Trek Bike Question

To be fair, the team that won 7 of the last 9 tours rode Trek. No no, that of course does not mean one should buy Trek. But then again, neither does the number of teams that choose Trek. The OP isn't talking about becoming a professional cyclist. He's asking about a relatively low-end old model of Trek bike.

I'm not going to even think of trying debate high-end stuff like what you mention because so much of it is what you "like". You mention you were upgrading things but was it because they broke or because you simply didn't like them? I prefer my Zipps to the Heds and Mavic's I've tried but that doesn't mean I think there is anything wrong with those other brands.

Experienced cyclists (and it sounds to me like you are) are notoriously picky and finicky about their components. They should be. But once you get to the part of the market where most of the sales occur (e.g. under $2000) the differences are not really all that great. You put a pair of Zipps a mid-range Trek and you have more than doubled the value.

For mid-to-low end, the biggies like Trek and Specialized offer great value for the money. If one is going high-end, well I hope such a person would give that bike enough test rides and do enough research that advice from this message board would be the last thing they would consider.

voice of reason wrote:

To be fair, the team that won 7 of the last 9 tours rode Trek.

8 of 9, Alberto Contador who was eventually declared the winner in 2007, was on a Trek.

you guys are on some sort of Crack if you think Lance rode on a Trek..All he had on his bike was the Trek name.

only the first couple of years was he riding rebadged bikes. He definitely was on Treks for his "glory" years..

trek bikes suck balls.....unless you buy the super expensive ones.

I'm with you, dude. Some of these people have NO IDEA what they're talking about, and have obviously never owned a Treck bike, because if they had, they'd know for a fact that there is no better bicycle made. Period.

I myself own a Treck from the 1990's which is still better than 99.9999% of all bikes made today, except for maybe the top pro team racing bikes. It's a combo racer/touring bike with an insane amount of gears on it - I don't know exactly how many, but trust me, it's a lot. My mechanic, who is a professional at what he does, tells me that the Lance's bike has 20 gears, and mine has even more than his does. Crazy but true. That's Treck for you.

Plus it has a specially designed shifter unit that "click-stops" perfectly into every single gear. It's also made of Aero-space quality CR-MO alloy. If you don't know what that is, it's the same grade of CR-MO alloy they use in jet liners and fighter planes - super strong, super light, and super high tech. Speaking for myself, I've put in well over 100 miles a year on this sweet machine, and had very few problems. It's over ten years old, and still rides like a bike that's not very old at all. How's that for durability?

If I ever got rid of it, which I doubt, because I love it so much, I would DEFINITELY by another Treck, and I recommend that anyone out there also buy another Treck.

What brand are you talking about? I tried typing Treck into google but only came up with Trek. Are you talking about a TREK bike. Glad you have had one for almost 20 years and have never learned how to spell it.

to be honest. it does matter about the components, but what also matters is the frame itself. Trek is outdated and behind the times compared to other bike companies like cervelo and specialized. trek just started (06 or 07?) using compact geometry frames, something that has been going on for quite some time in the bike industry. Also their carbon bikes still use lugs to be assembled where others have done away with this process because it creates dual densities throughout the bike giving it a poor quality. also even though trek is american made, the same product that is made by a company who outsources their labor is going to be cheaper for the consumer.

like a previous poster said, even though lance rode a trek to 7 victories, doesn't make it the best bike. you could have put him on a huffy and the dude still would have won 7 victories (when ur that juiced, equipment really doesn't matter)

To be honest, you are wrong.

Components do matter. If not why didn't Lance ride Sora?

Compact frames are used to save bike companies money. Molds are super expensive. That is why you see small medium and large.

The only thing you are right about is Lance being able to win on a Huffy.

yes, the more gears you have, the better the bike is. so my piece of crap bike has 27 gears, it is better than the one lance rides.

