Disgusted with the price of new bicycles (semi-rant)

[FunkyStickman]

The current crop of bikes I've seen around the internet makes my stomach turn. All the carbon fiber stuff? I absolutely hate it. I hate the way carbon bikes look, hate the price tags on them, and I hate the fact that everyone thinks you have to have one to be a "real cyclist." If that's the case, then I'm not a real cyclist, nor do I want to be one. I'm absolutely disgusted by the reality that people can spend $3000 on a bicycle, and it doesn't even come with pedals.

I just can't get over the fact that they even make electronically shifted bikes now. I mean, seriously... people spend an extra $2000 just to be able to shift with the click of a button? Really??

I'm sorry, but I just can't wrap my brain around this. You know all those awesome old steel road bikes from the 80's? They're still around, thirty years later, still rolling, still fast, and the cool part is, they're dirt cheap now! And you can still get parts for them. Why would you ever buy a plastic bicycle for $1500-$3000 when you can get one that's only a pound or two heavier (and much more comfortable and durable) for $150?? I mean, come on, 1/10 the price!

I build bikes in my spare time, mostly older ones I rebuild and give away. I've kept a few for myself. But man, the prices for the new drivetrains and shifters is just -absolutely- insane.

I just don't understand how a bicycle could cost so stinking much. I know guys that have a different set of carbon racing wheels for every day of the week! I'm constantly being bombarded with images of all these expensive bikes, and they just turn my stomach. All the bike shops want to sell me a "serious" bike for $3000, but it's useless to me. Can't put a rack or fenders on it, no dice.

I know there's some of you out there thinking "Funky has lost his mind!" but I just don't see it.

I could go on, but... I think I'm done for now.

Proceed with the facepunches.

[ChiStache]

I agree completely. I've been ridding my vintage Schwinn for five years, ever since I bought it used for $60. I love my bike. It's fast and light and fits me perfectly. I cannot imagine paying three grand for a bike, especially because I would always be so worried about it getting stolen!

[Eric]

Great rant!  This is classic!

I'm absolutely disgusted by the reality that people can spend $3000 on a bicycle, and it doesn't even come with pedals.

[Posthumane]

Perhaps it's because I don't hang out with too many people that consider themselves to be "real" cyclists, but I don't get hassled about buying a carbon bike too much. Granted, I have gotten hints from family members that I should get a new bike because they're "better" and lighter, but I've seen a number of steel road/hybrid and cyclocross bikes for sale at the local bike shop. Even the steel bikes are close to $1k though, which is considerably more than a used one...

I can, however, kind of see the appeal of electronic shifters (I am an electrical engineer, after all). The advantage of the electronic shifters over traditional cable setups that I can see is that you can take full advantage of *all* the gear ratios available on a given crankset/cassette option without having to think about weird shifting pattens.

[Hamster]

Nobody other than a pro cyclists needs a carbon frame. Nobody other than a pro cyclists (or maybe a rickshaw driver?) needs to spend multiple thousands on a bike. But I really don't understand why you are that upset about it. Hating inanimate objects will do nothing but shorten your life due to high BP and stress.

I bought a $3000 bike a few years ago when I was in the mindset of "once you save 15-20% of your earnings, spend the rest since you earned it." I love the bike, but I wouldn't make that purchase again. I have a less expensive steel touring bike as my commuter, which I also love, but use for different purposes.

If someone spends a few thousand on a bike, is it that big a deal compared to the other things they could waste it on? E.g. cable TV, "retail therapy" at the mall, overpriced phone plans, gas- guzzling cars, overly large homes, Apple products (hee hee.. just trying to push buttons, boats, RVs, alcohol, private school, or whatever someone's personal pet peeve may be?

[James]

Wait, why should I hate all this attention and money spent on biking? Because it isn't needed? Who cares? I can love a Tesla and the ideas behind it while knowing I would never drop that kind of coin for it. I can love a sweet carbon fiber bike while knowing it isn't worth anything more to me than aluminum or steel. And I can quickly realize that there are aluminum and steel bikes that can cost even more than some carbon bikes. I just can't get upset about people selling or buying nice stuff, even if it isn't what I want or what most people should be spending that kind of money on. And if I follow mustachian living then maybe some day I will buy a sweet used carbon bike that performs the way I like it and has had most of the up front cost paid for by the early adopter.


It's the people paying $3000 that are funding the R&D that might make carbon the perfect bike for you some day, at a much cheaper price than aluminum or steel. I just don't get the hate...

[mpbaker22]

Having spent $900 on my bike, I think it can be reasoned if you put miles on it.  Then again carbon fiber bikes tend to die sooner than others.  I have 3000+ miles on mine, btw.

[beltim]

Wait, why should I hate all this attention and money spent on biking? Because it isn't needed? Who cares?
...
 I just don't get the hate...

No one is saying you should.  FunkyStickman hates them and the culture around them, but he or she never says anyone else should

[Hamster]

Then again carbon fiber bikes tend to die sooner than others.  I have 3000+ miles on mine, btw.

Maybe was the case with first generation carbon fiber. My understanding is that current carbon frames can be stronger and more fatigue resistant than aluminum. Sudden failure of aluminum handlebars is apparently not that unusual. Santa Cruz bikes has done tests of the same frame in carbon And aluminum and the carbon one tolerated much higher loads before failure.

[lauren_knows]

I never underestimate the penchant for a consumer segment to go full-on crazy with gadgets.  Bike is a prime example of the last 10 or so years.... they're just trying to exploit peoples disposable income.

[Undecided]

Having spent $900 on my bike, I think it can be reasoned if you put miles on it.  Then again carbon fiber bikes tend to die sooner than others.  I have 3000+ miles on mine, btw.

I have nearly 45,000 miles on a three year old carbon fiber frame, so I'm not sure which anecdotes you're relying on to conclude that they tend to die sooner. I've also been in a few significant crashes on that frame, one of which required surgery on me, but not the bike.

