/n/ will defend this

But with the crotch rocket the coffin is sold separately.

>>1076991

Sure, I'll take the bait.

You're looking at stuff with pretty low production volumes a lot of the time, so it's not that surprising that prices would be high in some cases. I do agree that a lot of the really high end stuff is a ripoff for what little benefit most people would get.

And as someone who has a couple motorcycles, it's not like a lot of those aren't a total ripoff either.

Bicycle
>top of the line race bike
>marginal gains
>extremely lightweight
>low volumes

Motorcycle
>low end model
>old cheap tech
>heavy
>high volumes

Why does this stale bait keep coming up. You're comparing apples to oranges. The $700 road bike would be much more valid comparison.

File: How could a WATCH be thousands of dollars.png (639KB, 1216x805px) Image search: [Google]

639KB, 1216x805px

>>1076991
>kinda pathetic to believe a WRISTWATCH could be worth more than $5, max... anyone who tells your otherwise is ripping you off

>>1077017
More to the point you're trying to make:

Bicycle
>Frameset made BY HAND, one at a time
>Limited production runs
>Very limited market size

Motorcycle
>Built on an ASSEMBLY LINE
>Large production runs
>Massive market size

>>1077149
Anyone who buys a rolex is a fucking retard

>>1076991
You're paying for R&D and many othe things, including advertisement. Richfags buying expensive top end bikes are funding the development of everything which trickles down to your low end bikes.

>>1077157
>retains value well
>tells time
>makes poorfags jelly
Doesn't seem like a bad investment desu

>>1077168

You've got 2/3. They're pretty shitty as actual time pieces.

>>1077165

This. I fully support dentist riders since it means next year's Tiagra, 105 etc. are going to be pretty nice.

>>1076991
I won't but used jap bikes have shit resale value. Look up what a 2010 Gixxer is worth

It's worth way less than a trek madone

File: commencal-furious.jpg (747KB, 1600x1066px) Image search: [Google]

747KB, 1600x1066px

>Road Freds are retarded

more at 11

>>1077149
Not to mention the materials that go into building it. Those bicycles are made out of specialized materials while the motorcycle uses steel and fiberglass for the most part. Kind of like how those Rolex watches have gold, diamond, and quartz in them as opposed to a simple digital watch made out of plastic and cheap circuit boards that are worth almost nothing.

>>1077224
Motorcycles have carbon fiber parts.

Rolex watches aren't quartz

Rolex watches these days are made from stainless steel and ceramic paint same as the 1960's

File: Rolex-Oysterquartz-17000-stainless-steel.jpg (76KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 800x800px

>>1077269
Oysterquartz would like to have a word with you
>>1077224
Wow, you're ignorant

>>1076991
But I can get a Thruster fixie, Huffy cruiser, or Roadmaster mountain bike at Wal-Mart for 79 bucks! My most expensive bike that I ever bought new was like $530 and it had quality parts on it. Past $700 there are diminishing returns for some riders, including myself. I don't want dual suspension or a carbon frame. I prefer steel or aluminum frames and hardtail/rigid bikes.

File: 1488153596031.png (797KB, 812x806px) Image search: [Google]

797KB, 812x806px

>>1077185
Nice skinny jeans, bro.
Aren't you a little old to be jumping around on a BMX?

it actually makes perfect sense

>>1076991
cycling has fucked me up, i could easily spend £4500 on a mountain bike, but really don't want to spend more than £3000 on a 125cc motorcycle.

I was thinking of getting a bike

Does riding a bike transfer to riding a motorbike?

>>1077017
the ninja 300 is not considered heavy

>old cheap tech
the teach is standard, comes with ABS

>>1077272
>>1077269
>>1077224
>>1077168
>>1077149

Holy shit you GQ reading dorks with your fucking watches. Everyone else thinks you're a fucking geek.

I have seriously not hired a guy for wearing one to an interview. Instantly saw he was an ego-case loser. Not something I need in my life


>>1077278
>But I can get a Thruster fixie, Huffy cruiser, or Roadmaster mountain bike at Wal-Mart for 79 bucks! My most expensive bike that I ever bought new was like $530 and it had quality parts on it. Past $700 there are diminishing returns for some riders, including myself. I don't want dual suspension or a carbon frame. I prefer steel or aluminum frames and hardtail/rigid bikes.

woke

>>1076991
>Png
>still blurry af
Oh let me guess you screenshotted this image from that turbo autist who made a youtube video about this?

>>1077478
>Oh let me guess you screenshotted this image from that turbo autist who made a youtube video about this?

very perceptive my fellow Schwalbe rider...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF4MIEkIBZs

>>1077288
>Nice skinny jeans, bro.
As opposed to tight lil fag shorts?

>>1077464
I don't wear a watch, asshole, I just used that as an example of what a fucking moron you (OP) are.

>>1076991
wow youre telling me a low end thing and an incredibly high end thing cost differently?

fucking dork, other bikes exist too

>>1077458
>Ninja 300 wet weight without rider: 174 kg
>Moto3(250 cc) minimum weight with rider: 148 kg
>Ninja 300 power: 25 kW
>estimated Moto3 power: >41 kW
Your Ninja seems heavy as fuck to me senpai. And seriously lacking power when compared to a modern race bike with similar displacement engine. Also ABS is so old as a tech that it's a requirement already for almost all motorcycles in EU, dirt bikes are excluded.

File: 1459150408509.jpg (121KB, 948x717px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 948x717px

>>1077288
>27.5
>bmx

>>1076994
I don't think he was looking for reasons why something could be overpriced, he was stating that he believes the price isn't justified by legitimate performance/quality/etc. Anyone can come up with bullshit reasons to offer an expensive product.

As someone who has three motorcycles, I think they have damn near the cheapest convenience/price ratio in all of personal transportation.

