Khutch what bike do you ride anyway ? I'm going to guess, some Kind of Trek..( Laugh), that was a joke with NO disrespect
meant..( more of a forum one ). You keep posting 900.00 dollars, as if that was some high end bike. And if you can tell the difference between a 300.00 dollar bike and a 900.00 one, ( cool ), I have a Schwinn Trailways, ( Target bike )..and a Cannondale
F4 that I will not waste your time or mine listing the specs. Here is a link..http://www.cannondale.com/usa/usaeng...ame-technology if you care to look, but I really can hardly notice No difference in the 2 bikes...The Schwinn is more
comfortable on long rides at this point. I do not mean to be talking down to you, but what is so special about your bike..?
There are many bikes sub 500.00 dollars that ride out the same...900.00 dollars would only get you nice forks on a racing
bike. ( SORRY )..but we are Hybrid riders not racers, is this your first bike or something ? You can be proud of it, and we will be
with you. But stop with the ( unless you spend ) attitude, PLEASE...Richard

No offence, but below $400 i tend to see bigger differences in quality.
I have never seen your bike in real life so I won't get into detail.
I think that if one is serious about biking and bikes at least once a week, a bike of $400 or more is in place.
For people doing a few short rides a year ... ANY bike will suffice.
You got yourself a nicer bike lately, didn't you? ;)

Adelaar I think that after 50 different videos, the fact that in less than 8 months old and it has almost 2500 miles on it,
only have had to replace like 5 tubes. I'm not going to waste my time posting the specs, since I ride almost
everyday, and have worked in a (REAL ) bike shop, I think you might understand that I know what I am talking about. There is ( NO ) magical price starting point or cut off to define a good bike. Why would I post
something ( LIKE ) , a bike that comes XC race ready, and the other one a Big Box Store bike, and can barely
tell any difference, If I were leaving this morning on a 50 mile commute, I would take the cheaper one, more
comfortable, and has took a beating from me on and off road and not showing any signs of wear. But if you
need to spend at least 400.00 dollars to believe you have a decent bike, by all means spend it. Richard

Ah yes, your bike is similar in spec to mine when it was new.
1) I would start with contact points. Saddle (which you have), pedals and handlebars.
a. After almost three and a half years of riding the bike, I've changed the saddle twice.
b. Clipless pedals and shoes: I switched to Forte Campus pedals - SPD one side, platform on the other.
c. Handlebar setup: With longer and more aggressive riding, I wanted more hand positions and less width on the bar:
-- First I cut the stock riser bar down an inch on each side, then installed bar ends.
-- Then I switched out the bar for a Forte ATX flat bar and had it cut down to 44cm (my size on a road bar).
-- Then I switched out the bar ends for a pair of Specialized Dirt Rodz bar ends. These ends curve vertically. I installed them with the logo upside down so that they curve downward. When I climb through the hills, they give me a grip that is very close to gripping the underside of a brake hood on a road bar.
2) After that, wheels. Lighter? More durable? More aero? I upgraded to a much more durable, teensy bit lighter and slightly more aero wheel. These spin up way faster.

That should get you going for 6 months. Enjoy!!!

Ok. You have a point.
Let's wait until it has 10.000 miles on it and mine has an equal amount ... then we'll compare the differences with pictures and everything :)

Deal, and I do like your bike... Richard ; )

My hybrid is a Fuji Absolute 1.0. My whole point is that it is completely ordinary, not something special. I keep posting $900 because that is what I paid for it, not for any other reason. This whole tangent started when qmsdc15 questioned why anyone would spend $2k for a bike. My utterly ordinary, middle of the road, Fuji cost $900. It should surprise no one that someone who wanted a bike that is in some sense special would spend $2k on it and the person who spent that much would not have an "ultimate" bicycle, nor would they if they spent $4k. So why would anyone feel embarrassed because they spent that much on a bike? So lately qmsdc15 seems to be denying that he holds the position that $2k is too much to spend on a bike or that anyone should be embarrassed by owning one. I guess. To be honest neither he nor I seem to understand each other at all. I certainly would not have predicted that he would react as he did to my previous post on this thread. He obviously did not follow the logic of anything that I said and I no longer feel like I know what he is trying to say at all either.

More recently I was trying to discuss with him the philosophical difference between a "want" or "choice" and a "need". That all seems to have gone completely over his head but since the two of us seem to be unable to communicate with each other I suppose that is not surprising. Two people who cannot understand each other cannot have a meaningful discussion, so there is no point in continuing this one. I honestly tried to have an intelligent and respectful discussion with him and it is quite obvious that I have failed utterly and spectacularly. Perhaps he was trying to do the same with the same result.

Ken

Ken, it was I and not qmsdc15 who claimed that 2K for a bike is too much.
My bike is pretty "special" ... it has components of the shimano classes XT, 105 and ultegra mixed together and it cost me about $950.
For amateur riders, there simply is no reason to go higher in price as the difference in riding will be next to nothing.

People are free to do what they want to do of course, so if an individual wants to pay $5500 for a full dura ace "eddy merckx" full carbon bike and then go drive with it on sundays at an average speed of 13mph ... then that is their good right.
But don't you feel that is a waste of a good bike?
Don't you perceive that as "decadent"?
I do.
I actually feel sorry for such a bike.

