Cost of decent new road bike?

Reid Priedhorsky

Hello all,

I'm debating whether to upgrade my existing bike or buy a new one. How
much can I expect to pay for a decent new road bike? Decent meaning, as
cheap as possible given a few constraints:

1. If I buy a new bike, I want it to be durable. Given appropriate
babying, I'd like it to last 20 years or more.

2. Heavy is fine. I'm no racer. Steel chainrings? Sounds great to me.
Heavier and more durable wins over lighter (generally).

3. 7 speeds is fine. (It seems that nobody makes less than 8 anymore, so
that's fine too.)

4. Purchase would happen this fall or winter (need time to save).

Basically, I'm looking for a utilitarian, comfortable road bike that will
last me a long time and maybe take me touring sometime. What does such a
machine cost these days?

I see there have been many threads on the general economics of upgrading
vs. buying new, and I'm not interested in more discussion on that. I'm
looking to get a feel for what I'd need to spend on a new one, so I can
make an informed decision for myself.

Another consideration is that my existing bike has little chance of being
stolen given the paint scratches and 1983 technology, but a shiny new bike
would be much higher risk, esp. since I park it on campus with fair
regularity.

I live in Minneapolis, Minnesota, if that makes any difference.

Thanks,

Reid

--
http://reidster.net

Mike Jacoubowsky

> I'm debating whether to upgrade my existing bike or buy a new one. How
> much can I expect to pay for a decent new road bike? Decent meaning, as
> cheap as possible given a few constraints:

> 1. If I buy a new bike, I want it to be durable. Given appropriate
> babying, I'd like it to last 20 years or more.

If you're really expecting to get 20 years out of a bike, the amortized cost
becomes pretty darned low!
>
> 2. Heavy is fine. I'm no racer. Steel chainrings? Sounds great to me.
> Heavier and more durable wins over lighter (generally).

Steel chainrings are generally an indication of something that's more
cheaply made and won't shift as well. They'll also be more difficult to
replace if they get bent, because they're typically thinner and don't just
"drop in" like aluminum ones do. You'll typically require a thin spacer,
which may, or may not, be easily found.

> 3. 7 speeds is fine. (It seems that nobody makes less than 8 anymore, so
> that's fine too.)

If you're going to keep the bike around for a long time, 7 speeds may be a
legacy issue. 8-speed equipment is much easier to buy than 7-speed (many
more choices), and this will become more of a problem with time. If you go
8-speed, you have a lot more options down the road, since 8-speed equipment
is more readily adaptable to 9-speed, which, again, gives you that many more
options and allows you to keep it running longer.

> 4. Purchase would happen this fall or winter (need time to save).
>
> Basically, I'm looking for a utilitarian, comfortable road bike that will
> last me a long time and maybe take me touring sometime. What does such a
> machine cost these days?

You might look at a touring bike, such as the TREK 520, which runs about
$1000. Or perhaps an X01 "utility"/cyclocross bike, for around $900.
Either one gets you very sturdy equipment, a well-made frame, lifetime
warranty on the frameset, and a company that will probably still be in
business 20 years from now.

> I see there have been many threads on the general economics of upgrading
> vs. buying new, and I'm not interested in more discussion on that. I'm
> looking to get a feel for what I'd need to spend on a new one, so I can
> make an informed decision for myself.
>
> Another consideration is that my existing bike has little chance of being
> stolen given the paint scratches and 1983 technology, but a shiny new bike
> would be much higher risk, esp. since I park it on campus with fair
> regularity.

Could be more trouble than it's worth (and more cost) trying to upgrade a
pre-STI, pre-dual-pivot-brake, pre-130mm axle spacing bike. And, if you've
got a lot of miles on it, there's always the chance that the frame is
approaching its lifespan as well (figure 35-50k miles for a frame, as a
rough rule of thumb; some last longer, some less).