Even a $20K Ducati is gonna outperform cars that cost 10 to 20 times as much.

>>1077149
If you don't think the market size for bicycles is larger than that of motorcycles, you have a shit world-view.

>>1077456
Yea definitely. If you've never ridden a bicycle and go straight to a motorcycle I'd imagine you're much worse off.

>>1078367
Market for bicycles is definitely larger. However the market for bicycles that are within the same price range as motorcycles is definitely much smaller.

>>1078371
So you're trying to explain 'why they're expensive' which is unrelated to what OP asked. OP's stated topic is 'they're not worth the price'.

I think he's saying the performance difference between $700 and $11K is negligible for bicycles. You and many others are derailing the thread trying to explain how you could come up with an $11K price tag. Which is a topic that has more to do with economics and business and engineering than transportation.

>>1078411
If we have money to spend, why can't we do so? Even if the marginal return is small, that's still return

>>1078411
>I think he's saying the performance difference between $700 and $11K is negligible for bicycles.
It is for everything. You could say the same about TVs, computers, smartphones, headphones, clothing, streetcars and why not motorcycles. It's simply not a fucking argument.

>>1076993
More people die on a bicycle then motorcycles lol

>>1078519
*citation needed

File: cherrypicking.png (730KB, 1000x1090px) Image search: [Google]

730KB, 1000x1090px

Look Ma! i can cherrypick my arguments too!!!!

There's no reason to buy a bike over 1000 dollars.

None of you are professional riders.

>>1078411
That $11k bicycle probably isn't running a neco fall apart in your hand headset

It's probably not including welgo pedals

Or hl seat posts

Or SRAM or FSA anything

Low end bikes are seriously low end.

I don't understand why people have brand loyalty to bike parts when the quality is just so trash.

Only exception is Shimano but that's only because they need to meet via requirements and shit like neco headsets and SRAM brakes don't

>>1076991
>one hand built in America, using cutting edge tech of its time
>one shitty mass produced vehicle that has old tech, made in a grimy factory in Asia

>>1078535
It's nice to have nice things

>>1078553
>cutting edge
>le bb86 pressfit face

>>1078516
Neither I nor OP was trying to forbid you from spending money, not sure why you're asking me that question.

I think most of us agree, there's at least some small benefit between $700 and $11K. If you want to have a discussion about what you get between those two price levels, this is the thread for you.

>>1078517
I'm confused, it sounds like you're contradicting yourself. You agree that OP's concept is so true you consider it universal, then you say it's 'not an argument'? Not sure what you mean by 'argument' there but I think the goal of the thread here is to discuss that negligible difference. When it is and is not worth it, etc.

If you're asking my personal opinion, I absolutely think the concept is true for motorcycles and most everything like you said. Probably even more so moto than bicycle. E.G. you can spend about $10K on a slightly used S1000RR, or you can pay millions for a MotoGP bike that took a team of engineers to develop. The performance difference between those two is negligible for a layman.

>>1078545
I don't know a ton about about bicycles and the only brand I recognized from your incoherent rambling was Shimano. Not really sure what you're saying. Are you saying a $700 bike is low-end?

>>1078411
But I wasn't trying to explain why they're expensive. That has already been covered in this thread.

>>1078535
Cycling is a hobby for many people instead of being a way of transportation. If the $11k bike makes you feel happy while riding it definitely is worth it.

I have a $5k Fred sled that I only use on nice dry summer days for recreation. Haven't regretted buying it for a second as it's exactly what I want from a bike. I also have a sub $1k alloy bike that I use for commuting and on shitty days. There is a noticeable difference between my bikes in advantage of the Fred sled. Would there be a noticeable difference between a ~$2-3k and my $5k bike? Yes, but now we're reaching the negligible differences terrain. Would that $2k bike evoke the same feeling while riding it than the more expensive bike? Certainly not, and that's the reason for buying a more expensive bike in my case.

>>1078649
>Not sure what you mean by 'argument' there but I think the goal of the thread here is to discuss that negligible difference.
No, it isn't. It's for poorfags to feel better about themselves. Everyone who buys expensive watches, knives, guns, cameras, boats or other hobby equipment is keenly aware of what hard and soft values they're paying for and why.
The rest is just whining from poor and/or ignorant people who need to justify to themselves riding a bike boom boat anchor with downtube shifters.

>>1078535
There is no reason to buy a motorcycle over 3000 dollars.
You are not a professinal rider.

>>1077157
Yup. Truly rich people buy Patek instead

>>1077165
>bicycle
>Research and Development

comeonnow.jpg

Anyways, some motorcycles are mass-produced since the 80's and are dirt-cheap even brand new. KLR650, Viragos, Ninja 250/650, Rebels, CR600, ect. Japs make good motorcycles and plan for the long term. In the US used Japanese bikes are dirt-cheap. Especially older under 700cc cruisers are probably the cheapest motor vehicle in the market. Nevermind something like a CG125 or a Supercub and all of it's clones.

That said, there is always a niche market for wealthy nerds or desperate competitive athletes for a product that normally costs 200-800$ but is sold for 10 or 20 times as much. Look at archery, or firearm sports, skiing/snowboarding ect. Rich people or ultra-competitive people will buy very exclusive, high end products. Is that $7,000 scope 10 times better than a $700 scope? Nope. Is it 5% better? Yep. Anything better for a lower price Nope. Bought and paid.

So yeah, a multi-thousand dollar bicycle is a thing because you can't compete in the Giro d'Italia on a Ninja 250.

>>1078801
>skiing
>exclusive ultra high end super expensive gear
Nigga what. You can buy handmade pair of race ready alpine skis for ~$1k. And if you're even enthusiast level skier you can tell the difference between that FIS stamped race pair and the "enthusiast" model which sells for almost the same price. Intermediate level skis are pretty much unskiable for someone who is used to race skis.