[ruthiegirl]

All those high end bikes keep my local bike shop in business.  The shops certainly are not going to get that much money out of me, so I appreciate the people who do spend that kind of money (and pay the shop's mark-up). 

Then I can waltz in and nickle and dime the guys.

And have you ever ridden a really nice bike?  I got to ride my friend's triathalon bike last summer and it. was. freaking. awesome!!!!   Unbelievably light and easy up steep hills and a glorious smooth ride. 

Honestly.   It turned me.  If I had the funds and the real desire, I would drop a ton on a super nice bike.

[mpbaker22]

Having spent $900 on my bike, I think it can be reasoned if you put miles on it.  Then again carbon fiber bikes tend to die sooner than others.  I have 3000+ miles on mine, btw.

I have nearly 45,000 miles on a three year old carbon fiber frame, so I'm not sure which anecdotes you're relying on to conclude that they tend to die sooner. I've also been in a few significant crashes on that frame, one of which required surgery on me, but not the bike.

Well you're most likely the exception rather than the rule.   Speaking of anecdotal evidence, since that's all your provided ... Most evidence of bikes i anecdotal.  Unlike cars which have multiple statistical studies on each model, I've yet to see studies on lifespans of bicycles.  That being said, most bicycle forums will have comments on carbon fiber not lasting as long.  Perhaps that was only the earlier versions.

[dragoncar]

Nobody other than a pro cyclists needs a carbon frame. Nobody other than a pro cyclists (or maybe a rickshaw driver?) needs to spend multiple thousands on a bike.

A rickshaw driver is basically the definition of a pro cyclist.

[James]

Wait, why should I hate all this attention and money spent on biking? Because it isn't needed? Who cares?
...
 I just don't get the hate...

No one is saying you should.  FunkyStickman hates them and the culture around them, but he or she never says anyone else should

I didn't say he said I should, I said I didn't understand it, especially the vehemence of it. And I gave some reasons to support my position in order to contribute to the post. I do agree there are lots of consumerist up-selling out there that is crazy, but picking on carbon bikes is something I don't understand.  He asked for face punches, I didn't pull my punches. :)  But I should have also said I can sympathize with getting bent out of shape for no good reason regarding people spending crazy money on thing I don't see being worth it. I certainly get over-the-top upset about things that aren't worth it at times, and I don't begrudge FunkyStickman doing the same. ;)

[James]

Nobody other than a pro cyclists needs a carbon frame. Nobody other than a pro cyclists (or maybe a rickshaw driver?) needs to spend multiple thousands on a bike.

A rickshaw driver is basically the definition of a pro cyclist.

"A" definition, not "the" definition... :)

[James]

Well you're most likely the exception rather than the rule.   Speaking of anecdotal evidence, since that's all your provided ... Most evidence of bikes i anecdotal.  Unlike cars which have multiple statistical studies on each model, I've yet to see studies on lifespans of bicycles.  That being said, most bicycle forums will have comments on carbon fiber not lasting as long.  Perhaps that was only the earlier versions.

I picked aluminum for my mountain bike in part due to the toughness of the aluminum rather than carbon. The fact that very few people are selling used carbon bikes also factored in, but carbon has dropped in price to be very similar in cost to aluminum at the mid range of mountain bikes. Giant in particular has really brought the price of carbon down. But taking a tree to the side of my frame will likely only dent aluminum, while it might crack carbon ruining the frame. So for mountain bikes I see valid reason to question the toughness of carbon, and went with a used aluminum bike myself. (buying used carbon might also have issues if there was a crash causing a crack you can't see, but that would be a pretty extremely rare case) But for road bikes I just don't see a toughness issues, I would be very happy to have a carbon road bike if the price was right. It definitely would be awesome to have better data on these issues.

[Russ]

Having spent $900 on my bike, I think it can be reasoned if you put miles on it.  Then again carbon fiber bikes tend to die sooner than others.  I have 3000+ miles on mine, btw.

I have nearly 45,000 miles on a three year old carbon fiber frame, so I'm not sure which anecdotes you're relying on to conclude that they tend to die sooner. I've also been in a few significant crashes on that frame, one of which required surgery on me, but not the bike.

Well you're most likely the exception rather than the rule.   Speaking of anecdotal evidence, since that's all your provided ... Most evidence of bikes i anecdotal.  Unlike cars which have multiple statistical studies on each model, I've yet to see studies on lifespans of bicycles.  That being said, most bicycle forums will have comments on carbon fiber not lasting as long.  Perhaps that was only the earlier versions.

fatigue life and impact absorption are basically design criteria. You can make them whatever you want in a CF frame, and the design goals are usually better than the aluminum frames. The problem with CF is that it doesn't really have a yield strength where it bends before breaking, so if you hit something hard enough your frame can break in two without any of the "give" that a metal frame would have. That's really the only issue.

If you want a detailed analysis of fatigue life in bicycle frames, read Bicycling Science. There's an entire chapter dedicated to materials. The author also references plenty of academic research and industry white papers if you're interested in further reading.

WRT to aluminum handlebar (or crankarm, or stem, or seatpost...) failure, the reason for those "sudden" failures was likely a crack that propogated in a place where it couldn't be seen (under the bartape), and the user wasn't in tune enough to feel it growing. Carbon fiber is inherently no more or less resistant to this type of failure, it's all in how the part is designed. I believe that the larger number of alu bar failures you hear about is simply because there are far more aluminum bars out there to break.

source: this is my job

to OP: don't buy one then. and find a new bike shop while you're at it, if the one you go to right now is really that bad.

[Russ]

Oh and another thing: although it's pricey, your old broken carpet fiber frame can be repaired by baking a few new layers of composite onto the old. Can't fix aluminum unless you're a damn good welder and have a very high risk tolerance.

[Undecided]

Having spent $900 on my bike, I think it can be reasoned if you put miles on it.  Then again carbon fiber bikes tend to die sooner than others.  I have 3000+ miles on mine, btw.