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Gooserider

"Reid Priedhorsky" <reid@reidster.net> wrote in message
newsan.2004.04.04.20.04.17.931350@reidster.net...
> Hello all,
>
> I'm debating whether to upgrade my existing bike or buy a new one. How
> much can I expect to pay for a decent new road bike? Decent meaning, as
> cheap as possible given a few constraints:
>
> 1. If I buy a new bike, I want it to be durable. Given appropriate
> babying, I'd like it to last 20 years or more.
>
> 2. Heavy is fine. I'm no racer. Steel chainrings? Sounds great to me.
> Heavier and more durable wins over lighter (generally).
>
> 3. 7 speeds is fine. (It seems that nobody makes less than 8 anymore, so
> that's fine too.)
>
> 4. Purchase would happen this fall or winter (need time to save).
>
> Basically, I'm looking for a utilitarian, comfortable road bike that will
> last me a long time and maybe take me touring sometime. What does such a
> machine cost these days?


You have basically described a touring bike, or a cyclocross bike. Here are
some:

Rei Novara Randonee----$799

http://tinyurl.com/2uh9k

Jamis Aurora-------------$729.95

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/jamis/aurora.html

Trek 520-----$1099.99

http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2004/road/520.jsp

Fuji Touring------$840

http://tinyurl.com/2c794

Of course, there's always eBay, if you do your research and know your
measurements. New bikes from Iron Horse(aluminum frames) are available there
for about $400 or so. Used bikes abound, and can be quite a deal, but caveat
emptor!

Mike

Q.

"Reid Priedhorsky" <reid@reidster.net> wrote in message
newsan.2004.04.04.20.04.17.931350@reidster.net...
> Hello all,
>
> I'm debating whether to upgrade my existing bike or buy a new one. How
> much can I expect to pay for a decent new road bike? Decent meaning, as
> cheap as possible given a few constraints:
<snip>
> Basically, I'm looking for a utilitarian, comfortable road bike that will
> last me a long time and maybe take me touring sometime. What does such a
> machine cost these days?
>
> I see there have been many threads on the general economics of upgrading
> vs. buying new, and I'm not interested in more discussion on that. I'm
> looking to get a feel for what I'd need to spend on a new one, so I can
> make an informed decision for myself.
<snip>

For what it's worth, I've been looking into the Felt F80 myself, for around
$800. Most decent low end road bikes I've looked at fall in that price
range.
http://www.feltracing.com/2004_bikes/f80.html
Anything less and the parts get kinda rinky dink.

C.Q.C.

Ron Hardin

My Huffys typically last 40k miles, the thing that does them in being
that enough parts _simultaneously_ need replacement that it's cheaper
to buy a new Huffy.

Huffy has a mail order parts department and getting replacements is
no problem.

My triple chainwheel plus bearings and axle runs about $15. The parts
are cheap, ie.

I happen to have an ``Ironman'' triathelon at the moment, which was
about $150 new, one of their upscale 1998 models. 8k miles a year,
year in and year out.
--
Ron Hardin
rhhardin@mindspring.com

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

DDB

You're saying you put 8000 miles a year on a Huffy?!?!

I'm skeptical..........................

but even if you do ...damn that must hurt!!!


"Ron Hardin" <rhhardin@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:40709288.5722@mindspring.com...
> My Huffys typically last 40k miles, the thing that does them in being
> that enough parts _simultaneously_ need replacement that it's cheaper
> to buy a new Huffy.
>
> Huffy has a mail order parts department and getting replacements is
> no problem.
>
> My triple chainwheel plus bearings and axle runs about $15. The parts
> are cheap, ie.
>
> I happen to have an ``Ironman'' triathelon at the moment, which was
> about $150 new, one of their upscale 1998 models. 8k miles a year,
> year in and year out.
> --
> Ron Hardin
> rhhardin@mindspring.com
>
> On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

David Kerber

In article <pan.2004.04.04.20.04.17.931350@reidster.net>,
reid@reidster.net says...
> Hello all,
>
> I'm debating whether to upgrade my existing bike or buy a new one. How
> much can I expect to pay for a decent new road bike? Decent meaning, as
> cheap as possible given a few constraints:
>
> 1. If I buy a new bike, I want it to be durable. Given appropriate
> babying, I'd like it to last 20 years or more.
>
> 2. Heavy is fine. I'm no racer. Steel chainrings? Sounds great to me.
> Heavier and more durable wins over lighter (generally).
>
> 3. 7 speeds is fine. (It seems that nobody makes less than 8 anymore, so
> that's fine too.)
>
> 4. Purchase would happen this fall or winter (need time to save).
>
> Basically, I'm looking for a utilitarian, comfortable road bike that will
> last me a long time and maybe take me touring sometime. What does such a
> machine cost these days?