Other parts of skiing can certainly be really expensive and some people do buy into certain image when they go skiing. However they don't do it for marginal gains.

>>1078803
I know, sorry, skiing is a bad example, since even the spendiest performance skis are still in 4-figure terms and the best are still 3-figures.

Rich skiiers spend money on drugs and hotel rooms, food, ect. The sport it'self is only moderately-high expensive but the equipment never runs extremely high.

It's never cheap either, though. A bicycle or motorcycle helmet you can get for $50, a ski helmet will cost like 5 times that. But nobody is selling $1000 ski helmets, either, like in some specialty sports.

>>1078649
A $700 bike is on the very low end

>>1078801
Shimano has a very serious research and development department and is possibly the world's leading brand because they're the only ones in road cycling that meet strict Japanese guidelines on a road worth registerable bicycle.

These chink companies popular in America will not be allowed on Japanese road going registered bicyces due to lack of VIA quality regulation guideline minimum standards

>>1078801
. Is that $7,000 scope 10 times better than a $700 scope?

Yes

Everything from the bottom bracket ball bearings to the frameset vary widely in quality on a bike.

If you've ever disassembled a cheap bike and have seen cheap parts just shatter or seize then you know what I'm talking about.

Shimano products are well build fsa products are not

And you can see it.


You're arguing a bike is a bike and a motorcycle is a motorcycle

And that's an incorrect assumption

A $700 giant defy is a bicycle shaped object some some iffy and sketchy quality assurance decisions made to build a bike to a price point.

A $7000 bike is top notch performance

I have a 1999 litespeed that was around that brand new

And the welds are flawless

I bought an aluminum frame for $250 the other week and the brazeons are crooked, the aluminum welds are sloppy and the headset contact point was warped

>>1078818
B-BUT MUH sram!

File: Screen shot 2017-06-05 at 11.55.25 PM.png (29KB, 332x173px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 332x173px

>>1078746
See image attached and please tell me what you were explaining, because it looks like you were explaining why they're expensive... Although, yea it's definitely already been covered.

>>1078749
>'Everyone' buying x is 'keenly aware'...
Cringy stuff mate. How can you be such a blind optimist about richfags and also so rude in the same post. It seems weird to me. It's weird that you think everyone throwing money around is really that intelligent. Surely there are some idiots out there, no?

Why are you so insecure and emotional about this?

>>1078816
Totally disagree there mate. I know that 'the low end' is open to interpretation, so I'll clarify that to me 'low end' means sub average quality or price or both. Average here being weighted based on quantity purchased the world over.

If you define it the way I do, $700 is far above low end in both quality and price, let alone 'very low end'.

>>1076991
I honestly don't know why motorbikes can be had so cheap. Oh wait nvm, you can actually get a running and driving car for $500. I actually tried to sell mine at that price point but that actually didn't pan out for some fucking reason. In any case a brand new bicycle should come in around $600 or above for stuff that will last for a few years at least. Otherwise something cheaper will not live so long.

But yeah even though this is trolling, is the four grand quoted in the OP image the price for a brand new motorcycle? There's no such thing as a good motorcycle that's sold so cheaply; the equivalent in bike terms is getting a $200 something from Wal*Mart.

>>1079008
An average road bike is about $1700

Which is the middle of the road groupset equipped cannondale CAAD12 with the Shimano 105 groupset and factory caliper style brakes.

Anything less is a budget oriented bike.

A $700 bike example is a bikes direct motobecane with a mix of Shimano claris/Sora which are both very low end budget alternatives. Tiagra is the entry level set.

With that $700 bike you get off brand, wheels, brakes, cables, headset, bottom. Bracket, frame, bars, saddle, seatpost, seat collar, stem, tires and headset spacers. So all of your contact points and several of your major support mechanisms


Which anyone can agree with is a very low end bike.

>>1079037
That's a ninja 250, the entry level motorcycle

>>1079037
And yes a ninja 250 is a carburator equipped bike. Kawasaki is not known for their quality fuel injection systems and if the bike is left to be sat for too long say over winter. There is a chance you will need to have the carberator cleaned and rejetted.

For about $1200 more you can get the fuel injected ninja 300 a bit more power as a result and much more reliable

Especially if you plan to ride up mountains which a tone of sport bike enthusiasts do. The ninja 250/300 are not sport bikes they're commuter oriented bikes but sports in style.

For approximately $2500 you can get the Honda cbr300rr which is a much better bike all around and as a result are in higher demand.

You can expect a rideable trouble free lifespan of up to 24 months on the ninja and over 72 months with the honda

>>1078816
Is the dollar such a shitty currency that it buys you only "low end" bikes for 700 bucks?

For that money you get a decent quality bike that will work well for many years. Granted, it doesn't have bling-status or fancy names written on all components.

>>1079042
I think the miscommunication here is that you're using the word average wrong. OP posted about bicycles in general. That means all bicycles all over the world. You're talking about the narrow and highly specialized circle of expensive road bike owners. They do not represent the average cyclist.

I know about 300 people personally. I'd guess about 200 of them own a bicycle. Of those 200 I can only think of maybe 5 who spent more than $1,000. Average price in my neck of the world is probably $200-300 and I live in an upper-middle class community in a first world country.

File: dohoho.jpg (13KB, 264x320px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 264x320px

>>1079311

>He thinks there is a middle class

>>1076991
Most of bikes are under ~500$.
0/10 bait.

>>1079037
I spent $2,500 on a 2003 SV 1000. It had about 20,000 miles on it.

>more horsepower than a small car
>zero to 60 in 3 seconds
>neutral enough riding position (I've ridden it comfortably for 15 hours straight two days in a row)
>45 mpg plus
>I can maintain it with zero formal mechanical training
>less than $300 for a whole year of insurance
>any girl that gets on the back creams her panties from the acceleration
>I've put around 8,000 problem free miles on it
>many online are getting >100,000 miles

I consider this to be a very good motorcycle and it's 4 times the bike at 62% the cost of the one in OP's pic. So yea, there is such a thing as a good motorcycle sold cheaply.