I have nearly 45,000 miles on a three year old carbon fiber frame, so I'm not sure which anecdotes you're relying on to conclude that they tend to die sooner. I've also been in a few significant crashes on that frame, one of which required surgery on me, but not the bike.

Well you're most likely the exception rather than the rule.   Speaking of anecdotal evidence, since that's all your provided ... Most evidence of bikes i anecdotal.  Unlike cars which have multiple statistical studies on each model, I've yet to see studies on lifespans of bicycles.  That being said, most bicycle forums will have comments on carbon fiber not lasting as long.  Perhaps that was only the earlier versions.

I provided a specific example, not a specific example that I asserted as evidence for a more general claim.

I merely pointed out that you asserted a tendency without even anecdotal evidence. I agree that there don't seem to be studies on the lifespans of bicycles---so how do you know that I'm most likely the exception rather than the rule? If you rely on what's posted on bicycle forums, you'll have to conclude that most people average "around 20 mph" too, and I know that's not true.

Basically, aside from a catastrophic crash or serious user error, based on inspection, I don't see likely causes for limits on any quality, mass-produced contemporary frame's ability to last. I did have an aluminum frame (made in the U.S. by a well-known company that was (and is) a major proponent of aluminum for bikes) that experienced a weld failure, but that was likely a quality-control issue rather than a materials or design issue. Even road racing bikes seem very tough. On bike forums, I do read that driving the frame into the garage when you forget that the bike is on the roof may irreparably damage a carbon fiber frame, but mustachians don't drive their bikes around, do they? :-)

[James]

Off topic mention to Russ, I went MB in Madison on the way through this past Saturday, and even hit a tree...  :)


Had to rent a bike downtown (budget bicycle downtown - it was crap) and wasn't used to it resulting in the crash. I only have one speed...
Great single track southeast of town, forget the name.

[kendallf]

I have expensive carbon and aluminum bikes with modern components, and some great old steel frames with simple components (bar end shifters! or just one  gear!  No coasting!).  I like them for different reasons, and ride them differently, in different places.

+1 to the "let somebody else take the depreciation hit" and buy/build used.  I buy complete used bikes sometimes, swap parts around, sell components and frames, and this has funded most of my nicer bikes.  My race bike would cost somewhere between $5-8k if you bought it new and complete, and if somebody made that mutt mix of components.  I have perhaps $2k in it. 

Could I ride a $100 bike and be happy?  Yes.  Do I like my more expensive bikes and use them heavily?  Yes. 

[FunkyStickman]

First: thank you for the facepunches. I would take the time to give each of your hard-earned replies a witty comeback, but I don't have all night! I certainly expected to get negative and positive feedback about this topic: it's quite the hotbed.

To all those who have expensive bikes, good for you.

To all those who built their own bikes, or use older bikes at a fraction of the cost: I raise my goblet of badassity to you.

Full disclosure: I started commuting with a cheap AL mountain bike. The headtube cracked, so I swapped the parts over to a steel MTB frame I found in the trash. I put a few thousand miles on it. After 8 months, I scraped together enough cash to rebuild it with a proper frame. I bought a steel Surly LHT frame, swapped over all the parts again, and added a few things. I put a few more thousand miles on it. I think I've got about $800 in it total, and even that about killed me. I will probably never buy a new bike frame again, when there are thousands out there I can rebuild for a fraction of the cost. My LHT survived a 35MPH hit from a car (my leg, however, did not). I am currently restoring an '86 Raleigh 10-speed to use as a commuter, I got it for $0. I think I have a total of $15 in it now: tubes and cables.

I am trying to not get the local bike club involved in this discussion, but I'll just say... that was a bad experience for the most part. Great people, but their ideas of what bikes are for (and should cost) are completely opposite of mine, thus my lack of participation in the group. It's like showing up at an exotic car show with a beat-up stock Civic. People just stare at you and wonder why you're there.

To me, it is no different from luxury cars. I see no logical purpose for them to exist, because I couldn't care less about being pampered. I want something reliable, functional, maybe kinda decent looking, and affordable. Luxury vehicles (2 or 4 wheeled) don't do it for me.

And carbon bikes will never be cheaper than steel or aluminum. And even if by some freak act of God they are, they will still look awful to me.

On an upward note: I have to say I'm extremely impressed with the selection of city/utility/cargo bikes that have sprung up in the last few years. I can't begin to tell you all how much I want bikes to become viable transportation alternatives for everyone, but the prices..

Holy freaking cow, the prices... my pocketbook weeps every time I see a $300 pair of brake levers, $1500 carbon wheels, and who knows what else. I mean... damn. That's just insane.

[yahui168]

I just picked up a good condition 2010 SE Draft plus a kryptonite lock for $180. Woot.

[destron]

Although I don't get worked up about it that much and I generally don't agree with the rant, I am guessing that Funky Stickman has dealt with a lot of gearhead cyclists in his time. You know the type: carbon bike, no kickstand, full bike spandex suit, eats those caffeinated bike gels, props their bike up (unlocked) outside of Starbucks. These are some of the douchey-est people around. Their idea of a conversation about biking is "What level of shifters do you have? What? The Shimano XT? No, you need to upgrade to the ultimas." They really are dicks when it comes to people who have a different perspective on biking. To the gearhead, biking means putting your bike on your car, driving somewhere on Saturday morning with your gearhead buddies, and biking in a line as quickly as possible. They then drive home and drive to the grocery store, a friend's house, or other errands. Anyone who doesn't have the same biking goal as them is a turkey and looked down upon. They are like the borg. Anyhow, that has been my experience with them.

Anyhow, I wish I had a super nice all carbon frame road bike and whatnot but I would never pay for that. And, the real fallacy of this rant IMO is the "these days" attitude of it. There have been insanely priced bikes since at least the 1970's. In real dollars, these bikes are actually a lot cheaper than the top end $3000 bikes that were being sold 25 years ago.

