It's just occurred to me that I don't agree with the oft-trotted-out recommendation to beginners to "buy a cheap bike, then if you don't get into it, you haven't wasted much". In my opinion, if you want to get into cycling, then if you have got to the stage of finding a forum and asking a question about bikes you have obviously already made the decision that you are going to become a cyclist. So there is no point trying to pretend that you aren't one yet until you've got a certain amount of experience on a bike and are used to it. No, you might aswell buy the most expensive bike you can afford. That way, you are more likely to think "well, I've spent all this money, I might aswell ride the bloody thing" and you are a lot more likely to want to ride your bike if it is a really nice one than if it's a shitter. I think we should stop recommending "spend a maximum of 3 hundred until you know cycling is definitely for you". Whether a beginner knows it or not, cycling definitely IS for them, by the fact that they have found this forum, and therefore we should tell them that. Also, we should warn them against falling into the trap of having an entry level bike that they can't be bothered to ride 'cos it's not that great and not minding getting lazy and letting the motivation to cycle fall by the wayside because they won't have wasted that much money. In other words, a financial commitment is a good thing, just for the fact that it is a commitment.