File: AZUKI.jpg (181KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 640x480px

>>1079070
Sieg is part communication train-wreck and part delusional inbred-cyclist with his head up his ass.

$300-500 will buy you a great bike that will last forever if you take care of it properly and use it for basic riding.

I bought one of the bikes in my pic for $20 USD second hand at a store. The bike is fantastic quality and I'm confident you could ride it for many many years.

>>1079070
Also, you don't sound like you know much about how currencies work. Right now 1 USD = 109 YEN. Do you think that means the US standard of living is 109 times better than the Japanese?

>>1079312
Are there poor people?

>>1079318
You can buy a used 2003 bicycle too.

>>1079319
1000 dollars will also get you a (fine) carbon frame from aliexpress (look up forums) + groupset of choice.
But that's for DIY lovers, unless a cycling shop will also put the parts together.

You could also get an used cyclocross frame and get some thick slicks for max comfy.
Practically a road bike anyway.
And if it's an older frame, cantilevers are still great.

>>1079319
So your argument is that in discussion of new road bikes vs new street bikes

Is go to Craigslist buy used bicycles from 30 years ago and that everything I saw is wrk g because you're poor and buying anything nice is just crazy and nobody would do it

>>1079311
The comparison is between a road bike and a street bike. Both new

Most people don't own motorcycles so bicycles automatically win the low income debate. /N/ us all low income great.

You want to compare a entry level road bike and a entry level motorcycle let's do it.

But if you want to compare literal off brand garbage claiming it's going to last forever when it sure as shit doesn't then gtfo

So then you don't have the $5000 to buy a motorcycle

So what argument do you have now?

>>1079344
Agreed. Thanks for your contribution to the discussion.

>>1079470
>>1079471

I'm having a hard time understanding you. I'm thinking you must be a drinker and you must be frustrated often.

Anyways, this thread is not a discussion of 'new road bikes' or 'new street bikes'. The bicycles OP referred to are bicycles in general. That means any and all bicycles and their owners.

Spending a lot of money on a nice bicycle is a completely reasonable thing to do for some people and there's nothing wrong or crazy about it. There are plenty of people out there that do this, and I say more power to them. These people are not the average bicycle consumers though and that's an important thing to understand.

If you want or need the absolute best and are willing to pay 15,000% more but only get approximately 5-10% more performance, good for you. But don't lie to yourself and think that $700 bikes are useless garbage. They're more than enough for most people who ride bicycles. Hell, a lot of people who ride bicycles probably ride them 5 times or less a year. A $700 bike would easily outlive it's owner with such a light workload if they took care of it.

My brother bought a $100 Walmart piece of shit Schwinn before going to college. He's ridden it for 6 years and it's been outside in all weather 90% of that time. A conservative guess is that he has put 2,000 to 3,000 on his bike. The bike still functions and is on our driveway right now.

>>1077185
"pass the blunt bro!"

grow up

>>1079586
Don't worry, Sieg is retarded.

>>1079586
I haven't seen somebody put this much effort in to attempting to communicate with sieg in years

File: fkf.jpg (59KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 960x960px

>>1079470
>>1079471

Now I'll compare Moto to Bicycle. I only know USA information so my analysis is USA related. Per US Dept. of Transport, average commute is 15 miles and 26.4 minutes car/road traffic each way (see link below for source)

>DR 250 good condition second-hand $2,000
>useful life, easily 10 years & 100,000 miles
> Insurance $2,000 ($200 a year)
>Maintenance $2,000 ($200 a year)
>Fuel $4,666 (gets 75 mpg. assume $3.50 per gal.)
>Total equipment dollar cost per mile: $.0106
>Time cost per mile: $.212 ($7.25 per hour US Fed. min wage)(Use 26.4 Mins / 15 Miles per US DOT)
TOTAL MOTO COST PER MILE: $.223

>Good quality commuter bicycle $700
>Yearly maintenance $100
>I guess I'll assume the same 10 year 100,000 useful life, this seems unlikely but it helps the case of the bicycle so I'll throw you a huge bone since I'm on the side of the Moto
>Total equipment dollar cost per mile: $.008
>Time cost per mile: $.644 ($7.25 per hour US Fed. min wage)(Use 2h40mins / 30 Miles, about 10 mph)
TOTAL CYCLE COST PER MILE: $.652

So, the cost of the bicycle is 292% higher than that of the motorcycle. Also, this assumes you never take a taxi on a rainy/snowy day or any other reason. Also, you only get the cheap equipment benefit of the bicycle if you flat out do not own any car or motorcycle period.

Source:
https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/omnistats/volume_03_issue_04/pdf/entire.pdf
If you see any assumption you feel is wrong, or any unsupported numbers you feel are wrong tell me, I can either prove my numbers or change the analysis. But know that I gave the bicycle the benefit of the doubt in every case, and that it's impossible for me to nickle and dime a nearly 300% price difference anyways. This analysis ignores many other massive social, emotional, & other costs associated with commuting for more than 5 hours a day by bicycle.

>>1079597
So you're saying the bicycle is "more expensive" to operate, simply because it's slower?

>>1079597
>10 mph
>ignoring the health benefits of cycling
>implying that time cost is a valid argument when the person can't get paid for that time

>>1079597
If you live in a city bicycle is often as fast as cars/bikes due to the limiting parameter being red lights, not max speed. Depending on the situation a bicycle can actually circumvent red lights by transitioning from road to sidewalk. Furthermore a bicycle can take shortcuts through parks, and avoids traffic jams.

Though I agree that bicycles over $700 are pointless from commuter utility standpoint.