[Hamster]

Although I don't get worked up about it that much and I generally don't agree with the rant, I am guessing that Funky Stickman has dealt with a lot of gearhead cyclists in his time. You know the type: carbon bike, no kickstand, full bike spandex suit, eats those caffeinated bike gels, props their bike up (unlocked) outside of Starbucks. These are some of the douchey-est people around. Their idea of a conversation about biking is "What level of shifters do you have? What? The Shimano XT? No, you need to upgrade to the ultimas." They really are dicks when it comes to people who have a different perspective on biking. To the gearhead, biking means putting your bike on your car, driving somewhere on Saturday morning with your gearhead buddies, and biking in a line as quickly as possible. They then drive home and drive to the grocery store, a friend's house, or other errands. Anyone who doesn't have the same biking goal as them is a turkey and looked down upon. They are like the borg. Anyhow, that has been my experience with them.

Sorry you've had such a bad experience with these people. If anyone is interested in doing more group or distance cycling, I would say keep looking, as there are plenty of friendly cyclists out there.

I come from a very utilitarian biking background, having commuted on the same steel 'mountain'/hybrid bike for decades, doing 90% of my own maintenance. Then upgraded to a steel touring bike (surly long haul trucker, just like the OP's frame set), and started doing some local club rides including some of the people you're referring to. A few people initially looked at me a bit funny as I was doing group rides on a heavy bike with a rack on back. Most didn't really care, and just wanted to make sure they are riding with someone who can ride safely in a group at their pace. You do get people who show up for a group ride and are dangerous to ride with in a tight group.

Many clubs also have rides that go at various paces so the hard core racer types can do their thing while more recreational/casual riders can hang out and have a conversation while riding more leisurely.

I think you'll find all kinds, including damn nice people in fancy logo'd out spandex on $3000+ carbon road bikes, if you look for them. 

[sloof70]

I'd love to get into biking.  I really would.  But everyone I've talked to about buying new says you have to spend $1k minimum.  How a Chinese-made bike costs $1k I do not know.  And if you want to buy used, you pretty much have to be a bike enthusiast to navigate the jungle of Craigslist ads.  The middle approach is to go to a used bike shop, but since I live in the biking metropolis of Seattle, I'll still have to spend $500-700 on a USED BIKE!

And that's why I drive.  Too damn confusing.  Bought a bike a year ago, but apparently it's "the wrong kind" so it collects dust.

[destron]

I think you'll find all kinds, including damn nice people in fancy logo'd out spandex on $3000+ carbon road bikes, if you look for them.

You are totally right, and I was sort of ranting a bit myself. Probably the bulk of those types of cyclists are very nice people, although I think there is a bit of a pack mentality about it. I wanted to add that I am happy that they really enjoy their hobby. Although I wouldn't spend that much on a bike, I don't think it is ridiculous to do so -- I only think it is ridiculous to think you need to spend that much to enjoy the hobby of cycling. If you use the bike to ride, it really is not as expensive of a hobby as most of the junk we spend our money on (I'm talking to you, owners of sports cars).

[FunkyStickman]

I'd love to get into biking.  I really would.  But everyone I've talked to about buying new says you have to spend $1k minimum.  How a Chinese-made bike costs $1k I do not know.  And if you want to buy used, you pretty much have to be a bike enthusiast to navigate the jungle of Craigslist ads.  The middle approach is to go to a used bike shop, but since I live in the biking metropolis of Seattle, I'll still have to spend $500-700 on a USED BIKE!

And that's why I drive.  Too damn confusing.  Bought a bike a year ago, but apparently it's "the wrong kind" so it collects dust.

I'd imagine Seattle has a pretty good used bike market... and what's wrong with your bike? Unless it's a BMX bike or something, you should be able to use just about anything to bike commute. As long as it's mechanically sound.

[mrpress]

I think this is more than just a semi-rant :) I'm not sure why it bothers you so much either and like another poster said, there were $3k bikes in the 70s and the 3k bikes now are a hell of a lot nicer than they were back then. Aesthetics are a personal preference and to me, some carbon bikes are freakin beautiful. Live and let live and be thankful there are guys that drop that kind of money so the bike shop doesn't have to survive on the tiny margins of an entry-level hybrid.

[GuitarStv]

The Shimano 105 brifter setup on my touring bike is pure sex.  The components are worth a lot of money.  Is it possible to cycle without bar end or down tube shifters?  Sure.  It's not as fun though.

[prodarwin]

I rode a $5500 Trek around the local MTB trail a few months back.  SO AWESOME.  But I didn't buy it.  I still go and have plenty of fun on my ~$1000 bike ($500 used + about $500 in parts) instead.

When I ride on the road I use a steel frame bike I got for free.

Could I ride a $100 bike and be happy?  Yes.  Do I like my more expensive bikes and use them heavily?  Yes. 

Absolutely this.

[Hamster]

The Shimano 105 brifter setup on my touring bike is pure sex.  The components are worth a lot of money.  Is it possible to cycle without bar end or down tube shifters?  Sure.  It's not as fun though.

OMG, R U 4 real???? 105s are for borderline poor people. You should think about upgrading to Ultegra (at a minimum) if you want to be considered a serious cyclist. As for sex, if you have sensation in your genitals, you really need to ride more.

[frompa]

I am in the same boat as this poster:

I have expensive carbon and aluminum bikes with modern components, and some great old steel frames with simple components (bar end shifters! or just one  gear!  No coasting!).  I like them for different reasons, and ride them differently, in different places.

+1 to the "let somebody else take the depreciation hit" and buy/build used.  I buy complete used bikes sometimes, swap parts around, sell components and frames, and this has funded most of my nicer bikes.  My race bike would cost somewhere between $5-8k if you bought it new and complete, and if somebody made that mutt mix of components.  I have perhaps $2k in it. 

