused.....and then you're disappointed when it craps-out sooner than something from "the warehouse" (purchased for the price of scrap metal according to what it weighs...) would have!

D1andonlyDman

That's actually the argument I made 10 pages ago last year. Diminishing marginal utility relative to incremental cost increases. You characterized the earlier post as being an explanation of marginal cost - which isn't exactly what it was.