A Fuji Touring, with 27 speeds, Deore/Tiagra mix, STI, steel frame,
fairly heavy duty wheels and tires, a rack, and eyelets for fenders is
around $800 at a bike shop. From what I've read, the weak spot on that
bike for durability would definitely be the shifters. The frame and
wheels seem to be pretty much bullet-proof.

.....

--
Dave Kerber
Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

David Reuteler

Reid Priedhorsky <reid@reidster.net> wrote:
> I live in Minneapolis, Minnesota, if that makes any difference.

do you ride in the winter? (and before you laugh i'm from minneapolis).
if you do i'd be partial to aluminum not least of all for aesthetics
once the salt gets to it.
--
david reuteler
reuteler@visi.com

bfd

"David Reuteler" <reuteler@visi.com> wrote in message
news:4070b07e$0$17251$a1866201@newsreader.visi.com...
> Reid Priedhorsky <reid@reidster.net> wrote:
> > I live in Minneapolis, Minnesota, if that makes any difference.
>
> do you ride in the winter? (and before you laugh i'm from minneapolis).
> if you do i'd be partial to aluminum not least of all for aesthetics
> once the salt gets to it.
> --
> david reuteler
> reuteler@visi.com

A bike that should meet all your concerns and you ought to consider is the
Rivendell Romulus here:

http://www.rivbike.com/html/bikes_romulusframes.html

Alternatively, if you plan on doing more trails/offroad use, check out the
Atlantis:
http://www.rivbike.com/html/bikes_atlantisframes.html

David Reuteler

bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
> A bike that should meet all your concerns and you ought to consider is the
> Rivendell Romulus here:

one minnesota winter would have that steel bike looking like an old schwinn
varsity. structurally i'm sure it'd be just fine, but aesthetically no.
my old cannondale weathered many a winter and looked reasonably good.

isn't rivendell in, like, the bay area? do they even have snow there?
--
david reuteler
reuteler@visi.com

Pbwalther

>You're saying you put 8000 miles a year on a Huffy?!?!
>
>I'm skeptical..........................
>
>but even if you do ...damn that must hurt!!!

> My Huffys typically last 40k miles, the thing that does them in being
>> that enough parts _simultaneously_ need replacement that it's cheaper
>> to buy a new Huffy.

Ron Hardin

Well, Ron has been posting here for quite some time. Ron seems to be the
champion advocate of ultracheap cycling.

Personally, I believe him when he says he gets 40K out of a Huffy. He sounds
like he knows mechanical stuff and he certainly sounds as if he has had
experience with squeezing umpteen miles out of a Huffy. Sure for most of us,
it would be like flogging a dead horse. But I guess it is a sort of sport for
Ron. Different people enjoy different things I suppose.

However, I would advise normal mortals to move up a bit on the quality scale.
I doubt very many people have the tolerance for Huffy quality that Ron has.

The advice of getting a reasonably decent touring bike seems to me to be about
optimum. If you want durability, reliablity and you don't care about
performance, it is hard to beat a touring bike.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <4070e156$0$17264$a1866201@newsreader.visi.com>,
David Reuteler <reuteler@visi.com> wrote:
>bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> A bike that should meet all your concerns and you ought to consider is the
>> Rivendell Romulus here:
>
>one minnesota winter would have that steel bike looking like an old schwinn
>varsity. structurally i'm sure it'd be just fine, but aesthetically no.
>my old cannondale weathered many a winter and looked reasonably good.
>
>isn't rivendell in, like, the bay area? do they even have snow there?

_ If you were ambitious, there are about 2-3 days a year you
could ride at least a few miles on snow covered roads. You need
to get above 3K feet ( An hour or so from Walnut Creek). No salt
used as far as I know. Even in the Sierra they don't use as much
salt as on the east coast.

_ When I lived in Fort Collins I road a steel bike all winter
and didn't notice much paint damage. They don't use much salt
their either. Having spent much time around boats and salt water,
Aluminum is no magic bullet. Salt can destroy that just as well,
it just happens in a different manner.