Could I ride a $100 bike and be happy?  Yes.  Do I like my more expensive bikes and use them heavily?  Yes.

Also, I agree with the OP's comments about dealing with bike clubbers.  In my area, too, I've found the bike club people downright dull, representing only that hyper-lycra-obsessed, recreational-only, drop-as-much-cash-as-you-can sort of cycling.  These guys (and they are overwhelmingly male) are not people I'm going to hang out with.  And when it comes right down to it, I, with my primarily utilitarian day-to-day and year-round riding, ride thousands of miles more per year than they do, even though at the height of their annual fitness (which is probably about now) they can probably ride faster than me for a sustained fifty miler.

But as to CF vs steel frames, or bikes that cost thousands vs. tens, I say, why choose?  I have, use and thoroughly enjoy them all. 

[FunkyStickman]

Also, I agree with the OP's comments about dealing with bike clubbers.  In my area, too, I've found the bike club people downright dull, representing only that hyper-lycra-obsessed, recreational-only, drop-as-much-cash-as-you-can sort of cycling.  These guys (and they are overwhelmingly male) are not people I'm going to hang out with.  And when it comes right down to it, I, with my primarily utilitarian day-to-day and year-round riding, ride thousands of miles more per year than they do, even though at the height of their annual fitness (which is probably about now) they can probably ride faster than me for a sustained fifty miler.

I know I shouldn't let it bother me, but it is just so inefficient.

But as to CF vs steel frames, or bikes that cost thousands vs. tens, I say, why choose?  I have, use and thoroughly enjoy them all.

Because they cost a freaking fortune!! That's the whole point. Why the heck do bikes need to cost thousands of dollars? That's paying a 200%-400% premium for "sex appeal" and I just don't get it, when $500 will get you a very nice, functional bike.

I'm all about price vs. return, and finding that "sweet spot" where you get the most for your money. On bikes, that sweet spot of functionality vs. cost is about the Sora range.

If a Sora-equipped bike is 100% functional and reliable, then anything more than that is pretty much just for "sex appeal."

I'm fine with it if you want sex appeal in a bike, and are willing to pay a 300% premium for it... but just admit it. It's completely unnecessary.

[DocCyane]

I live in a city that is a cycling magnet because of the mountain roads (San Gabriel Valley) so I see cyclists daily and tons of weekend warriors. They all have grey beards and all the stupid expensive gear.

I think it's another Boomer trend like Harley's. it's a way to spend their kids' inheritance, tick something off a bucket list, and compete with each other by having the new flashy, flashy.

In ten years when they are aged out of the sport and it's back to young people buying again, I bet these expensive items will cease to be the trend.

I'm hoping the same happens with trucks because I'd love a little truck like the Ford Rangers used to be.

[ajmers]

It's funny you mention this now! For about 6 years I've been riding my mom's 1979 Schwinn 10-speed (which is now a 12-speed because the shop couldn't get a 5-speed sprocket) which I LOVE. It fits me perfectly. Now that I am going to start bike commuting, my dad has repeatedly offered to buy me a new bike for my birthday, to which I say, "Thanks! but... why?" He and my mom are avid cyclists who both have nice, secondhand Cannondales. We all went on a ride together last year and my mom got back on my (her) bike and was surprised that it rode just as nicely as hers.

When I worked at a bicycle shop in college, I would eye the carbon fiber frames with their pretty designs, and see the guys come in to get their $thousands bikes fixed, and I would stress out wondering when I would be able to afford such a bike, and how I would know what an appropriate amount was to spend. I probably stressed out about it because I don't really want one (yet :)).

[FunkyStickman]

I read an article recently called "Cycling is the new Golf" about how it's now "cool" for country-club types to get into it, and try to outdo each other with buying more and more expensive bikes.... and this is evident in my local club.

Out of the 150 or so members, there's probably 2 that actually commute on bikes, including me. Everyone else does fitness/sport cycling, drives to the group rides, etc. and it just seems so incredibly anti-mustachian.

[fuzzed]

Do you have to commute to be a cyclist?  Can one not ride a bike for the exercise, the enjoyment of pushing yourself, and enjoying the countryside? 

I am a "weekend warrior" type, and at first glance may look like one of those “cycling douches”.  I ride 2-3 times throughout the week (30-40k) then one longer weekend ride (60-100k).  I bought a carbon bike, three years ago.  I looked at steel, then steel with carbon fork and seat post and ended up with carbon.   My rational was, I did not want to buy a bike at a lower price point, only to regret not spending enough to have something i would be happy for years.  I paid cash, well technically put it on my card to get the delta miles, then paid for it from my savings account later that day.     I do own lots of the proper clothing.  I found being on a bike in cutoff jean shorts, work boots and a Harley tank top to be less than ideal after an hour or so.  I took up cycling after years of running marathons, and did not want to work hard enough to qualify for Boston.   I figured, try a new sport, something lower impact and a sport where you can coast when tired.    ;)

I know what you mean about cycling douches, they are out there, but so are an awful lot of people who ride for the “sport” of it.  I am constantly amazed at how strong many of these riders are, it is quite inspiring to ride with people in their 60’s or older and can literally ride circles around you.
I get that you don’t like carbon bikes, that is fine, take one for a ride, and if you don’t like it great.  I used to feel the same about German cars.   They are just a Honda/Toyota with a large price tag, until I drove one.  That very quickly changed.   To each his own.  If you don’t enjoy something or see the value that is fine, you tried it and it was not for you.  You just don’t need to lump everyone who does enjoy something into a category. 
As for anti-mustachian, I think there is a mustachian view and a forum mustachian view.  Sometimes the latter is a race to the bottom.  I spend $5 a week on food, make my own clothing from dryer lint from laundrymats and barbershop hair clippings….
There, if feel better </rant> thanks for reading… :)

[James]

If a Sora-equipped bike is 100% functional and reliable, then anything more than that is pretty much just for "sex appeal."

