How much for a decent bike?

[pwa]

If i were in the market for a very expensive bike right now, and didn't want to be locked into a cycle of re-buying groupsets every few years, I would avoid anything that might not have spares available five years down the line. And that probably means electronic shifting. No matter how good it might be, the idea of making a trip to the tip with top end cycle components makes me feel sick. If something is nice today, I want it to remain nice in years to come. This stuff is too dear to be regarded as disposable.

[amediasatex]

I try and do it myself and that's not successful I go straight to YouTube, where a visual guide is 100x more effective...

I think both have their place. For visual learners youtube is an excellent resource for learning how to do some things, providing someone has produced a video covering your needs. There's no denying that videos and pictures can really help you get to grips with some bits that don't necessarily make sense in text only descriptions.

There is still a place for more in-depth and explorative near-real time discussion that you can pretty much only get from forum threads, the only issue being sometimes you have to spend a long time searching or wading through to get the info you need.
Forums and static websites are also great for quick 'look it up' type things that videos don't cater well for, not to mention I cna read faster than I can watch a video, and video content is not searchable like text.

As always, horses for courses and diversity is a good thing.

[iandusud]

Sure, consumerism may be the way of the world we live in, but is that really desirable? Quite apart from the way that the overconsumption it encourages is literally wrecking the planet, is not an informed skepticism a far healthier attitude for people to hold?

I'm not trying to take sides in this debate but the above statement is spot on.

I think most of us, myself included, like to indulge our passions, and in the case of most of us that includes cycling, but we have a responsibility to the planet and the rest of the human race to stop this runaway train of constantly throwing stuff away and replacing it. Of course that will require a different economic model to the existing one, but it would be a good thing for us all.

Brucey said: "If you really want to go faster, concentrate your effort on training and eating properly; I see few bike riders that couldn't afford to get a bit fitter and to lose a few lbs; these things will usually make way more difference than any amount spent on the bike."

I couldn't agree more. I'm not at all overweight at 6'1" and 72kg but I know that when I get my weight down to 69kg and my mileage up (usually by mid-summer) the performance gains are far more noticeable than any changes I've ever made to my equipment.

Ian

[Samuel D]

Does that clarify or have I completely missed the point (entirely possible!) of what you were asking?

Perfectly clear and probably it was the first time around, since JakobW understood. Thanks.

[PH]

All my bikes are decent, they all fit the criteria they were intended to, though I've bought some along the way that didn't. Replacement costs vary from £250 to £3,250. There's the same BSO rubbish around that there's probably always been, but the price where bikes offer decent function and reasonable longevity does seem to have fallen. I'm also committed to the idea that bikes that get used work out cheap whatever the cost, half the value of the one that would cost £3,250 to replace is 14 year old components and have done 90,000 miles with very little additional expense and I expect them to last another 14. I kept a record of all costs for a few years (Till I got bored with it) 20p a mile is plenty to indulge every whim. It also stacks up well against anything else I might compare it to, whether that's transport or leisure.
I think we could do with being a little less critical of others choices, we can't know what gives anyone else satisfaction, half the time we can't work that out for ourselves.

[amediasatex]

I...but I know that when I get my weight down to 69kg and my mileage up (usually by mid-summer) the performance gains are far more noticeable than any changes I've ever made to my equipment.

While true, I feel compelled to point out that 'performance' does not necessarily mean 'faster', there are many ways to define performance, and speed is only one of many aspects. It's true that in the cycling world, especially in the UK performance is often taken to mean speed but that's largely a result of our association of cycling with 'sports cycling'.

My cargo bike for example 'performs' it's job admirably, but how quickly it gets there is almost an irrelevance. If it wanted to improve it's performance as a cargo carrying utility vehicle I would be looking at other metrics of measurement.

It's a similar thing with the word with 'quality', which is somewhat relevant to his thread (use of the word decent) and often synonymous with expensive in most people's minds, but that is not necessarily the case. Some cheap and mid range parts are very high quality, and likewise some expensive parts are not, and as always it depends on what you're comparing and measuring against.

Gone a bit off-topic again but just a gentle reminder that the priorities and requirements of one person may not be the same as another so just because something ticks one of your boxes it might not do so for others, or might not even be a box on their list!

[Oldjohnw]

The whole of the world economy is based on the perceived necessity of year on year growth. If it falls below a certain percentage for a certain number of quarters we are deemed to be in recession. This means that we are constantly being persuaded to update our possessions in every area, or travel to ever more exotic places (too often where locals live in abject poverty: what irony that exotic is associated with deprivation). I imagine that this extends even to those arch-environmentlists called cyclists (and also hill walkers so I am not excused): the very nature of what we do is meant to be counter cultural but I suspect many of us succumb to consumerism.

