Some discussion in the 'noisy 250s' thread has gone far beyond that issue, and I found it interesting enough to start a new thread. The claim has been made that it is (or can be) cheaper over all to have a cheap small commuter bike as well as a sports bike than to commute on the sports bike. Hopefully we can get away from the 'anyone who chooses to do it differently from the way I do is a poser/wanker/whatev', and just discuss the issue from a cost perspective. No doubt there are lots of assumptions to be made about type and cost of the two bikes, length of commute, amount of sports riding on weekends and whether it's track days or road, age and insurance cost of rider and so on. But have at 'er, guys: make your case.