I actually used the normal 50mm lens on my 35mm camera 85% of the time which is why the 80mm is what I was testing. I want to shoot more with a wide angle, but to buy a 'Blad 50mm (my target lens) it will cost me over $1000 for the lens alone (not taking into account the chrome "C" lenses as I was told that these are the oldest and to get the T* lenses) plus close to another $100 for the hood. At my enlargement size I don't really believe there will be any appreciable quality difference. As for color fidelity, I just shot the chromes because I didn't want there to be any quality control issues in my test--I only shoot black and white in medium format and do color with a 35mm point and shoot and probably a (blasphemy!) digital in the future. As for contrast, modern multi-coating and a hood along with proper darkroom magic should suffice. For the bokeh, I haven't shot with either the 'blad or bronica 50mm so I can't say anything there, but this can also change sample to sample. Finally, to the repair record: I can by 3 bronica 50 lenses for every hasselblad 50mm so if it's not cheaper to fix it, I can just buy another and still be ahead.
For me and my $$$ situation Bronica made the most sense. If I had the money and could spare it I probably would have gone with the 'Blad, because as you say, they are the best. But if you're in the same money predicament as I am I think the opportunity for an entire system at the Bronica price point more than makes up for a slight quality difference, others may see it differently, but this is just how I played it.