Is this a good bike? 2013 Fuji Absolute 2.3

[Rusoarmo]

First bike I would own since middle school.
I live in Seattle.
Plan on commuting using this and bus (work pays for bus card)
Want to add fenders, lights, etc to make it better.

Is this bike worth $300 in good condition?
http://www.bikepedia.com/quickbike/BikeSpecs.aspx?year=2001&brand=Trek&model=2000

^ That was the original bike I was going to buy. I got the guy down to $200 but last minute someone with a Fuji 2013 Absolute 2.3 came through for $150, I figure that extra $50 would be better used for lights, fenders and a lock

[tvan]

Not for $300. I probably wouldn't pay over $200 for it.

[Rusoarmo]

I've gotten them down to $250.

I also have the option of a 2013 Fuji Absolute 2.3 for $200.

I want the bike to commute so I will need to buy a helmet, lock, fenders, lights, etc for both.

[Guardian]

In my sincere opinion, having biked more in the last 10 years than anyone I know and probably even 90% of Mustachians..

Get a bike you like. Be sure it's used, but a good solid foundation that can be upgraded, maintained, cared for.

If you spend an extra $50 or $100 on the purchase or in accessories or in Plasti-Dip to make it look exactly how you want/need...no harm done. ESPECIALLY if you are riding often enough to keep your car parked at home.

Don't go wild, but do fall in love. The 2 wheel life is one of the truest love affairs on this planet.

[Matt_D]

The Trek seems to have been an entry/mid-level "race" bike, which isn't what I personally would want in a commuter - I like bikes that can handle slightly wider tires (for traction and comfort) and a bit more upright position.

Price-wise, I'd say if it is in good condition $250 isn't a bad deal given that you're in Seattle.

The Fuji is a lower-end bike than the Trek, but more along the lines of what I'd think makes good commuter material.

[GuitarStv]

I wouldn't even require that the bike be used . . . especially if you're commuting and brand new to adult cycling.  Most bike shops will fix stuff for free for the first year after a purchase . . . and if you don't know anything about bike maintenance, that can be a great way to learn and a way to not have your bike out of commission for long periods (which is a real momentum killer).

I like drop bars much more for commuting.  If there's no place to attach a rack, you can't fit wider tires (at least 28s) and mudguards, that might be a deal killer for a commuter bike.  Those things are all pretty essential for me.

[Rusoarmo]

I offered $200 for the Trek. Figure if they don't bite then screw it and I'll go with the Fuji.

[tvan]

One general method I've seen used to price a used bike is to find the MSRP.  Then take 35% off that for general mark-up.  Then depreciate it 10% each year.  So that Trek bike at an 1100 MSRP is now worth around $160-170.  $250 isnt far off, but I think you could do better.

For example I recently purchased a 2007 Specialized Tricross Sport (cyclocross bike which is great for commuting) for less than $200.  At an msrp of 1100 that person should have been selling it for closer to $300+. 

[Rusoarmo]

Not sure if the market I'm in makes it more difficult to find "great" deals. Lot of people ride bikes around here. I don't want to spend a lot of money on the first one so $200-250 for my first bike is plenty. If it lasts me 2-3 years and I stick with it, I'll pay to upgrade later.

[Rusoarmo]

Looks like I'm picking up the Trek for $200. Not bad I say seeing as how they originally were asking $300

[wotan]

check this site.   http://www.bikesdirect.com/?gclid=CKy_iPSmuMcCFc0WHwod6UsN1A

[frugaliknowit]

As you have not biked in years, I would not get a drop handle bar bike for a commuter bike.  There's just no need for it and you will find it uncomfortable (at least for a while), particularly if you wear a back pack.  For commuting purposes (streets/stop & go), I prefer flat bar.

With confidence, I reccomend (new or used), Specialized Sirrus, new or used:  http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/multi-use/sirrus/sirrus.  I have a 2004 model. 

[Rusoarmo]

I was looking at the Sirrus and I really like it. However I don't know if it's just Seattle, but bikes seem to depreciate slower here.

My plan is to use this Trek 2000 for a bit. First small short trips to the store a couple miles away, park and ride, etc. Then, slowly make my way up to longer trips. @ $0.50 saved per mile, 400 miles for the bike to pay itself off. Once that happens I will start looking into something better.

[tvan]

I was looking at the Sirrus and I really like it. However I don't know if it's just Seattle, but bikes seem to depreciate slower here.

My plan is to use this Trek 2000 for a bit. First small short trips to the store a couple miles away, park and ride, etc. Then, slowly make my way up to longer trips. @ $0.50 saved per mile, 400 miles for the bike to pay itself off. Once that happens I will start looking into something better.

I think that's everywhere.  People think because they never ride their bike that it's worth the same as when they purchased it ten years ago. 

[Rusoarmo]

Well looks like the guy with the Fuji came through last minute and lowered the the price to $150.

It's a 2013 Fuji Absolute 2.3

I believe MSRP is $410 so even following that 35%, and then 10% each year (even down to 2016 since new models are around the corner) I got a pretty decent or at least fair deal.

[neo von retorch]

I don't know a lot about bikes, but I think you're overvaluing "newness." If you can get an $1100 bike for $200 vs a $400 bike for $150... what's more likely to be a higher quality bike? While tires wear and other components will eventually age and need replacing, the miles/years on the older but "better" bike probably don't have all that much impact. Personally, I would go for the Trek in this comparison (though I would dig around a little more and try to understand the specifications and components to better understand what goes into those MSRPs and what makes a bike better.)

[Matt_D]

I don't know a lot about bikes, but I think you're overvaluing "newness." If you can get an $1100 bike for $200 vs a $400 bike for $150... what's more likely to be a higher quality bike? While tires wear and other components will eventually age and need replacing, the miles/years on the older but "better" bike probably don't have all that much impact. Personally, I would go for the Trek in this comparison (though I would dig around a little more and try to understand the specifications and components to better understand what goes into those MSRPs and what makes a bike better.)

You're partially right (age doesn't matter THAT much, I have a perfectly functional bike from the 80's), but some of the components (like shifters and brakes) have gotten so much better in the last 10-15 years that most of the entry/mid level stuff is now just as good as high-end stuff from a little earlier. A cheaper newer bike is probably going to be heavier than the older more expensive one, but functionally will still be pretty good (as long as you don't go TOO cheap and get what some folks call a "bike-shaped object").

In this case, my recommendation was more based on the original purpose for the respective bikes than the price point and age.