>>1079586
> A $700 bike would easily outlive it's owner with such a light workload if they took care of it.

Not sure if Decathlon is a thing in USA but for Europoors the current B'Twin 100 is great for the price.
1x7 should be fine for a lot of things, it can also fit 35mm tires.

It's only 260 euros.
Perfect for commuting.

>>1079597
Motorcycles are for enthusiasts of motorcycles. Nobody buys a Gixxer liter bike to commute on. A civic is cheaper, cheaper to operate and generally better to commute on. Everyone with a gsxr1000 is a true motorcycle enthiast.

So why are we comparing enthusiast class goods to poor people who can't afford to take the bus ?

Because one catagory is you?

Take your self out of the equation most people have more money than you.

That's the definition of poor. You have less money than most of the world population you're poor.


You're an outlier with no income and bo opportunity.

So of course you're not an enthusiast of any hobby since you're dirt poor and $20 Craigslist bicycles are a viable option for you


That's.not most people. I spent $20 for dinner for 2 at five guys burgers last night. By definition I'm richer than you.

Your commuting budget for a year is what I spend for lunch I live in California I'm richer than you. It's a fact.

So the fact that you're poor. Negates the fact that enthusiast class bicycles exist?

You can't afford it so cycling is only viable to homeless people that collect cans on bicycles?

I have 3 cars, I have a house with a 3 car garage

I have 3 bicycles.

I build bikes for fun and ride it on a $400 bicycle trainer in air conditioning that I just spent $15,000 to overhaul 3 months ago. (New condenser and hood work) to play a $499 Xbox I think I just bought final fantasy 15 on an impulse buy for $70 after tax last night.

So...why are you even in the conversation?

Both objects are hobbyist grade equipment. You rely on a piece of junk to live your life. On pennies a day.

Like why are you in the conversation? It's a discussion between hobbies you can't afford hobbies since you literally pickip trash to sell to survive

Do you understand how you're not relavent?

Siegs wrong I bought a cheap bike and I live in a box!!!! You can cycle for cheap

What you're doing is not cycling.

>>1079613
Pretty much. Everything has costs, sometimes you pay money, sometimes you pay time. If you consider your time to be of (very) little value or if you intend to use that much of your free time bicycling anyways, you may prefer the cycle. But there's no way around the fact it costs over a thousand hours a year at that rate.

>>1079629
1) Do you think 10 mph is too slow or too fast? For commuting it seems pretty reasonable, if not generous, but I could change the analysis if you convince me otherwise.

2) Yea, there are definitely health benefits to being active but it'd be hard to include them in the analysis for a few reasons. A) Moto riders can exercise as desired which would negate the difference between modes B) Health benefits are hard to quantify in dollars or other C) Crunching numbers and even getting the relevant data to appraise this in any legitimate way would probably require one or more doctors and a statistician with greater powers than myself. That is if the data exists, if it doesn't you'd need 10-50 years and hundreds of researchers D) I had to define the scope & limitations of the analysis. There are positives & negatives on either side I consciously left out, for example,you can use a motorcycle for travel & getting around for any other reason other than commuting and experience the same gains in time savings & convenience.

3) Two things about this: A) I don't understand why you're stating the person can't get paid for that time, it's a hypothetical situation and you seem to be acting as if you know the person B) that's irrelevant anyways because It's not about whether or not they're getting paid for the time, I'm using USD as a way to quantify and assign value to the time (I'm using minimum wage as a HUGE favor to the bicycle, and because Sieg said something about poor people. If you increase the wage to $10 the difference between modes skyrockets). Most people probably value their own time even higher than their employer does, but this is something else I've consciously left out in favor of the bicycle. For example, if you work a minimum wage job and your boss says 'you guys wanna leave 5 hours early today' most people would jump on the opportunity because they would rather do X for 5 hours than get paid Y.

>>1079638
You are 100% correct there mate but these are only side notes to the analysis I'm afraid. The analysis is based on the average US commuter as defined by the Dept. of Transportation .pdf I linked above. The average commuter cannot take advantage of those tricks in large enough a way to beat road traffic on a bicycle.

>>1078535
There really isn't. I commute 20 miles everyday on my $500 and it does the job perfectly and has lasted for years.

>>1079680

Brother. I don't think I have it in me tonight, my $20 bicycle broke down today and my wife wants to leave me because I couldn't close the deal on buying a bigger box we were looking at moving to. The kids are hungry and I feel like a failure.

Maybe you're right. Maybe I don't even belong in the conversation. I feel like a worthless piece of shit.

I'm seriously considering suicide at this point, Sieg. Should I do it? Should I just end it?

File: ikea_family_bicycle_SEO.jpg (164KB, 520x350px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 520x350px

>>1079886
Let's say the ikea bike is a good representation of a commuter bike

same price point, rear coaster, front disc, 3-speed automatic hub

35 lbs assembled not counting acessories like the ikea basket, the trailer, and the light kit

>>1079898
you're not a cyclist, you a ride a bike to work. you don't find cycling a hobby.

If i ride a ninja 250 to work am I a motorcycle racer?

do you put me in the same catagory as someone who takes his ducati to track day events just because i ride 15 miles a day and split lanes?

>>1079938
>If i ride a ninja 250 to work am I a motorcycle racer?
You're a motorcyclist you twat. If you race bicycles that makes a bicycle racer. The key word being race.

>>1079886
>1) Do you think 10 mph is too slow or too fast?
Maybe if you're making a ton of stops.

14 mph is much more reasonable unless you're riding some omafiets, then it's 12 mph.

>2) Yea, there are definitely health benefits
>Moto riders can exercise as desired which would negate the difference between modes
But then your argument that cycling takes more time becomes moot because now the motor rider is spending extra time to get the same benefits as the cyclist.

>>1079970
And 14 mph is still on the low side with a road bike.

18 mph should be achieveable for most.

