Mountain bikes - why are some so expensive?

photome

rxbren wrote: »

its all down to frame design/material, then onto the components cheap bikes are just that, the cheapest frames- also heavy and components not made to last if riden hard i borrowed a friends £500 scott bike and after two weeks of just riding to and from work and a coupe of rides around a lake i pretty much had to rebuild it as the cheap components they used didnt hold up to well, the bottom bracket fell apart, brake line connections failed and leaked and the gearing needed constamt adjusting.
it wouldnt have been too bad if it was riden hard/jumped but the only off road it saw was the grass across his garden
at the end of the day you get what you pay for and the high end bikes use the most upto date components and materials all top of the range bikes (except full on downhill bikes) are seriously light weight

No way that should have been happening after 2 weeks on a £500 bike

My Kona has stood up to lots more than that over last 2 years with nothing breaking and only minor adjustments..retail should have bee £550 but it was the previous years model so i only paid £300.

Far to many bike snobs just as there is car snobs I guess

The OP only does commuting so i stand by the fact there is no need to spend over £300

rxbren

dont think it even made it too a full two weeks and it pretty much started to fall apart its all down to the cheap components it had hydraulic disc brakes which were cheaply made/put together and bottom brackets are always a point were companys skimp on quality the sealed unit had collapsed on itself

sj999

custardy wrote: »

well you have obviously never ridden high end bikes
better equipment,design,materials,lighter,stronger and on and on.
Why did you buy a £250 bike instead of a £70 one?

I did and it broke after a month. As for high end bikes, I test rode a Mondraker that retailed at about £1500. It was lighter, the gear change was slightly better. I took it off road. It was better then the Kona but not 6 times.

Here are some photos (found on the Internet) -

Sgt_Pepper_2

londonTiger wrote: »

there are bikes that cost more than cars, there are bikes that cost more than houses (Olympic bikes cost over a million £)

Can you get a house round your way for ten grand?

Sgt_Pepper_2

sj999 wrote: »

I did and it broke after a month. As for high end bikes, I test rode a Mondraker that retailed at about £1500. It was lighter, the gear change was slightly better. I took it off road. It was better then the Kona but not 6 times.

Here are some photos (found on the Internet) -

Where's the bottom one from Argos?

phil_kirsty

I found my scott hybrid which was £400 alot better than my current cannondale bad boy which was a lot more than the scott.
For a commuter bike you dont need suspension will and does slow you down and you use alot more energy .;my scott had lockable suspension .

photome

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

Where's the bottom one from Argos?

take it you know nothing about bikes

Anselm

What are good makes of bikes that I could buy second hand for a 3 mile commute? I have a diamondback MTB but its junk.

Sgt_Pepper_2

Anselm wrote: »

What are good makes of bikes that I could buy second hand for a 3 mile commute? I have a diamondback MTB but its junk.

What's your budget?

Anselm

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

What's your budget?

To be honest with you I genuinely don't know, only because I've only ever had crap bikes so don't know what a good amount of money I'd need for a proper investment if you get me? I'd say maybe 200-400? Probably wouldn't pay much more than that.