Bike buying delimma

by ssmith on Oct 11, 2008 10:53 AM EDT

Ok, here's the riddle...

Option A: Used 2008 Specialized Tarmac SL2. $2500. Upside: It's an $8000 bike for cheap. Downside: No warranty for the 2nd owner (and Specialized bikes seem to break a lot). Random: The current owner sprinted on it to a national championship recently.

Option B: New 2009 Specialized Tarmac SL through my racing team's deal: $2700. Upside: It's a $5000 bike for cheap. Full warranty. Downside: It's not quite the bike that the SL2 is.

Assume equal/equivalent parts and wheelz and whatnot. Actully, the used bike might have somewhat better wheelz.

So, what would you do?

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

the latter

but i’m not someone who would appreciate the difference btw the two. Still, the former has its own karma already. Also, my impression of pros is that they do things to their bikes on the assumption that someone will give them another.

"If writing too much about the Classics is wrong, I don't want to be right."

by Chris Fontecchio on Oct 11, 2008 11:15 AM EDT reply actions

Would agree with Chris

I can distinguish some subtle differences but not little ones. At the end of the day I want a bike that fits properly and does what I want it to do, and if it feel fantastic – well that’s nice too.

Full warranty and new is the way I’d go.

"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum."

by Drew Davis on Oct 13, 2008 8:47 AM EDT up reply actions

Full warranty

Or, put the SL2 on your homeowner’s policy.

by dheadrick on Oct 11, 2008 11:52 AM EDT reply actions

I wouldn't worry about the warranty but..

I would go with the latter regardless. The SL2 is simply a better deal anyway.

For a (humorous but true) confirmation on why retail prices are a crock, check out this

by humbug1 on Oct 11, 2008 11:56 AM EDT reply actions

sorry I menat SL (not SL2)

by humbug1 on Oct 11, 2008 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions

option b :-)

new bikes are better than used bikes – especially a used bike that’s been raced hard. also, warranties are nice.

by Jen See on Oct 11, 2008 12:01 PM EDT reply actions

None of the above...

Get a Steel Independent Fabrication

Racing for Victory and Free Beer!

by DemonCats on Oct 11, 2008 2:18 PM EDT reply actions

Booyah!

That’s my ride, baby. Steel is real. And Senor Smith, option b is what you should go with. That ex-pro bike is not long for this world.

by Jimbo... on Oct 12, 2008 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions

So, you're talking...

…about a SRAM bike vs. a D/A bike?

I think you gotta go for the SRAM Vanna. I’m diein’ to try that stuff. If you go with the D/A bike, you’re riding a grppo that’s already played out. What’s the resale gonna be on D/A bike next year? Bubcus! That’s what!

Have fun you SOB. I’m completely jealous. You’re gettin’ a new bike!

Never, ever, work with a sprinter.

by Put 'Em in the Gutter on Oct 11, 2008 2:54 PM EDT reply actions

Both bikes are SRAM

And the used SL2 has a few extra bolt-on goodies (low-weight brakes and whatnot) that sweeten the pot a bit.

by ssmith on Oct 11, 2008 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions

In that case...

…the used bike sounds very difficult to justify. Those brakes are…such a marginal place to save weight. I worked on the second gen of the Zero Gravity brakes and they really struck me as cheesy, and not in a good/macaroni/tortilla chip kinda way.

That “new bike smell” is pretty hard to beat for such short money. When you buy the used bike, you are looking at buying a new chain and a new cassette right off the bat. Then, you prolly got to change the cables and bar tape. What else? Tires and tubes? BB bearings? New stem? What was that guy thinking with those ergo bars (T. Ritchey, you made some funny bars along the way, didn’t you)? Labor charges if you can’t change that stuff yourself?

I think I’m leaning toward the new bike now. Both bikes sound like great deals, but the new bike has a few more ticks in it’s column. And, I hate to say this, but you might be right about the breakage of Specialized bikes. I know several people who broke Treks back in the day, but I have a 150lb friend who broke a Spec last year (along with the several people I’ve run across who broke their Spec’s back in the aluminum days). 150lb people should never be able to break bikes. If you’re into kilos, 150lbs is not very big at all. Think, Pantani plus 10 kgs or so.

Cheers

Never, ever, work with a sprinter.

by Put 'Em in the Gutter on Oct 11, 2008 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions

bhahahaha!

the Ritchey comment, priceless :-)

by Jen See on Oct 11, 2008 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions

go with the warranty

There’s not THAT much difference between the frames.

(And, to D-cat): I rode steel bikes exclusively (with the exception of some time on my wife’s original Klein Quantum) until I got my Isaac. (Old Trek 531, Razesa slx, Scapin, and a Masi 853, if you must know). Carbon is a better frame material. Unless you crash the wrong way.

So, if you wind up being sucked into the “it was a pro bike” lure: the key question is not “was it ever crashed?” The key question is" if it was crashed, what kind of crash was it? Slide out in a crit? Probably not a big deal. T-bone a curb? Oops, deal off.

by R Mc on Oct 11, 2008 4:19 PM EDT reply actions

yep

Big miles, and almost certainly a crash (or several) on a used bikey. Go new.

by Jen See on Oct 11, 2008 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Geez,

seems like there’s a consensus. And not what I expected. With cars, I think it’s hard to justify a new one unless you plan to keep it forever. The depreciation is just too quick.
Given that I’m on a 2-year bike rotation schedule, I figured the same would play here. But the warranty issue is a big one. Our team was sponsored by Specialized this past year and I can think of at least 4 guys who needed replacements (not crash-related)…and none are big.
Anyone want to argue the contrary?

by ssmith on Oct 11, 2008 5:02 PM EDT reply actions

Nope

I’ve got a buddy who’s on his second Specialized warranty frame: neither frame broke, just both developed front-end problems, and the rep warrantied them.

You want that warranty.

by R Mc on Oct 11, 2008 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions

I have friends that...

sell them at bike stores and they always seem to mention to the customers that because of the Zertz inserts, they feel they are riding on a flat until they get used to it.

Racing for Victory and Free Beer!

by DemonCats on Oct 11, 2008 6:51 PM EDT reply actions

Update...

Ok, so I called the seller, a guy I know pretty well. I explained my hesitation and he told me to pass on it and go with my team deal on the SL. Very classy on his part.
In any case, his take was that the loss of the warranty wasn’t worth it. And he says that he likes the ride of the SL better anyway. But he did point out that this bike is a crash replacement that he’s only had since early August. So, if it wasn’t for my awesome team deal, his bike would be a steal…

So, thanks everyone for your input.

by ssmith on Oct 11, 2008 8:56 PM EDT reply actions