>>1079971
If you're commuting then you might not be in full lyrca (depends on distance), might have panniers and stuff, and hopefully aren't on a "proper" road bike. It's not going to be as fast, and you also might not want to go as fast as you could to save energy/sweat/smell etc.

>>1079976
>sweat
not an argument

it's a given that you're going to sweat unless you're close enough to work that you might as well just walk

take a shower, dirtbag

t. commuter who wears lycra AND has panniers

>>1079976
18 mph is fully doable without lycra.

Maybe you need to strengthen your condition.

>>1079976
Wait, why shouldn't I commute on a proper road bike? I commute on a proper road bike in full lycra

>sweat&smell
Showers are a thing. Ain't nobody got time or the nerves to ride slow enough to not sweat during hot summers. So it's easier to just go fast and take a shower once you get to work.

>>1079988
It's not like you can't put a rack and fenders on once, I guess, but they rarely have the mounting for more serious hardware. I'm just allergic to backpacks. If it works for you then by all means continue!

If you're unable to take the bike inside then security might be an issue, too.

>>1079320
You don't seem to know much about how rhetorical questions work.

>>1079597
Why does the bike have to go 30 miles, the Moto only 15?
Pleas adjust to equal numbers.

>>1079998
I much prefer a backpack on shorter trips like commuting. Rack and panniers attach weight into the bike and make handling worse. Also panniers certainly aren't aero and make sidewinds even worse. Good backpack sits on your back nicely.

Panniers are still obviously the better choice for touring.

>>1080079
Have you ever ridden with a backpack?

I have. Once. I have never sweated more in my life. Miserable experience.

>>1080080
Sounds pretty clear that he has, not everybody gets the sweaty back so bad. That said I commute with a pannier as well.

>>1080080
I do it all the time. Yeah my back gets sweaty. But then again I sweat profusely even without backpack so I'll still be sweaty anyway. Being slightly more sweaty due to the backpack doesn't really matter. Good backpack also doesn't cause nearly as much sweating as bad one.

>>1079970
I'm not sure I'm convinced on the 12-14 mph pace. I know that it's totally reasonable to cruise at those paces on a bike, but when you consider the time it takes to gear up and down and stoplights and the fact that when you're commuting you're not necessarily riding on ideal roads/sidewalks/traffic/pedestrians/grass/pot-holes/curbs/broken glass etc. these things hit your pace hard. A moving average of 12-14 might be realistic, an overall average I think would be substantially lower. Also, we're talking about the average commuter here, not the average cyclist. Many people are too out of shape and fat to even keep a 10 mph pace for 30 miles down-hill.

I really don't feel qualified to take the health benefits into consideration in the analysis. If you think you're qualified you'll have to make your own analysis. But I disagree with your point. The motorcycle takes a half hour, the bicycle takes 5 hours, so that's 4.5 hours a day difference. A full healthy workout takes about 1 hour, so you still are net 3.5 hours positive on the Moto if you workout 5 days a week.

Like I said earlier, the are huge positives and negatives on either side I'm intentionally ignoring, for example, I think if I spent 5 hours a day riding my bicycle I'd loose my girlfriend and probably half my friends since zero free time. This is also hard to analyze so I left it out. If you want to hire me as a salaried employee I'll conduct the analysis under your direction, if you want it for free on /n/ you'll have to work with my limitations.

>>1079971
I completely disagree. Not sure if you read my full post but this is meant to be an analysis of all USA commuters. That includes people who weigh 300lbs and people who don't even know how to ride a bike.

Honestly, I don't even think the average cyclist could keep up that overall pace in the average commuter route. There's a huge huge difference between moving average and overall and there relevant figure here is overall.

>>1079977
Sweat is very relevant as it's a difference between Moto & Bicycle. I've ridden my motorcycle to work every day for the last 2 months and never showed up with a sweat problem. Some days temps were over 90, I would have been drenched if I were cycling.

>>1079943
No, I'd be a motorcycle commuter.

A bicycle commuter is different than a bike hobbyist

Even if he rides his race bike to work sometimes

>>1080423
I average 15 mph on my commute, provided I don't have many stops but I am also actively not pushing myself.
Could easily up a gear.
I am not in a good shape either, it's not even a "proper" road bike.

> and fat to even keep a 10 mph pace for 30 miles down-hill
Pathetic.

>That includes people who weigh 300lbs and people who don't even know how to ride a bike.
Why would you do that?

And those 300 lbs people desperately need to lose weight and cycling helps.
>>1080419
> The motorcycle takes a half hour, the bicycle takes 5 hours
Which is an assumption and dependent on your situation.
Just like you think a cyclist has to travel twice as much, which is a false assumption.


For me cycling is faster than going by car because of parking.
>>1080423
> There's a huge huge difference between moving average and overall and there relevant figure here is overall.
Ok, Let's take London.

I can easily travel 3 times as fast on a bike than in a car/motorcycle.

>>1080000
Checked. The purpose of a rhetorical question is to make a point, not get an answer. You must be dumber than I thought if you were making that point as an actual assertion rather than a curious question.

And most people are not average

>>1080423
The people who are in shitty shape would quite quickly lose weight and get faster. Yes at the start they might be the slowest of slowfags but after a few months of commuting they'd already be much faster.

>>1080444
k

You still need that shit buried underground. You know, oil?

Bycicle doesn't run out of gas.

Motorcycles can be efficient, but only the ones less likely to kill you.

If something breaks on your moto you probably won't know how to fix it, so consider high maintenance costs

Most people have low mileage motos. Some thousands, maybe 15k. Gee I wonder why.

You really have to want to drive a 375lb moto.

>>1077149
To be honest, a low tier quartz watch is more accurate than a mechanical one. Mechanical watches are just paying for wonderful ´´useless´´ tech and brand tax if you are getting a decent watch. Mechanical watches are like those old beautiful cars which doesn't have seatbelts, abs and some other useful things, but they are nice and sound good.

