What is mid-range?

[lewis1641]

And that's how the mags saw it, too.

and we know they were always right

sorry, just being argumentative

 

[Neil]

And that's how the mags saw it, too.

and we know they were always right

sorry, just being argumentative

Thing is, though, it's a fair point - how many of us have read group tests of bikes for entry level, and for mid-range in mags?

As for them being right - they were right - at least about how they pitched those tests. I read countless over the years, and they made for interesting reading. Both MTBs I bought, BITD, were as a result of reading group tests of mid-range bikes.

 

[lewis1641]

i understand your point but my problem with the top of your suggested mid range price is that above mid range is high end. i dont see a £900 or £1000 bike as being high end, certainly not to the same degree as say a £3000 bike. there is a small segment for low end, a small segment for mid range then an infinate segment for high end

 

[lewis1641]

edit. to define mid range you need to define low end, then high end. mid range is whats left!

 

[Neil]

i understand your point but my problem with the top of your suggested mid range price is that above mid range is high end. i dont see a £900 or £1000 bike as being high end, certainly not to the same degree as say a £3000 bike. there is a small segment for low end, a small segment for mid range then an infinate segment for high end

And it's no different in the world of cars, either.

 

[Neil]

edit. to define mid range you need to define low end, then high end. mid range is whats left!

Surely that was always established - £300 was around entry level, 500-600 was mid-range, and say 750+ was high-end.

Suspension and differing materials probably had some bearing on that, in making the high-end category rather large - but as I said in my other posts, that's no different in the world of cars, either.

And this comes back to my reason for comment - it's not because I have any intentions of entry - merely that BOTM every month is open-ended. This specific BOTM was for mid-range bikes, and I think it's churlish to try and suggest that top-end or boutique stuff, dressed down, is fair game, when those sort of entries would be just dandy for normal BOTM, that's all. All the talk about expensive bikes skewing what everybody really knew as mid-range just seems to be detracting from the spirit of the thing, when BOTM every other month would be fine for such bikes.

 

[lewis1641]

i agree with 300 being entry level. that seems the minimum spend to get something reasonably off road compliant. i dont agree that a £750 bike is high end though. i'm not just saying that to defend my entry.

i dont think i am being churlish to suggest that 750 is a very low ceiling for mid range

 

[GoldenEraMTB]

Quite a discussion. Its hard to define by any one criteria. I'd say though that mid range has a bigger spectrum than low and high end.

great point; albeit a short one

i'd just woken up.

what i think i was trying to say is.. bottom end is fairly easy to define. you know what to look out for and what to expect on a bottom end bike and you know you'll be looking at up to say £400.

same with top end bikes. you know what is going to be draped on that beautiful frame and you know you will pay thousands for it.

mid range lies between these. there are lower mid range, mid range and higher mid range i guess. my point is that the makority of bikes are mid range and i guess that is why john has defined mid range as lx-max. ho had to use some kind of cut off before approaching the higher end of mid range.

my thinking is that there are not many really high end or really low end bikes out there compared to the number of "mid range" bikes.

i have entered my rts 2 this month as i feel that it is mid range. yes it is more expensive than the 5-600 price point that a few are suggesting as a guide but a lot of the extra was because of the back end. if it were a hardtail it would be around the 5-600 price i would have thought. i am looking at this as mid range suspension.

my other thought for entry was my beloved khs montana pro. i couldnt enter as it has dx hubs and xt cranks. i thought about a quick rebuild but deemed that not very sporting as the bike was originally xt equipped and had, if i recall, a £900 retail. however i would definately regard this as mid range. thats not to say i was a spoilt brat when i was a kid - my best bike was a fire mountain, its just i see high end as being the exotic and out of reach.

ah...yes...good stuff. Another thing to consider:

low end = "recreational mtb"

mid range = "sport mtb"

high end = "race mtb"

mfgs were fond of using those labels as well

 

[Neil]

i agree with 300 being entry level. that seems the minimum spend to get something reasonably off road compliant. i dont agree that a £750 bike is high end though. i'm not just saying that to defend my entry.

i dont think i am being churlish to suggest that 750 is a very low ceiling for mid range

I think, BITD, people spending at least £750 were buying a serious bike and were of the view it was high end <shrug>

 

[GoldenEraMTB]

i agree with 300 being entry level. that seems the minimum spend to get something reasonably off road compliant. i dont agree that a £750 bike is high end though. i'm not just saying that to defend my entry.

i dont think i am being churlish to suggest that 750 is a very low ceiling for mid range

I think, BITD, people spending at least £750 were buying a serious bike and were of the view it was high end <shrug>

depending on how far back in the day...

in the early to mid 80's perhaps. late 80's, into the 90's, not so much.