mountain bikes, price difference of $150 bike to $300 bike. is it worth the different?

Question

to pay the extra 300 dollars.

Answer 1

This is a question that bike companies wrestle with all the time... I develop specifications for new bikes and it is always quality versus money. This is a little long, but I think your question deserves a detailed answer.

The vast majority of bikes $150 or less are what is called "price point" bikes. This means they were designed with only one thing in mind... minimizing retail price and maximizing profit. They are considered "throw away bikes" because a single major problem will cost more to repair it than replace the whole bike.

As you get towards the $200 price, parts start to become better and the attention to detail is stronger because it is expected that the customer will be keeping and riding the bike for quite some time. Adjustments and overhauls are economical at this point, but major repairs, again, could exceed the cost of the bike.

Approaching the $300 retail price there is fierce competition in the industry... the main selling point in bikes is between $300 and $800. Quality and performance rise steeply. Extended life is demanded and the ability to repair the bike becomes important. This is where it is usually cheaper to repair a bike than it is to buy a new one.

As you reach $800, the operation of the bike becomes more homogenous, and now you pay for the "little things". Lighter weight, polished bearing surfaces, precision machining, refined materials. These things definitely make a difference and are usually worth every nickel to those who want or need them and comparing a bike in this range to a $300 unit would be ludicrous.

Back in the 1860s when the safety bicycle was invented (a safety bicycle has 2 wheels the same size), the average cost of a bike was about $81, or 3 MONTHS average salary. Now, I would not expect anyone to spend 3 months salary on a bike today... but 2 to 3 weeks salary I think is a good compromise.

Answer 2

I got a fully-outfitted $1000 bike purchased from a bike shop for nice long weekend rides, and a $60 Walmart beater bike for running errands (when I lock it up unattended, bike thieves won't swipe any parts off of it), so I'm qualified to comment on the differences between a cheap bike and a bike-shop bike:

There is indeed a difference in the quality of the components. The cheap bike has plastic pedals, which I did manage to break. The wheel rims also seem to get out of true a lot faster with the cheap bike (the alloy used for the rims are a bit flimsy). The cheapie's rear wheel also has a lower-quality hub assembly (it wobbles a bit as you spin the wheel). You can also tell the shifters and derailleurs are also flimsier. The cheap bike's frame is also a lot heavier. That's why bike thieves don't bother stealing $60 Walmart bikes.

It's OK if you are using a Walmart bike as a beater for running errands (i.e. short rides from home during which breakdowns are not critical), but for long distance / recreational riding you really want a durable bike-shop bike.

When it comes to bicycles, generally you DO get what you pay for.

Answer 3

Go for the best frame as then u can upgrade the other parts as they wear. You tend to find the same frame used for a range of bikes, but the cheaper ones have poorer quality components. Scott usually use the same frame for numerous bikes and are normally a good bet. Have had a couple of Scott's myself. Both the Scott of Cannondale would be a good bet, the saracen would most likely compromise on the frame in exchange for better spec parts...

Answer 4

Sounds to me that you're interested in the lower end bikes. Wal-Mart and other discount retailers offer those types of bikes. And they sell a ton of bikes. But you have to ask yourself about the purpose of having one of those low end bikes. Is it just for riding around the neighborhood? Or do you plan on doing some commuting? Or will you be taking it out on your local single track for some epic rides?

For $150 all you can expect is to be able to ride around your neighborhood. And even at $300 you would be getting an entry level bike (as long as you get it from a bike shop and not from a retailer).

$150 vs $300 bikes you would be looking at weight, components, and overall durability. Again you would need to refer to the previous questions about its purpose.

When you finally decide what you want to do with it then go out shopping for that type of bike. Check out the websites for components, weight, etc.

Bottom line is you get what you pay for.

FYI. I've spent $2500 on my Cannondale Scalpel 900 XC bike and $1700 for my Cannondale R900 road bike. It may sound like a lot of money but those bikes are considered middle of the road in price range.

Good luck.

Answer 5

It depends on what you're wanting the bike from, and which two bikes you are comparing.

If it's a $200 or a $500 bike, it will probably be alot of a difference. If you're comparing a 4,500 to a 4,800 bikes, I doubt you will notice much difference, or more likely, the differences will be more subtle.