>>1080646
>´´useless´´ tech
>mechanical watches
have fun knowing the time post nuclear emp apocalypse

>>1077464
>having a $200 quartz wristwatch makes you an ego-case loser
>posted from my iPhone
Sounds like that guy dodged a bullet there by not getting hired by you

File: psf.jpg (677KB, 1024x783px) Image search: [Google]

677KB, 1024x783px

>>1080442
You don't seem to understand the idea that this analysis was meant to represent the average commuter. As such, specific examples such as your 15 mph average and your London suggestion have no place in it. Also, London is outside USA and therefore outside the scope.

The cycle doesn't go twice as far as the moto, I just expressed the speed over the full 'there & back' commute for the bicycle and just 'one way' for the moto. It's an expression of speed not distance and doesn't change the result (E.G 60 miles/hour is the same as 1 mile/minute).

>Both results are expressed as cost per 1 single mile

File: ypl.jpg (26KB, 480x621px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 480x621px

>>1080010

Lol, you might wanna work through that again.

The analysis compares cost for a single mile on Moto VS a single mile on Bicycle. So, no I'm not comparing unequal distances.

The notation for the speed was expressed as the full there & back trip for the bicycle and just one way for the moto but that doesn't matter, it's a measure of speed not distance.

>26.4 mins / 15 miles = 52.8 mins / 30 miles = 17,582.4 mins / 9990 miles

If it makes you more comfortable, use the middle notation above, but know that all three work out to 1.76 minutes per mile which is the bike speed per the US DOT .pdf linked above.

>>1080419

A 15mph average pace is more in line with what you'll see most commuters doing, even in hillier cities like Seattle. Most of the people you see going slow are crackheads and homeless.

>>1078535
Bikes above that threshold offer markedly improved performance, even to recreational riders, than any below it.

I think this thread can be summed up like this:

All motorcycles require a course and an m1 test.

All motorcycles are more expensive to operate than the cheapest cars

All motorcycle riders ride motorcycles because they find fulfillment in the activity,

-----------
Not all bicycle riders can afford vehicles of any kind

a large subset of all bicycle riders do so out of economic necessity.

a very very small subset of all bicycle riders ride bicycles because they enjoy it. (freds on road bikes, mountain bikes on bike racks, fixie kids messing around but driving their fixies on roof racks of lowered hondas etc etc

-----------

it would not be a viable for someone who cannot afford a car to operate a motorcycle out of economic necessity since motorcycles are more expensive to purchase (even used) and more expensive to operate.

My old ducati 996 ran me around $13k back in 2008.

motorcycle loans tend to be around 4.8-5.3% apr

while car loans tend to be as low as 0.0% for the first 6 months then goes up to 1.8% for 36+ months (lower than inflation)

My ducati got less fuel mileage than my civic.

my ducati tires wre $729.92 out the door

my honda tires were $299.91 out the door installed

my civic insurance is around $2000 a year

my ducati's insurance was around $3200 a year

i've never replaced the clutch in my civic

my ducati went through 3 clutches in less than 10,000 miles

an oil change for my honda costs $26.00

the oil change in my ducati ran me $78

>>1081748
What are you talking about?
All the chavs ride dirt cheap 125 bikes here in the UK as they cost literally nothing (£500 second hand, and a £100 CBT day course), whereas a cars' insurance is £1500 alone for young people!
I ride a motorcycle because I literally cannot afford a car!
Is it that different in the US or wherever you're from?!

>>1081748
Fuck you, Sieg. Fuck off, Sieg.

>>1081711
True fact. I'm fat and I'm always really slow compared to everyone else in Seattle.

File: bgb.jpg (89KB, 736x487px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 736x487px

>>1081753
No dude, motorcycles are dirt cheap here in the US too. This guy is just off his rocker.

I bought a 2003 SV 1000 for $2,500 (very comparable to his 996). Insurance is less than $300 a year. I maintain it myself dirt cheap. Gets 45 mpg minimum. Even a high performance 1000cc bike is cheap as hell.

File: bgo.jpg (453KB, 1000x745px) Image search: [Google]

453KB, 1000x745px

>>1081753
Also, to get a license I took an optional class for $25 which was three days long and they provided a motorcycle for me to use during the class. Dirt cheap.

>>1081748
>All motorcycles are more expensive to operate than the cheapest cars

What kind of bullshit is this? All three of my bikes together cost me less to operate than any single car I have ever owned.

>>1081753
yes it's different in california

a m1 license is an additional step

you need a standard drivers license with an m1 provision to ride a motor cycle here (and most e-bikes)

which requires paid classes and training and an additional test

>2003 SV 1000 for $2,500 (very comparable to his 996

comparing a suzuki to a ducati is like comparing a honda to a porsche

>>1076991
Different products.

2 liters of Coke: 99c
20 oz of Coke: $1.50

>>1077456
A little but take the class anyways

The bike OP posted is for hobbyists and professionals, they're not thinking about spending their money efficiently because they're just buying it to ride it for fun.

>>1082064
Where are you getting that info? Pretty sure you don't need M1 for an e-bike. You might need an M2 for an e-bike that can go over 20 mph on motor alone though. Mopeds (actual mopeds, not scooters) require only an M2 unless they go over 30 mph. Bikes, including motorized bikes, have special laws around them. Neither M2 or M1 requires a class C driver's license, by the way.

>>1082064
>comparing a suzuki to ducati is like comparing a honda to porsche
I couldn't even come up with this level of retarded shit. Then again it's coming from a guy who manages to go through 3 clutches in 10k and break headset presses.

