Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Bike Cost Versus Improved Quality: Where does the curve flatten?

Jump to Latest
21 - 40 of 41 Posts
#21 ·
I had a $1,600 FS bike that I was convinced was a piece of junk, and in 2012, I went to a large demo event and road several more expensive bikes from well known manufacturers. By the time I was done, I was convinced that my bike wasn't so bad after all, and I was feeling good about keeping my money.

Then I took a ride on a pimped out carbon superbike, and I quickly realized how much better a bike can be. I went out 2 days later and bought that same bike with a higher end but not top end build kit.

I've never regretted it for one second.

Since then, I've purposefully ridden the same or similar bikes with lower end spec sheets, and there was no question to me - they did not ride nearly as well. So for me, the diminishing return curve flattens out at the $5k - 6k level.

Not to say I wouldn't have a good time on a lower speced ride, but I get a lot of enjoyment out of riding the bike I ride, and in the future, that's the level of bike I'll be shopping for (when the time comes, which I expect is still years away).
 
#22 ·
It's a individual decision based on what and how you ride. At one extreme, someone who rides DH or Freeride is gonna be looking at a whole different line of parts, with prices based on smaller manufacturing runs. At the other extreme, lots of folks have a blast on $400 singlespeeds ( which can be durable as all heck )

It also depends heavily on your funds. Past a certain point of having funds, the feel of ball bearing shifters, a high POE hub or a light laterally stiff frame is worth it. Going further, there is even a point where ceramic bearings and the like makes sense.

Nice stuff makes your bike feel nice, how much that is worth to you individually depends on who you are and how much money you have.

For me the point is:
Steel Frame and Fork
SLX crankset, brakes, derailleurs
XT shifters
Factory Tubeless wheels with $80-$100 worth of tires
Heavily discounted alloy post, bars, stem
 
#23 ·
Circlip said:
The phrases "every little bit helps" and "diminishing returns" are somewhat at odds with one another IMHO.
Click to expand...
This is absolutely, completely, factually correct. Spending more gets stuff that is better, but for each additional dollar spent (marginal cost) what is the marginal return for that?

What's important is that for each rider there is a point where the marginal gains in performance stop being worth it.

Somebody with considerable disposable income who is riding 50 miles a week? less than XT/X0 is actually a poor value proposition, just because those parts are going to get used right out to the failure point, and that rider is extracting every bit of value from what they got. This rider will probably still have residual budget to go on trips with the bike, assuming they aren't curating their own garage museum collection of carbon bikes.
Weekend warrior with a still developing skillset - that threshold is probably a lot lower, it just needs to be something that is more capable than the rider, includes key safety margin updates (good tires, hydraulic disk brakes, dropper post if applicable) and is serviceable to run an entire season (or at least full weekend trips) on a tune-up. Getting something Deore/LX X5/X7 with hydraulic brakes and air sprung suspension with non-OEM tires is going to be plenty of bike, and still leave budget for doing cool stuff like travel to awesome places, and acquire requisite gear to get out and use it.

There is a point with any hobby activity where being able to buy functional pieces of art has its own value - elegant design, typically driven by trying to marry maximum functionality with minimum weight - for me this happens to be in any aerospace material driven activity/sport where weight is always a handling factor, where there's always a $/g ratio that can be justified at different cost levels. I've picked up a few maxims from messing with stuff like that:
Top end stuff retains value better than mid-range stuff. Strange, but name brand top of the line stuff if it's ever resold is going to appeal to a bigger audience and retain value better in most instances
Completely customized/aftermarket tweaked setups are always of the most value to the person that customized them - and wearing those out through use a love is the best thing ever.
There are always two questions - What can you do to it? What can you do with it? The former is easier to wax philosophical about on the internet; the latter is really (hopefully) the ultimate goal, so go and do it yourself instead of only living that through GoPro promoted videos.
 
#25 ·
People try to talk about an "average" (I hate that descriptor) or "typical" (like that word much better) mountain biker, but I think that's one of those ideas that gets harder and harder to pin down the more you look at it.

The weather is pretty nice right now where I am. Maybe a little hot and dry, but I'm in the Pacific Northwest. About seven months out of the year, it's just depressing. Everybody's having a flurry of hiking and kayaking and the parking lots at MTB trailheads are overflowing. Where are all those people most of the year? Can we kick them out of MTB for riding about ten times a year? On the other hand, there are still cars in the lots in December and when there's snow, there are almost always ruts and tire tracks already there when I get to the trails. (And some of my teammate's Strava pages are pretty insane.) I really think it's a spectrum. The idea that there's a peak in there somewhere is appealing, but I suspect there's more people with a bike in the garage than fair-weather riders, more fair-weather riders than 100 day riders, more 100 day riders than 200 day riders, etc.

I think that's some of why there such incredible differentiation and range in bikes available from the majors. They need to sell bikes to everyone who wants one to hang in the garage or to ride a few times during the nice part of the season or they won't sell much at all. They need aspirational bikes to be seen as high-end. They need bikes for the 100+-day riders so they'll be seen on the trails. And they need them in every discipline people are excited about. Sometimes they'll even create a discipline.

