>>2055627
>Bicycles have an inverse relationship between utility and price
Yeah well what's wrong with that? At least back in 2009 or so, I figured the sweet spot for me was around $500. I got a brand-new picrel with essentials (lights and lock). Was extremely useful for commuting around the city as well as some exercise and recreation. I didn't go off-roading but it was sturdy enough to handle shitty Boston/Cambridge/Brookline streets without ever getting a pinch flat or having an accident. It had straight handles for stable maneuverability and was light enough to be reasonably fun to ride and easy enough to carry up and down staircases.

I've since moved away to the interior and a semi-rural area, so don't use it much anymore. But I got a solid 8 years out of that bike. WELL worth the $500. I could have gotten some cheap beater from craigslist but I didn't need to save $300 to roll the dice on getting piece of junk. And I didn't need (or even want) a specialty bike (racing bike, mountain bike, etc). Everyone who had more performance-oriented road bikes seemed to be constantly getting flat tires, and all the extra weight and complexity of a mountain bike would have been a waste on city streets.

I did always wonder why it's so rare to find a decent performance-oriented pedal-powered boat. Traditional 2-seater paddleboats are kind of a joke.