_ Booker C. Bense


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQHF992TWTAjn5N/lAQEzYwQAh5i0Upxoy6F1I7AOmRz775f9Rm73TKBZ
REVLduV1pO07Nak8d2oYiwhOfoR7sukwFMyEd0BP+Xkx455qV+aKvVaETuOMYYzi
u4cQo41AXnZHDyle0UXOZbJwrK2Xa5Hwwzz5oFlTH+PIbEPRx2nj6JOqqQq/VQOB
BsLchjMkQ2g=
=AuO1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

David Kerber

In article <c4rulo$m0s$3@news.Stanford.EDU>,
bbense+rec.bicycles.misc.Apr.05.04@telemark.slac.stanford.edu says...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> In article <4070e156$0$17264$a1866201@newsreader.visi.com>,
> David Reuteler <reuteler@visi.com> wrote:
> >bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> A bike that should meet all your concerns and you ought to consider is the
> >> Rivendell Romulus here:
> >
> >one minnesota winter would have that steel bike looking like an old schwinn
> >varsity. structurally i'm sure it'd be just fine, but aesthetically no.
> >my old cannondale weathered many a winter and looked reasonably good.
> >
> >isn't rivendell in, like, the bay area? do they even have snow there?
>
> _ If you were ambitious, there are about 2-3 days a year you
> could ride at least a few miles on snow covered roads. You need
> to get above 3K feet ( An hour or so from Walnut Creek). No salt
> used as far as I know. Even in the Sierra they don't use as much
> salt as on the east coast.
>
> _ When I lived in Fort Collins I road a steel bike all winter
> and didn't notice much paint damage. They don't use much salt
> their either. Having spent much time around boats and salt water,
> Aluminum is no magic bullet. Salt can destroy that just as well,
> it just happens in a different manner.

And you don't see it as much.


--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

AMH

Reid Priedhorsky <reid@reidster.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.04.04.20.04.17.931350@reidster.net>...
> Hello all,
>
> I'm debating whether to upgrade my existing bike or buy a new one. How
> much can I expect to pay for a decent new road bike? Decent meaning, as
> cheap as possible given a few constraints:
>
> 1. If I buy a new bike, I want it to be durable. Given appropriate
> babying, I'd like it to last 20 years or more.
>
> 2. Heavy is fine. I'm no racer. Steel chainrings? Sounds great to me.
> Heavier and more durable wins over lighter (generally).
>
> 3. 7 speeds is fine. (It seems that nobody makes less than 8 anymore, so
> that's fine too.)
>
> 4. Purchase would happen this fall or winter (need time to save).
>
> Basically, I'm looking for a utilitarian, comfortable road bike that will
> last me a long time and maybe take me touring sometime. What does such a
> machine cost these days?
>
> I see there have been many threads on the general economics of upgrading
> vs. buying new, and I'm not interested in more discussion on that. I'm
> looking to get a feel for what I'd need to spend on a new one, so I can
> make an informed decision for myself.
>
> Another consideration is that my existing bike has little chance of being
> stolen given the paint scratches and 1983 technology, but a shiny new bike
> would be much higher risk, esp. since I park it on campus with fair
> regularity.

Hi Reid,

This is a pretty good scale:

Be ready to spend at least $300

$300-$500 A good used bike. If you're lucky you'll find a garage sale
where someone is getting rid of a never ridden, dusty Cannondale for
that price, maybe less if they are motivated to sell. New you'll get
an acceptable bike that will work.

$500 - $700 A well kept used bike, the owner of this bike should have
provided a fair amount of TLC. Brakes replaced, chain lubed, frame
cleaned, regularly. New you'll get a lighter frame that will last as
long as the cheaper new bike and probably the same components.

$700 - $1000 A used bike in excellent shape with some fancy whizz bang
components. New you'll get some better components.

$1000 and up should get you a solid ride with the latest components
with your choice of frame materials new or used.

As far as how long it will last is more dependant on you and luck of
the draw. Every body has a story how crappy X material is for frames
and how Y material is far far superior. An average person will do fine
with any frame material my steel, carbon fiber and titanium are/were
never a problem nor did I really notice a difference in ride.

my $0.02
Andy

>
> I live in Minneapolis, Minnesota, if that makes any difference.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Reid