I do think that the product designers have a certain user in mind when they design a bike, and they're trying to make the most appealing bike for each pricepoint for that user. That works okay for people with flexible budgets and a fairly realistic idea of what they want to do, I think, and has trouble with people on tight budgets or just getting into the sport. Which is kind of a problem since I think MTB is somewhat high turnover, I think, and kids with nothing but time and a little talent are potentially good future customers and promoters of brands.
 
#26 ·
It's really an absurd question for anyone with even a small amount of understanding of basic economics.

Your flawed assumption, based on your question, is that cost and quality are directly related. Even more flawed is that that direct relationship can be captured by as simple equation. We could then use a bit of calculus to determine where that curve flattens and, voila, everyone can buy the stuff that hits that point.

Obviously, quality and cost are not directly related...not so much due to the quality side of the equation, but due to the cost side. Cost doesn't reflect value. It reflects what someone is willing to pay for that item.

Let's take a simple bottom bracket as an example.

I can grab a SRAM GXP BB for about $25. And they suck. And they are ugly. Plain gray aluminum. I wore one out to the point where the cranks jiggled around in about 400 miles.

But I can grab a Chris King for about $175 (including the right spacers). It will last forever and it's gorgeous.

Which BB has the best value? Depends who you ask. Am I getting 7x the value out of the Chris King? Depends who you ask.

The guy on the $10,000 Lynsky with polished titanium tubes and all components matched in a gorgeous deep blue probably thinks the CK is the best value.

The guy riding a beater singlespeed he built out of stuff in his parts bin might say "I'll destroy the frame before I replace enough SRAMs to warrant a CK!"

The term economists use in place of cost or value is "utility" and that's why your question can't be answered. Humans naturally seek utility, which is an aggregate sum of satisfaction. And that utility differs for each person.

Utility, for you, may be a part that lasts long enough for the bike to become obsolete. Utility for me may be a part that matches my frame color and is as light as humanly possible...even if I have to replace it once a year.
 
#27 ·
The problem always comes down to quantifying marginal utility - as BM alluded to when it's a difference between riding back and hiking back, it's really painfully obvious. Away from the edge cases, as soon as it hits an area where it's less binary to determine, the answer from everybody here seems to be 'of course it's diminishing returns, but I'd buy it again'... which creates problems for even the most simplistic memoryless zero-retained-value pleasure-machine models.
 
#28 ·
The "knee" in the curve is probably right around $1200: ~X7 components, factory hubs, straight-gauge spokes, mostly alloy components... durable stuff. Maybe a workable-but-heavy suspension fork. This bike will get you anywhere you want to go within reason and is worth upgrading with a better fork and wheels.

I does depend on your own priorities. I used to run LX rear derailleurs on everything because I could get them cheap and not cry as often as I broke them (old, bad riding habits). I never cared what kind of shifters I had (mine were "friction rapidfire" ;) ).

-F
 
Discussion starter · #29 ·
@KevinGT: even considering utility (as defined by economists), I don't think the basic cost-versus-value question is absurd.

I do see your point that utility is unique for every rider; on the other hand, I think there absolutely is a flattening of the curve for each of us—even if it's in a different place for each of us.

I mean, sure—if we use the line of reasoning that literally everything is relative and ultimately subjective...then, in a sense, everything is meaningless. Taken to its extreme, this approach would suggest there is no point in quantifying anything. A Huffy bike from Walmart could be considered every bit as good as a state-of-the-art Trek if the rider achieves joy and satisfaction from it.

But as long as people continue to assume that utility goes up with cost, then there will be a curve, and that curve will flatten for everyone at some point.

Just sayin'. :)
Scott
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#30 ·
To me, the curve flattens out significantly as you approach pro-level components in the usual lineups. I personally can't tell a functional difference between XT and XTR, or X9-X0-XX or however SRAM goes. For example, my XO derailleur was destroyed and I replaced it with an X9, can't tell a difference (but it was quite a bit less than an X0).

Personally, I'm a little doubtful when I hear someone say something like "that XTR ______ is so much better than the XT" or something along those lines. I doubt most riders could tell any difference at all.
 
#31 ·
hard to say


but in general

for the big bike makers
----
$2300-$2700 for 2015 mtb or road,

you are getting a bike which eclipses $4500 bikes from years up to 2008
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#32 · (Edited)
SWriverstone said:
A Huffy bike from Walmart could be considered every bit as good as a state-of-the-art Trek if the rider achieves joy and satisfaction from it.
Click to expand...
In that case a huffy couldn't be considered as "as good", but rather better, because we have the equation set as value vs cost.

Most kids get their first wheels from Walmart. I have been chasing that first high ever since .. alas, it is never as good as the first time. I miss you, Huffy Road Rat <3
 
#33 ·
I think Llama summed it up fairly good for "The Avg Joe" saying that these days, if a bike has Deore/X5 parts on it, you're getting a very decent bike for the $$ you're spending, my loaner/rentals all use modern Deore 10spd and they work fantastic, no complaints. That being said, I said "For the Avg Joe" i.e. the person who rides somewhat regularly/a couple times a week, maybe.

