i’m all for saving money. what troubles me about these bikes are the space between bikes made in china, or taiwan in an older era, versus bikes made in the orient after having been engineered in the U.S., quality controlled at the point of manufacturing by U.S. agents, tested repeatedly in the U.S. according to CPSC and other industry standards, subject to CPSC and other recall rules, warranted according U.S. (or canadian, or european) brand sensibilities, and so forth.
entropy results when you don’t pump energy into the system. QC, testing, brand accountability, etc., is the energy pumped into the system. i don’t buy dog food or any constituent dog foods “sub assemblies” from china. some stuff i either won’t buy from china, or won’t buy it without very intrusive engineering, testing and QC from a western brand.
that’s just me. you decide for yourself what’s best for you. me, i would probably rather buy a fairly late model, lightly used, name brand bike on the secondary market if i did not want to spend the money for a new, high end superbike. or i’d go for a model downstream. i’d buy frames and parts nearer the end of their “cycle”, that is, i’d by force 22 now instead of red 22, or ultegra instead of Di2 electronic, or a frame that’s 3 years old and has been downstreamed.
somebody’s going to post to this thread and say, “of course slowman is saying this, he’s protecting his advertising revenue.” think what you want. just, the further we go into the future the fewer and fewer of our readers know that in another life i was a bike manufacturer and i’ve done the asian rodeo and, frankly, there is a very, very different sense of accountability and work ethic there than there is in a western country. i remember watching a news report on a rice farmer complaining about the local manufacturing plant poisoning his rice, so that he could not feed it to his children. so what did he do with the rice he grows? “we send it to another part of china.” that’s entropy, chinese style.