Bicycles-recommendations?

fj12ryder wrote:

rexlion wrote:
(snip)
The only thing I wish for differently is an internal hub; with chain gears you have to let off pressure on the pedals when shifting down, but an internal hub doesn't need any letup when shifting. These are pricey but nice to have.

I think you've got that backwards: external derailleurs require you to pedal while you shift because the derailleur has to move the chain to another gear, the internal hub shifting is the model that shifts when you remove pressure from the chain, i.e. stop pedaling for a second.

With derailleurs, a slight decrease in pressure, only for a moment (but maintaining rotation), prevents excessive chain and sprocket wear, making for a smooth shift. Constant, full-on, loaded-for-bear, going up-hill pressure while shifting seems to produce less reliable shifting, tweaking the chain and sprockets. Maybe, it's just me and I'm doing it wrong, but this is my observation. I'm a cycle hobbyist, not a pro.
Going up the price scale of bikes, you get better and better components, to a point. Then, reducing the weight of the quality components kicks in, costing a little more (excluding engineering costs and marketing from the scale).
I used to think spending thousands on a bicycle was insane. I never imagined I'd buy a bike that had a comma in the price tag, but I'm glad I did. Compared to previous bikes, including a hard-tail Cannondale that I rode for 5 years and thought it was the Bee's knees, my present bike feels like I'm, somehow, cheating. Forty years ago, I'd slap a couple wheels on any frame I could scrounge up and be in tall Cotton. My tastes, and level of desired comfort, has matured. Amortized over 5 years, it cost about the same as a gym membership, which would be worthless, because I hate going to a gym.
When you visit your LBS (local bike shop), ask about last year's model. Sometimes, they're not on display and you might save a few bucks. Don't sacrifice fit for money, though.