I don't think it is fair to compare this unit to something at least three times the price.
I think it's absolute fair to
compare it to another similar product even at three times the price and to learn the differences. I think it's ridiculous to
expect it to perform the same way and to the same standards as a product three times its price.
There's no doubt it has a lot of bang:buck. This whole discussion has brought a very viable option to riders. I would not buy another Sena for my 'street' helmet because of the expense and its primary use (around town and short hops). The BT-S2 does that just fine.
And at its price having a second one instead of relying solely on hoping you make your charging cycles on time makes sense. Even having a third if you ride with a pillion is still cost effective.
A Sena of varying model may have more utility. But if you don't need it there may be no value in going top shelf. I like my 20S and if I hadn't got it I'd probably get the 30K. But for a second unit the BT-S2 is perfect for me.
Daniel said:
considering that is what always ends up happening
Sometimes it makes sense. Other times it's just plain silly at best such as
expecting one motorcycle to perform favorably to another when it each built and marketed for a different purpose.
That's not to say you shouldn't use any given bike or any other product for a purpose other than intended by the manufacturer if that suits you.
So with the BT-S2 the proprietary headset/charging connector is something of which to be aware as is the volume level. Both are worth noting and will affect buying decisions for valid reasons just as there are valid reasons for getting one instead of a Sena.
The ultimate question for me with any product that meets the level of utility I want is— how long will it last? A few uses? A season? More than a year? The time depends on the product of course. I'd expect a good or even mediocre anvil or vice to last longer than an inexpensive electronic device. But who knows.