I disagree, but I think both you and I are fine with that.

[FunkyStickman]

First off, let me clarify that my attitudes towards cyclists, cycling, and the actual bicycles are not necessarily exclusively rigid. I know a lot of cool cyclists, have ridden a lot of great bikes, and get a lot of pleasure out of riding. I'm specifically addresing the rising cost of new bicycles in comparison to what they're actually worth. Everything else is pretty much subjective.

Do you have to commute to be a cyclist?  Can one not ride a bike for the exercise, the enjoyment of pushing yourself, and enjoying the countryside?

Yes, but you don't need $3000 worth of bike to do this. Nobody does.

My rational was, I did not want to buy a bike at a lower price point, only to regret not spending enough to have something i would be happy for years.  ......   I figured, try a new sport, something lower impact and a sport where you can coast when tired.    ;)

Why exactly would you not be happy with a cheaper bike? Do you think a sub-$1000 bike wouldn't last? The technology in even a Sora bike is multiples better than the top of the line stuff from 20 years ago. I honestly think it's just marketing that says you need "lighter, faster, stiffer" parts to "enjoy" your bike.

[opinion]
And I'm not a fan of sports.. people waste a lot of money on sports. I get overruled on that a lot, but that's just my opinion. The NFL could dissolve tomorrow, and it wouldn't affect me in the least.
[/opinion]

I get that you don’t like carbon bikes, that is fine, take one for a ride, and if you don’t like it great.  I used to feel the same about German cars.   They are just a Honda/Toyota with a large price tag, until I drove one.  That very quickly changed.   To each his own.  If you don’t enjoy something or see the value that is fine, you tried it and it was not for you.  You just don’t need to lump everyone who does enjoy something into a category. 

I'm not questioning whether carbon bikes are better per se, or even that I don't like riding them. I'm arguing that they're not 500% better, and are not worth the price premium. Same with German cars. They are too far up the price/value curve for me to even consider them as a viable option.

As for anti-mustachian, I think there is a mustachian view and a forum mustachian view.  Sometimes the latter is a race to the bottom.  I spend $5 a week on food, make my own clothing from dryer lint from laundrymats and barbershop hair clippings….
There, if feel better </rant> thanks for reading… :)

The general mood I've seen so far is either 1. Mustachian, or 2. Mustachian except when it comes to something I really, really want. I'm not saying I'm 100% Mustachian in every area of my life, but I want to be able to objectively look at everything. I spend a LOT of time working on and riding bikes, thus this thread. People get defensive when you call them out on expensive purchases, I'm no exception. But the whole principal behind Mustachianism is living well with less, and I'm very much for people enjoying themselves on bikes. I just get sick in the stomach when I see people throwing tons of cash at something for marginal returns.

I also spend a lot of time playing music, and I've been extremely Mustachian when it comes to that, too. I see guys with huge collections of guitars, amps, pedals, and whatnot... I cringe when I see my buddies spend $300 on a custom distortion pedal, when a $75 one sounds almost exactly as good. Same with computers, cars, hobbies, etc.

Almost everything has a "Premium" market section now, and they're almost always overpriced to take advantage of people with more credit or money than they know what to do with. Consumerism at its best. Conspicuous Consumption. It turns my stomach.

In the true spirit of Mustachianism (or Mustachiosity?) I'm reminding people that enjoying cycling does not require massive outlays of cash... ever. This rant is strictly about the money, and the insane costs of new bikes and parts. Everything else is subjective opinion.

I disagree, but I think both you and I are fine with that.

Yup. I'm not going to beat you over the head. Just calling it like I see it.

[GuitarStv]

Why exactly would you not be happy with a cheaper bike? Do you think a sub-$1000 bike wouldn't last? The technology in even a Sora bike is multiples better than the top of the line stuff from 20 years ago. I honestly think it's just marketing that says you need "lighter, faster, stiffer" parts to "enjoy" your bike.

There is a trade-off at a certain price point though.  My touring bike cost me well under a grand.  It replaced a cheap (free) ancient mountain bike that I had been using for commuting.  There's a very steep difference between a used bike selling for four or five hundred dollars bike and one selling for one to two hundred dollars.

[Russ]

First off, let me clarify that my attitudes towards cyclists, cycling, and the actual bicycles are not necessarily exclusively rigid. I know a lot of cool cyclists, have ridden a lot of great bikes, and get a lot of pleasure out of riding. I'm specifically addresing the rising cost of new bicycles in comparison to what they're actually worth. Everything else is pretty much subjective.

Do you have to commute to be a cyclist?  Can one not ride a bike for the exercise, the enjoyment of pushing yourself, and enjoying the countryside?

Yes, but you don't need $3000 worth of bike to do this. Nobody does.

My rational was, I did not want to buy a bike at a lower price point, only to regret not spending enough to have something i would be happy for years.  ......   I figured, try a new sport, something lower impact and a sport where you can coast when tired.    ;)

Why exactly would you not be happy with a cheaper bike? Do you think a sub-$1000 bike wouldn't last? The technology in even a Sora bike is multiples better than the top of the line stuff from 20 years ago. I honestly think it's just marketing that says you need "lighter, faster, stiffer" parts to "enjoy" your bike.

[opinion]
And I'm not a fan of sports.. people waste a lot of money on sports. I get overruled on that a lot, but that's just my opinion. The NFL could dissolve tomorrow, and it wouldn't affect me in the least.
[/opinion]

I get that you don’t like carbon bikes, that is fine, take one for a ride, and if you don’t like it great.  I used to feel the same about German cars.   They are just a Honda/Toyota with a large price tag, until I drove one.  That very quickly changed.   To each his own.  If you don’t enjoy something or see the value that is fine, you tried it and it was not for you.  You just don’t need to lump everyone who does enjoy something into a category. 

I'm not questioning whether carbon bikes are better per se, or even that I don't like riding them. I'm arguing that they're not 500% better, and are not worth the price premium. Same with German cars. They are too far up the price/value curve for me to even consider them as a viable option.

