>>2065065>test drivewhen i bought my 200$ shitty e-bike i told the boomer i bought it from "at this price I don't even care if it rolls properly, the motor works and the rest of it has higher value than that as scrap" and he fucking INSISTED i take it around the block before buying it. he would not let me pay him and leave until i did.
it's needed basically constant maintenance but nothing has explicitly *broken* on it yet except for actual wear parts (brake shoes, toobs, the stupid little rubber grommets on the front fork, etc) and i dented a wheel taking a particularly large curb at incrediblhth hihg sped. but upon inspection, it was actually already dented, I just made it worse.
bicycles are pretty robust because despite looking xtreem and having all kinds of wacky physics they don't objectively have to cope with a lot of stress for what they're made out of. you could make a bike out of fucking pine if you wanted to. some people actually have
>>2065055up to a bit less than 1000$ it's a pretty linear "it's just better [made] parts [from better material] bro" but after that it's pure larp unless you're actually racing and at that point the frame is the cheapest part of the bike (though still hundreds if not a couple thousand dollars of carbon fiber nonsense with fewer features and more liable to burst into treats than a 200$ walmart floor model, but it weighs -3 grams and has perfectly optimized aerodynamics)
seriously, you can find bikes that cost as much as a new car, literally in the 45,000 USD range, and it will still have the same stock entry level shimano junk you find on Canadian Tire Specials but a weird looking frame with a ghastly paintjob
>>2065062pontiac did this for many years
