ThinLine

OK so here is my assesment on the whole situation of high priced road bikes.
I am in the market for a new road bike since I just got a new dream job.

There is a law of diminishing returns and a threshold of where that is apparent and evident. Meaning...if you spend $1000, $2000, etc. more, you do not necessarily get faster, better, etc. Does a $8500-10,000 bike ride 3-4 times better than a $3000-$4000 bike. I say NO, you get asthetics, colors, some bling and blah and a name to impress.

With this in mind, I have decided to buy a 08 BMC Road Racer SL01 with Chorus($3513.00). Other bikes fall within this realm also.....Specialized Tarmac Pro/Robioux, Orbea types, Cervelo, Trek Madones 5.2ish's, etc.
This bike (BMC) falls at that threshold level of anything more costly does not equate to dollars worth better.

I could be wrong, but I have done alot of research, although I would buy a steel IF for whatever it costs if price were no object.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING

RonH

Did you look at titanium = Litespeed?

ThinLine

I did. I know a friend who had one years ago and the downtube cracked near the bottom bracket.
Instant turn-off.
They do produce a fine frame though.

jrennie

While your selection is a fine choice I think you rational and conclusion has been tailored to your choice. The BMC is not very light and many bikes that would perform equal can be had for cheaper. I do agree a $8-10k bike is just for a drool factor but the BMC at $3500 also falls into this catagory. If we all just went for best value and not "dream bikes" then mike at BD would be very happy as he offers the best value/dollar.

JBS103

I don't know, I think a $3000 to $4000 dollar bike still has a huge amount of "asthetics, colors, bling" involved.

ThinLine

Correct, bmc is not the lightest. It just has that racy look.

BD does not have anything with campy groups, all Shimsram.

stephen1254

There certainly is a diminishing return as you spend more money. I think a good analogy would be with stereo equipment, where you get 98% of the performance for $2000, and the last 2% costs many thousands more. Having said that, I wouldn't listen to anything other than my Krell/Legacy rig, and I thoroughly enjoy my Trek SSLX, which is simply the smoothest, slickest bike I've ever ridden. In fact its so nice, I'm going out to do 70 miles this morning. Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

terry b

It's a completely personal ethic.

There are tons of people who think a $3500 bike is inexpensive and beneath them - lower quality group, components, wheels, etc. They would consider it a waste of their money and look at something far more dear. To them, $3500 in no way represents a threshold beyond which there is nothing better. And in reality, it doesn't. There are 1000s of lighter/stiffer/sexier bikes beyond that point (and below it too.)

And then there's my uncle Bob who told me he walked into Sears one day and saw a $799 mountain bike and was so offended that he turned around and walked right out.

Beyond a certain point ($1000? $2000?) they're all good. You buy what you can comfortably afford to spend. And by afford I mean the amount that meets your budget and your (completely) personal notion of value for your hard-earned dollar.

Retro Grouch 

Isn't that part of the fun of making a bike purchase? Everybody draws that cost/effectiveness line in a different place.

late

You are going at this backwards. You need to test ride a bunch of bikes. Really put the pedal down. A good way to check for BB flex is to accelerate up a hill.

Buy the one you love.

boyze

$3.5k should put one pretty high on the diminishing return curve unless one's return curve is heavily weighted with show factors

rufvelo

The $1500 Ultegra equipped aluminum bike is the turning point.

johnny99

The cheapest brand name road bike is around $700. Diminishing returns start from there. A $1400 bike is not 100% faster (or even 10% faster) than a $700 bike.

schnee

There, fixed that for you.

jpatkinson

I think THIS is the bike you should be getting: should cost you less than $3500, I would suspect!

I also think [for the non-pro], that anything above about $1500 isn't making any of the average Joes out there significantly faster [that would be MY magic price]. But, it really doesn't matter! If you have the money, and you want the bike, then buy it. I can afford any bike I could want, but can't fathom spending more than $1.5k on a bike -- I am out there riding for the experience and the workout.

damocles1

Anything over $3500-ish is nothing more than an exercise in vanity and wallet-power. Does my high-$$ Ridley make me faster than a $2500 Tarmac? Likely not, but you won't see 25 of my bike at every race/century/group ride.

I spent the money to build a dream bike and make me happy. If you have the cash, do what you want.

NaBlade

Sure. But it's not a fixed threshold. And since we're all different, the threshold is relative and dependent on the rider's strength (or lack of), among other things.

ThinLine

Your right, I base this on my view point of buying a bike and then saying;...damn..I should have gotten the ultegra group..or I should have spent more for the ES wheels...or......
This was a buyer satisfied ordeal with no regrets, remorse and total satisfaction without the Calvin Klein
attitude. The BMC RR SL01 did this for me.
Chorus is excellent stuff without one saying I should have gotten record.

But someone with, say 2200 or Sora may say...damn I should have gotten 105.

ad6mj

+1 there is truly where the diminishing return starts. That doesn't mean I don't want a nicer bike than a $700 one though.

mloywhite

The entire premise of this thread is that everybody decides what bike to buy based on price. Like several other posters, I bought what I wanted, spent what it took(and that I can afford), and love my bike. Am I at all faster on it than I would be on my old OCR? Not much if at all. Do I love my expensive bike and ride it more? Absolutely. I think bikes are a lot like golf clubs. Any good golfer could do pretty well with a decent-quality set of clubs that fit him, but a great set of clubs will not help an average/below average golfer at all. Same with bikes.

Coyote2

I'm not stating that your bike purchase falls in this category, but that's the sort of attitude that is literally ruining our world.

waterrockets 

Yeah, I think Tiagra and aluminum is the where the diminishing returns start to get steep. A guy I mentored into racing this year is on a 3-year old 19 lb carbon Giant with Tiagra, and he's destroying guys on $5000 bikes. A newer or more expensive bike isn't even on his radar.

djgonzo007

I agree with you I find it hard to beleive that anything above the $3K-$4K mark is worth the price. I had a hard time throwing down $3K for my Roubaix Pro. At 16.1 lbs fully built and a frame that is plenty stiff yet comfy I wouldn't pay more than that for any bike.

ChunkyB

Tons? Really? Man, I'm either really poor, or I have really low standards. My $600, full 105, 2004 Raleigh I just bought was such an investment, I'm almost afraid to ride it outside. To be fair, though, that's partly because I'm afraid the wheels are going to buckle under my weight. Especially after that Thanksgiving feast I just had.

ThinLine

Most peoples replies are in line with what I thought they would be. I do not buy bicycles (or any materialistic item) for a "keep up with the Jones" attitude or bragging; look what I have. My purchases mostly are to not buy the same thing again. Quality well made things do that for you.

I just purchased a set of German screwdrivers (Felo and Whia) for their metal quality, durability and ergonomics. I will pass these down to my kids kids their that good and I don't even have kids.

Was an interesting thread