I think the conflict here is you projecting your values onto everyone else. Everyone has a different opinion of what's "worth it" and what's not. If nothing more than Sora is worth it to you, then cool, have at it. I, like many, think 105 is the sweet spot, but I also recognize that's only my opinion. This can be generalized, as it has been with cars, to pretty much anything. Is it worth it to me to work X extra time to send my kids to private school? To buy a CSA share? To pack a BLT for lunch instead of PB&J? To have a $3000 bicycle? To have a $600 bicycle? To have a $100 bicycle? Maybe yes, maybe no, depends who you ask. And around here, everybody probably has a good reason for whatever their answer may be. I have found absolute statements such as "nobody needs this" to be counterproductive in duscussions on whether something is worth it to a person and why. Those statements tend to make people shut down and say "I do, fuck you", rather than share their reasons which is something you can actually learn from. Nobody needs anything but food and water and maybe shelter, and in much smaller quantities than we usually think of as the lower limit of comfort. Pretend I told you that you don't need music at all, it's a waste of time and money. The first half of that statement is objectively true, and I'm presenting the second half as such as well. Is that the beginning of a productive discussion? How does it make you feel?

As for anti-mustachian, I think there is a mustachian view and a forum mustachian view.  Sometimes the latter is a race to the bottom.  I spend $5 a week on food, make my own clothing from dryer lint from laundrymats and barbershop hair clippings….
There, if feel better </rant> thanks for reading… :)

The general mood I've seen so far is either 1. Mustachian, or 2. Mustachian except when it comes to something I really, really want. I'm not saying I'm 100% Mustachian in every area of my life, but I want to be able to objectively look at everything. I spend a LOT of time working on and riding bikes, thus this thread. People get defensive when you call them out on expensive purchases, I'm no exception. But the whole principal behind Mustachianism is living well with less, and I'm very much for people enjoying themselves on bikes. I just get sick in the stomach when I see people throwing tons of cash at something for marginal returns.

I also spend a lot of time playing music, and I've been extremely Mustachian when it comes to that, too. I see guys with huge collections of guitars, amps, pedals, and whatnot... I cringe when I see my buddies spend $300 on a custom distortion pedal, when a $75 one sounds almost exactly as good. Same with computers, cars, hobbies, etc.

Almost everything has a "Premium" market section now, and they're almost always overpriced to take advantage of people with more credit or money than they know what to do with. Consumerism at its best. Conspicuous Consumption. It turns my stomach.

In the true spirit of Mustachianism (or Mustachiosity?) I'm reminding people that enjoying cycling does not require massive outlays of cash... ever. This rant is strictly about the money, and the insane costs of new bikes and parts. Everything else is subjective opinion.

The main tenet of Mustachianism as I see it is to not spend resources on things that aren't worth it to you, keeping in mind all the consequences of that spending.  If someone else values a $3000 bicycle and has a well-thought reason as to why it's worth the cost to them, why begrudge them that? What might be marginal returns to you could be the "sweet spot" for someone else. Every person has their own set of values, and if you judge everyone else on your values alone you're gonna have a bad time.

[FunkyStickman]

I think the conflict here is you projecting your values onto everyone else. Everyone has a different opinion of what's "worth it" and what's not. If nothing more than Sora is worth it to you, then cool, have at it. I, like many, think 105 is the sweet spot, but I also recognize that's only my opinion. This can be generalized, as it has been with cars, to pretty much anything. Is it worth it to me to work X extra time to send my kids to private school? To buy a CSA share? To pack a BLT for lunch instead of PB&J? To have a $3000 bicycle? To have a $600 bicycle? To have a $100 bicycle? Maybe yes, maybe no, depends who you ask. And around here, everybody probably has a good reason for whatever their answer may be. I have found absolute statements such as "nobody needs this" to be counterproductive in duscussions on whether something is worth it to a person and why. Those statements tend to make people shut down and say "I do, fuck you", rather than share their reasons which is something you can actually learn from. Nobody needs anything but food and water and maybe shelter, and in much smaller quantities than we usually think of as the lower limit of comfort. Pretend I told you that you don't need music at all, it's a waste of time and money. The first half of that statement is objectively true, and I'm presenting the second half as such as well. Is that the beginning of a productive discussion? How does it make you feel?

I see your point. I suppose in my staunch opposition to the "you must have X or you can't enjoy it" mentality, I've swung completely in the opposite direction, which is "nobody needs X to enjoy it." It's technically true, but as you said, it doesn't necessarily accomplish what I'm looking for, which is to express my disgust at the pervasive and insidious culture of consumerism.

I don't really want to provoke any "F you!" responses, but I'm not afraid to challenge people to higher feats of Mustachianism, either. Perhaps we'd be better served with a topic more along the lines of "Show your Badassity" than the "Wall of Shame and Anti-mustachianism." My apologies if I've stepped out of bounds!

It all of course stems from my frustration at trying to find something decent to build and ride for less than the cost of a used car. I think everybody can relate to that. Decent used bikes are very hard to come by where I live.

The main tenet of Mustachianism as I see it is to not spend resources on things that aren't worth it to you, keeping in mind all the consequences of that spending.  If someone else values a $3000 bicycle and has a well-thought reason as to why it's worth the cost to them, why begrudge them that? What might be marginal returns to you could be the "sweet spot" for someone else. Every person has their own set of values, and if you judge everyone else on your values alone you're gonna have a bad time.

True, and as I said, it was never my intention to begrudge anybody for buying one (really, It's not! Honestly!) But it burns me that to get that level of functionality, you have to spend that much. I just don't get why everything is so damn expensive.

[Deano]

Hmm, not sure about weighing in here, but I'm game.