>>1076991
the only bikes that vost that much a
that i can defend are those carbon fiber triathlon bike

my dad used to own one that was around 10 grand and i could pick it up with my pinky

i think oit as the same reason a guitaris would buy a 5k dollar guitar instead of a 500 one. i wouldn't know the differencr but the user sure does

>>1078519
no


just no.
once more.
no

If you (OP) Unironically believe sitting on a motorbike and getting fat, and having to fill it with thousands of dollars worth of petrol every year, is better than staying fit and enjoying the wind in your hair.

then i feel sorry for you, simple as

>>1082086
What about the extra food you eat for cycling? Does that not cost any money?

>>1082086
>and having to fill it with thousands of dollars worth of petrol every year

to use even $1,000 worth of gasoline, I would need to ride my motorcycle about 30,000 miles.

To ride a bicycle that far in one year (assuming 15 mph) would take 2,000 hours. I get paid just shy of $30/hr, so I'd be using $60,0000 of my time to bicycle the same distance that $1,000 of gasoline could get me.

sounds like a great value to me.

>>1082087
Eating is also enjoyable

>>1082101

Unless you're working damn near 24/7, I wouldn't factor your hourly wage in like that. A guy who runs a shitty camper or decides to live in a cardboard box behind his work place would come out ahead of all of us.

>>1082117
And I enjoy using gasoline.
Besides, when you mentioned petrol the issue was the monetary cost so you should stick to arguing the monetary cost, or start comparing other factors that are more important than monetary cost.

>>1082124
Sorry I'm not part of this discussion, just wanted to say that I enjoyed eating
Carry on

>>1082071
the DMV

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/motorcycles/motorcycles

Driver must have a motorcycle license (M1 or M2).

A "motorized bicycle" is also defined as a vehicle with pedals and an electric motor (not more than 1,000 watts) which cannot be driven at speeds of more than 20 mph on level ground even if assisted by human power. (CVC §406(b)).

If you operate a motorized bicycle which meets the definition of CVC §406(b), you:
- Must be 16 years of age or older.
- Must wear a properly fitted and fastened bicycle helmet.
- Are exempt from the motor vehicle financial responsibility, driver license, and moped plate requirements (CVC §12804.9).

A motorized bicycle is issued special license plates and identification cards, which requires a one-time $18 fee. No renewal is required.

-----------

m2 is still a seperate provision

a standard driver's license is a class C

so you are not entitled to operate m2 class vehicles with a class C

File: Screen Shot 2017-06-16 at 5.04.50 PM.png (291KB, 407x496px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 407x496px

>>1081748

S I E G
I
E
G

>>1082247
fuck yeah siege rules!

>>1079938
>you're not a cyclist
that's where you are wrong buckaroo, if a cager is a motorist then a bike rider is a cyclist.

>>1082101
>a great value
Why do 'people' do this?

>>1077017
ok, I'm assuming they're US dollars, so...

http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/84359/buyers-guide-specs/2016-suzuki-gsx-r600/
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/72740/buyers-guide-specs/2016-suzuki-gsx-s1000/
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/85267/buyers-guide-specs/2016-yamaha-yzf-r6/
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/90240/buyers-guide-specs/2016-honda-cbr600rr/
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/90241/buyers-guide-specs/2016-honda-cb1000r/
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/91091/buyers-guide-specs/2016-ducati-monster-821-dark/
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/90240/buyers-guide-specs/2016-honda-cbr600rr/

I mean, they're all high volume, but they're using proven tech that's actually still quite high end (ie good suspension, brakes, frames, engine management)

>>1082369
>good suspension, brakes, frames, engine management
They're using good enough shit to sell their bikes. However the difference on all components is massive when compared to actual high end stuff.

>>1077176
gixxers are an automatic traffic stop tho lol

>>1077647

You're comparing a saloon car to an F1 car faggot

>>1077647

You're comparing a saloon car to an F1 car faggot

>>1079884
I live in a dense city. I save easily over 1,000 hours a year by cycling vs any other form of transit, where I live. I can see your argument for rural, suburban or very poorly planned cities, which there are many of. But, for me, this calculation works in the opposite direction where I easily "save" that time/money via bike. I actually agree with you that this should be part of the calculation, and I indeed keep it in mind for myself. Again, for myself, the cost in the end leans just phenomenally towards bike over moto.

Can I get a rack to carry my bike on a motorcycle?

File: jakes_bike_rack_02[1].jpg (157KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 800x600px

>>1085958
What type of bike?

>>1077168
>requires extremely expensive maintenance
>b-b-but I can still sell it for roughly the same price at some point so it's t-t-totally a good investment

retard.

>>1086831

I know this is /n/ but there is a forum with a thread of a guy that sold a Vauxhall for £18,000, sold it for £16,000 and claimed it was because he washed and waxed every couple of days.

When he went through the detail of his cleaning of his new car it was pure OCD and pure EXPENSES, the man bought £10,000 blocks of wax, used bottled water to wash the car and a myriad of other expensive processes that lasted hours every other day of the life of any car he used.

Sure his car is the cleanest but you can't tell me the investment is actually "worth it" if you spent more on products than you would have lost in regular depreciation.

>>1077168
If you buy a brand new Rolex submariner in stainless steel/black/black

You lose $6400 off the top the second you buy it.

Servicing every 12mos at an authorized dealer

Most Rolex watches depreciate as time goes on. Especially a basic bitch model like a black face sub


You want investments to steadily gain value not steadily lose

>>1080651
>Implying there are anywhere near enough conductor length in a digital wristwatch for it to be rendered useless by an EMP resulting from a non-lethal nuke.
Watchfags are deluded

>>1077288

>accuses someone of not acting age
>posts fucking cartoons

>>1078531
holy shit the rear derailleur

>>1087688
What about it? That's how it's supposed to look with when crosschaining big/big with a proper chain length.

File: roger_smith.jpg (148KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1500x1000px

>>1077149
>rolex
lel fucking pleb

>>1078770
correct