I don't know which one of you was first but you both said it. I merely pointed out that no one needs a bicycle at all and I did not realize that I was opening Pandora's box by doing so. In terms of your argument I actually agree that a $2k bike does not really give one $1k of benefit over a $1k bike while in my opinion a $1k bike does give reasonably close to $500 improvement over a $500 bike. It always depends on what you perceive as an improvement and on what value you place on a given improvement. Your arguments are largely based on quantifiable performance benefits and that is the type of argument I normally subscribe to as well. However purchase decisions are driven by many other factors for people who are not race or performance driven. Those factors cannot be quantified and in many cases cannot even be expressed adequately. So it it really impossible to say that the desire to own an expensive bicycle is misplaced. The people who buy expensive bicycles have their reasons and for them they are valid. I don't consider any price for a bicycle that is actually used and treasured by its owner to be decedent. To me decedent would be buying an uber-expensive bicycle which you never ride just to impress the people who see it on display in your living room. If you buy the bike and then proceed to wear it out on the roads and trails then it was not decedent to buy it, no matter how much you paid. If there is a $4k bike that you just love, will use, and can afford, then buy it. If there is a $200 bike you love but buying it would mean asking your family to go hungry for a couple of weeks, don't buy it, look for a $10 bike in a garage sale instead.

If Mr 13 MPH really uses his full-on race bike and enjoys it, if he feels God's pleasure when he rides it, then he has made an excellent choice. No bike could ask for a better owner than him. Perversely a professional racer would appreciate that bike's performance more and make better use of it but he would not love it as much, he would pitch it in the bin the instant something 10 grams lighter came along.

Ken

I never realised that "decedent" in english is written with an "e" instead of an "a" where it should be, because it is derived from the latin word "cadere".
In flemmish we write "decadent", probably because we are closer to the french and in french it is also "decadent".
Thanks for pointing that out ... gotta learn something every day :)

I merely pointed out that you do not know the needs of every person on this planet. Food clothing shelter sure but how do I acquire these things? In modern society, most of us exchange the products of our labor for these things. I don't know how to hunt for food or how to make my own clothes and shelter.

It is arrogant to think you know what I need to survive.

I never questioned why someone would buy a nice bike, I only said no one needs one. Later I recanted and admitted that a bicycle racer might need one. I find it extremely offensive that you continue to state that I don't think people should buy a $2000 bike when I said nothing of the sort.

The idea that anything you've written here contains logic I can't understand or goes "over my head" would be insulting if it wasn't so ludicrous. You continue to make yourself look foolish.

Somebody learning from the most vacuous post is encouraging. :)

This has been one of the most OFF topic debates I think that there has been...( And I am just as guilty ), the
horse is not dead ( YET ), lets just shoot it ! LOL Richard

They shoot horses, don't they?

YA ! when they get lame.... Richard : )

Unfortunately, now you have to unlearn it! In my haste I often rely on the spell checker to alert me to my mistakes. Unfortunately spell checkers can only identify words that they do not find in their dictionaries, they cannot tell that you have correctly spelled one word when you intended to use a different word. Decadent is spelled in English as you say it should be, decedent is also a valid English word however:

de·ce·dent

[dih-seed-nt]
–noun Law .
a deceased person.

Origin:
1590–1600; < L dēcēdent- (s. of dēcēdēns ) departing, withdrawing, prp. of dēcēdere. See decease, -ent


My bad, sorry.



Ken

Uh, only if you are not a member of the human species like I am. All humans need the same things to survive. It would be arrogant of me to tell you how to live your life but I have not done that, I have only questioned your assertion that you need a bicycle to survive. You could use another means to earn a living and I never suggested that you should (which would be arrogant), only that you could. You could pull that cart by hand if nothing else is available to you, which I doubt. I have never questioned that using a bicycle to pull the cart is better than pulling it by hand either. In fact I suggested to you that you might use an e-bike to pull the cart to even better effect but you did not exactly take that suggestion well. It is not arrogant to suggest a different bicycle to a BF member, it is one of the fundamental purposes of BF to do that.

I never said that you are incapable of understanding the logic of what I have written, only that it is obvious (and by your own admission too) that you are not understanding it. You and I do not "get" each other and apparently never will at the level required to hold this discussion. I make no value judgments at all when I say that, I am not putting you down when I say it. It is just an observation based on the fact that you have never responded to any of my arguments with something I can recognize as a thoughtful rebuttal and it is just as obvious to me that you are not recognizing my arguments as thoughtful rebuttals either. You once said to me something to the effect that we live in different worlds. At the time I thought that was just rhetoric but now I see that when it comes to the life of the mind we are in such different worlds that it is impossible for us to bridge the gap. Again, I am not saying one world is better or worse than the other, only that the gap between us is unbridgeable. I have tried to bridge it thoughtfully and respectfully several times now and I assume that you have done the same. So it is time to give up, this discussion is not and can not go anywhere. You don't understand me, I don't understand you. I apologize if I have caused you any grief (beyond simply disagreeing with you), it truly was not my intention to do so.

Ken

Consider it unlearned ;)

"You could pull that cart by hand if nothing else is available to you"

That's not a good idea. It would take most of the day just getting to and from work. I might have time to make a few deliveries... How do you suppose that would effect my earnings?

"You could use another means to earn a living"

Are you offering me a job? Did I mention I live in a country with a high rate of unemployment? Do you know what my job skills are? Do you know what jobs I am qualified to do?

"So it is time to give up, this discussion"

You can quit telling me what I need anytime. Instead you continue to write long ignorant posts. I'm sick of replying, but you will not get the last word when it comes to a discussion of my needs. You can quit saying we all need the same things. I agree that everyone needs the same things to live but not everybody is able to fill those needs for him or herself and some of those who can't do so don't survive.

I actually understand very well everything you are saying. I believe you understand what I'm saying too, but you're too proud to admit you're wrong.

You need to say all this to excuse the fact that you made a spelling mistake!? That explains a lot.