For me who rides normally at least 3 days a week, XT is my value for $$, you get the trickle down from XTR, but it isn't weight weenied out, so it's more durable than XTR IMHO. If it's my personal bike or I can find it on sale, XT is what I prefer definitely for shifters and most other drivetrain parts, however I have a personal bike setup with ZEE shifter and 10spd Clutch Deore RD to try 10spd and it shifts as easily and smoothly as I could want, as easy to shift as full XTR, but it doesn't have the multiple upshifts XTR/XT has and weighs a little bit more.

Didn't get to go through all the replies, but want to, interesting thread and topic.
 
#34 ·
my simplistic answer to the Original Post is the plateau for hardtails seems to be somewhere around $1500-2000 and for dualies it's about $2500-3000. this is based on my recent poking about the internets, thinking about my next possible bike purchase.

think about the really cool bikes you can get in those price ranges...

the OP asked what seems to me to have been a simple question and got a lot of not-so-simple answers.

but such is only my opinion, and you're free to disagree with me.
 
#36 ·
SWriverstone said:
So the question I ponder is...why are we all SO obsessed with equipment...when we all KNOW that ability, discipline, intelligence, training strategy, etc. make a MUCH bigger difference? (Again-I'm not talking about top racers-I'm talking about average run-of-the-mill recreational riders, who still tend to obsess over equipment!)
Click to expand...
Because it's easier to obsess over equipment than to train...
Take me for example, played golf yesterday, looking forward to a ride today (Sunday) with my girlfriend. It's pissed down all day. I've moped around the house all day and tried to figure what I could buy for my bike (that I absolutely don't need). It's true of nearly all sports, that excellent players can use almost any equipment. But rather than jump on a stationery bike (I don't have one) I've perused Ti Springs, Saint brakes and eaten KFC.
 
#37 ·
I read somewhere that everyone thinks he's above average at everything he cares about, except for clinically depressed people. Unless people care about only a very small proportion of what they do during the day, this is statistically impossible.

I like to think I'm pretty badass on a mountain bike. This gets reinforced relatively often. But there's a group of guys at work that are much, much faster than me on anything that trends downhill. Doesn't even have to be by very much. They also use long-travel bikes and really fat tires with big, prominent knobs. I don't even own something with that much travel and I usually keep my old bike at work. The combination of them being faster, me thinking I'm fast, and the disparity in our equipment makes it really easy to think that if I just bought the right bike or the right tires, I'd be able to keep up with them.

I went through a lot of tires relatively quickly a few years ago because I recognized they're important and I wanted to be faster on sketchy traction. It's tempting.

In the last two years, I've been able to be more relaxed on my bike and I'm being much more flexible with how I use my feet. This season, I'm on tires I don't even like but I'm continuing to get faster. Go figure.
 
#38 ·
Its not a mountain bike, but its relevant.

I just got my girlfriend her first road bike. It was $350 bucks delivered, new. We did our first ride yesterday, and she loves it. The bike was flawless for the whole ride, which was a few hours long.

My bike is all 105 or ultegra, handbuilt light wheels, swapped parts for weight or fit. Typical road bike stuff. Its 19lb ready to ride with a small bag, a tube and some other stuff I didnt bother to remove for weighing. Not top of the line, but its a higher end road bike. Hers is not, its all the new cheap claris group, steel fork. Its low end stuff, and it works just fine.

Im not saying her bike is perfect. I think she could use a carbon fork, and the crank has to go. Ive bent better quality rings in a week on other bikes. So thats not the line of big returns, but man it seems like its close. Another ~100 in reliability upgrades and that bike will last years, for a fraction of what mine cost.
 
#39 ·
If you like your $500 bike that is what matters.

I always advise folk to spend more than you dare and you will not regret it. My bike regrets have ALWAYS been from going cheap. Once the money is spent the money is gone and that is the end of it. But the purchased item is what you live with-everyday.

As to the OP; the $700 bike is fine, but going to $1200 is twice as good. Going to $2000 is smart over the $1200, if you can afford it. Spending $3500 on a bike is fine, but you're really only gaining 20% in weight savings and quality. And yet here I am.

Going to $5000 10% gain, but the bike becomes art. $7000+, someone likes to fondle his piece of art and may have a need to keep up with the Joneses
 
#40 ·
At some point I feel greed took over many bike companies. I was just browsing the Thunderbolt at the Rocky Mountain website. $12,000!! Granted, it's a good bike, it's got the latest bling, but for basically that price I could get a bike with a BMW motor, electronically tuned suspension, heated grips, headlights....This bike industry needs a reality check when it comes to it's pricing.
 
21 - 40 of 41 Posts
About this Discussion
40 Replies
26 Participants
Last post:
AndrwSwitch
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
posts
16M
members
534K
Since
1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Discussion Downhill - Freeride California - Norcal Shocks and Suspension Passion