So, my background...I raced for 20 years...several of them full time for a few small time pro teams. I raced in Europe, SA, NA and Aus...I only offer this information to give some perspective and perhaps weight to my opinion. I've raced on a huge number of bikes, materials and components...mountains, cobbles, bricks, dirt roads, concrete slabs...anything and everything. I'm quite opinionated when it comes to bikes, but I don't get a hate on for other people's choices in this department.

To the OP, some people race at an amateur level and love it. Good for them I say. A 3k bike does the trick for that, 10K or more? Nope, just foolishness, but so is a Ferrari and a mansion and there are plenty of those.

Carbon...good for racing (having raced on carbon for many years) but I wouldn't buy it for a racing bike. If I were racing on my own dime it would be on Alu...cheap, light and STIFF. A racing bike has to be stiff...the 80's bikes the OP is talking about aren't overly stiff really, particularly in the component department. Modern steel bikes are incredible and worth the investment, so is a quality Ti frame.

Components. 105 is indeed the sweet spot as someone mentioned, though the shifters are a little soft and the springs die sooner rather than later (used 105 on a winter training bike). Buying my own kit now, my road bike is a mix of Ultegra/105. Good wheels? High quality hubs can be used for a few decades, Dura-Ace still have serviceable bearings...worth the cost. Build them up 28/32 to a nice rim, 23 mm rims have  nice ride quality when paired with a quality 23 mm clincher. Spend money on the contact points...saddle, solid bars/stem etc., but don't go crazy. A carbon seat post is an ok splurge if you're riding an Alu frame, but to soften things up ride the aforementioned wheel setup at about 90psi. Like butter.

If you want something to really last, buy some used Campy stuff...completely serviceable and seems to get better with age. A little pricier but built for life.

Yes, cyclists can be douchy. I still ride 3 or 4 times a week, but I steer clear of most group rides etc. I find most MAMIL's to be fairly obnoxious, particularly the ones that are bosses at work and home, they can't take even the slightest comment aimed at helping them or saving their lives on the road. Having said that, finding a good club with a mix of people is great. The one I raced for as a kid was like a second family to me, really helped shape me in a positive way. Cyclists aren't douches, it's just that what you're seeing is a high concentration of middle aged, middle to upper class men. Prime douchery (yes, I recognize that would be me as well....but I'll always say hi on the road and give a hand where I can).

To sum up the bike choice? Spend a few grand on a steel/Alu/Ti bike, put 105 on it and some solid built wheels, take good care of it and enjoy it for the next 10-20 years. I haven't raced for something like 7 years now, but I'm still enjoying the bike I bought after I sold my last team bikes (carefully worked into my contract as I knew I was finished with racing at the end of that season...carbon doesn't last decades!). Use the same advice for mtb's, just sub in Deore for components!

[FunkyStickman]

Here's a bike with all 105 (except for the cranks) for less than $1000:

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/motobecane/gran_premio_xiii.htm

[Deano]

Here's a bike with all 105 (except for the cranks) for less than $1000

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/motobecane/gran_premio_xiii.htm

A serviceable bike for the most part, but the price is deceiving. The hubs are the lowest end Shimano and will not last long. Same goes for the BB and the headset...not built to last. The derailleurs and shifters are 105, but nothing else is, so despite the claims otherwise, this is not a full 105 bike. The calipers will go to crap with any serious use (low end Tektro). The frame looks interesting, though I've never heard of Reynolds 520. Rims are solid as well, though the wheels will be machine built and will need a rebuild sooner rather than later. 1 inch steerer tubes are also fading fast, it will get tougher and tougher to find replacement forks,headsets and stems in the not too distant future.

The bike industry uses drivetrains to sell bikes, but a bike is more than it's drivetrain. I wouldn't recommend this bike to someone who wanted to have it for several years, the real cost might be closer to 1200 or more to make it into something capable of serious use. Having said that, with some upgrades as the parts inevitably fail, it might not be a terrible purchase.

[FunkyStickman]

Here's a bike with all 105 (except for the cranks) for less than $1000

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/motobecane/gran_premio_xiii.htm

A serviceable bike for the most part, but the price is deceiving. The hubs are the lowest end Shimano and will not last long. Same goes for the BB and the headset...not built to last. The derailleurs and shifters are 105, but nothing else is, so despite the claims otherwise, this is not a full 105 bike. The calipers will go to crap with any serious use (low end Tektro). The frame looks interesting, though I've never heard of Reynolds 520. Rims are solid as well, though the wheels will be machine built and will need a rebuild sooner rather than later. 1 inch steerer tubes are also fading fast, it will get tougher and tougher to find replacement forks,headsets and stems in the not too distant future.

The bike industry uses drivetrains to sell bikes, but a bike is more than it's drivetrain. I wouldn't recommend this bike to someone who wanted to have it for several years, the real cost might be closer to 1200 or more to make it into something capable of serious use. Having said that, with some upgrades as the parts inevitably fail, it might not be a terrible purchase.

And for the same reasons, I wouldn't think twice about riding this bike for tens of thousands of miles. If the hubs die, I can rebuild the wheels with Tiagra hubs for almost nothing. Unless the brakes actually snap, they would be serviceable for quite a while with some decent pads. Machine built wheels work fine, you just have to make sure they're properly tensioned. Nothing wrong with 1" threaded forks and headsets, they will be making parts for them for years to come. I can still get 5-speed freewheels, and heck... my touring bike uses 7-speed cassettes! Yes, they still make them. Nothing wrong with them, they work perfectly fine. As long as I can still get 7-speed cassettes and bodies, I have no need to upgrade to 8-11 speeds.

For someone putting 4-5000 miles a year on a bike, this would work perfectly fine if properly maintained and not abused.

[GuitarStv]

Seems like a decent bike for a reasonable price to me.  Sure is a far cry from your originally posted 150$ price tag though.

[FunkyStickman]

Seems like a decent bike for a reasonable price to me.  Sure is a far cry from your originally posted 150$ price tag though.

It is, but that's for a new bike. I could see spending a few hundred on a used bike with equivalent parts.