[thelawnet]

You are not all you think you are. Sorry to break the news, but YouTube had you beat into a cocked hat for technical advice and know how a long, long time ago.

Best stick to Youtube then, eh? Off you trot.

[Vorpal]

How much for a decent bike varies rather alot, depending upon the value that the owner places on various things, and what they're doing with it.

Someone racing or time trialling values different (and often more expensive) aspects than someone who is utility cycling, who values somewhat different aspects from someone who is touring, who values somewhat different aspects from a leisure mountain biker.

'How much for a decent bike?' is rather like 'How long is a piece of thread?'

My mountain bike was free, but is decent. My tourer cost more than any other bike I own, but somewhat less that the OP's more expensive bike. IMO, excluding free bikes, the bike that was the best value for money was our Thorn childback tandem, which I bought used, but it would be completely useless to someone looking for the bike that will shave a few seconds off their 25 mile TT.

[Jeemy]

For my £0.02 I paid £500 for a second hand carbon roubaix 105, which included helmet, glasses lights and some clothes. All I had to buy was shoes. So much better value second hand.


I'm a trendy consumer. Just look at my wobbly bog brush using hovercraft full of eels

[Airsporter1st]

if you could only hear yourself.... jeez...

...and vice versa.

As a relative newcomer to the forum, I have the greatest respect for the phenomenal wealth of knowledge and experience that you share so freely with others, but your frequent condescension and belittlement of others do you no favours. Needless to say perhaps, I have been on the receiving end on several occasions, for no good reason that I could determine and its not pleasant.

My apologies - I took what was intended by Brucey to be a humorous response to a previous post of mine, the wrong way and that caused me to take a distorted view of his subsequent posts. I now understand that his heart is in the right place!

Sorry too to the OP for contributing to the derailment of the thread.

[rob_wales]

For my £0.02 I paid £500 for a second hand carbon roubaix 105, which included helmet, glasses lights and some clothes. All I had to buy was shoes. So much better value second hand.


I'm a trendy consumer. Just look at my stupid phone.

Second-hand is good for a lot of things. I do a lot of photography and have purchased several used DSLR lenses at considerably reduced costs. Funnily enough though I've never had a used car.

[rob_wales]

Sorry too to the OP for contributing to the derailment of the thread.

No problem. Allow me to bring it back on track another way. Where I live in West Wales there are a lot of cyclists as the off-road stuff in particular is very good. I've seen a big increase in numbers over the past couple of years, and having spoken to a few cyclist who are obviously new to the game and have gone out and bought a bike, which is good. I've spoken to a few bike shop owners too, and they all report increasing bike sales, despite austerity. But how does a newcomer know how much to spend? I was not a newcomer, but the last time I bought a bike was in 1996 in Cambridge - it was a Trek and cost £650. My new Voodoo that I bought a few months ago was also £650 (although I got a discount). Comparing the two bikes there are differences but overall I'd say there isn't much in it in terms of perception of riding experience and utility, but 22 years of inflation has passed. I didn't think a £650 bike at today's value would buy a bike that was as good as one back in 1996.

I always feel after making a purchase that more expensive ones might be better and perhaps I should have spent more. But I guess under capitalist consumerism that is exactly what I am meant to think! My mobile phone is a Huawei P20 Lite which cost £320. I see one of the latest iPhones is about £1,100. Can that really be 4 times better than my excellent phone? Is a £3,000 bike really 3 times better than my Raleigh Mustang Elite which cost £1,100? I could have bought an iPhone instead, but you can't ride that!

[iandusud]

The whole of the world economy is based on the perceived necessity of year on year growth. If it falls below a certain percentage for a certain number of quarters we are deemed to be in recession. This means that we are constantly being persuaded to update our possessions in every area, or travel to ever more exotic places (too often where locals live in abject poverty: what irony that exotic is associated with deprivation). I imagine that this extends even to those arch-environmentlists called cyclists (and also hill walkers so I am not excused): the very nature of what we do is meant to be counter cultural but I suspect many of us succumb to consumerism.

This is so true. We all (i.e. society at large) need to wake up to this. All we're doing is making a very few people very rich by exploiting others and the planet's limited resources.

P.S. I'm not lefty eco-warrior, just a realist.

Ian

[Oldjohnw]

This is so true. We all (i.e. society at large) need to wake up to this. All we're doing is making a very few people very rich by exploiting others and the planet's limited resources.

P.S. I'm not lefty eco-warrior, just a realist

I watched a documentary film last week where passengers on a massive cruise ship were filming animals and landscape at risk of terminal damage through warming of the sea. No irony.

Sorry: didn't mean to hi-jack the thread.