You are a retard. Compact frames are produced for one reason and one reason only: increasing profit margin. Many pros hate them because of the relaxed geometry. Race geometry frames are typically produced in 2 to 3 cm increments with 7 or 8 sizes available. Compacts come in small, med, or large. More choices mean higher production costs which means lower profits.

And your argument about mono vs lug frames is a preference. Many pros prefer lug frames over their monoque counterparts. It has to do with the type of rider you are. A climber or sprinter, large or small. The rider style needs to fit the frame construction.

And someone earlier posed the question about how many teams ride Trek, implying that no one rides them because they aren't good bikes. So, how many teams ride Trek on the Pro Tour: one. By the way, how many Pro Tour teams ride Cervelo? Oh, right...one. How about Giant? One. Scott? One. Cannondale? One. Get the picture. Most frame manufactures only sponsor one pro team. They just want their bikes in the race for advertising.

Dude, the ignorance is killing me.

tekkie wrote:

like a previous poster said, even though lance rode a trek to 7 victories, doesn't make it the best bike. you could have put him on a huffy and the dude still would have won 7 victories (when ur that juiced, equipment really doesn't matter)

The 7-11 team, including Greg Lemond, actually rode Huffy branded bikes in the Tour. All of these were rebadged customs, mostly built by Serotta.

I took some slack for my sarcasm attempt, too. Even when you try to be obvious, people can't figure it out because it looks so much like a legitimate, ignorant, LRC post.

I like the part about having an insane number of gears but you not knowing exactly how many. And dropping the pro mechanic reference added validity. Nice touch.

At this point, some of the ignorance is probably just intentional trolling designed to make people write a pissed of response. If the OP has any sense at all, he stopped reading this thread long ago.

Can anyone give me an opinion on the Gary Fisher genesis hardtail series? I'm looking at the disc wahoo and the disc marlin.

"What brand are you talking about? I tried typing Treck into google but only came up with Trek. Are you talking about a TREK bike. Glad you have had one for almost 20 years and have never learned how to spell it."

First of all, if you actually read my post, I didn't say I owned the bike for almost 20 years.

Second of all: THAT'S ALL YOU GOT? Seriously? I miss-spelled a couple of words? Big freaking deal, Dude. What are you going to do, report me to my third grade teacher? Nobody spell checks when they post on message boards on the interweb. Everyone knows that, unless you're a nube.

Let me give you a little advice, my nube-friend, you may know a lot about jogging, but since you're the same person that not only didn't know that Trek-Botranger seat posts and stem posts are top-notch component parts, but you didn't even know that seat posts and stem posts are interchangeable, you are WAYY out of your league when it comes to knowledge about the sport of cycling. Leave that to people like the Lance and myself - people who put the serious hours in the saddle on our sweet TREK riding machines.

And, dude, before you go bashing TREK components, you need to talk to my mechanic, who has hands-on professional wrenching experience with them on a daily basis, and DEFINITELY knows his sh*t. I asked him about Trek-Botranger components, and he said that they are - and I quote, "...for the most part, perfectly serviceable components." Basically what that means is they are some of the finest components available in the known world.

Plus, if you knew anything about bikes, you'd know that TREK is probably the leader in the entire galaxy when it comes to innovation in the technology of the cycling inventiveness.

Here's an example - just one of many: My mechanic retrofitted my Trek racer/touring combo bike with Trek-Matrix tires that they specially designed with a Kevlar tread. I'm sure you don't know what that means. Don't feel bad, few people aside from my mechanic and the engineering scientists at the TREK labs understand it completely, but basically, it means my tires are made out of bullet-proof vests!!!

Why would they do that, you ask? Here's why: The sidewalks near my house, where I cyclo-train, have a lotta lotsa LOTTA broken glass on them. Am I worried? Put it this way - if my tires can stop a speeding bullet, do you think they're worried about little glass? They're not.

That's just one of many things that make TREKS the sweetest rides available to man or womankind. Get on board, or get out of the way, because me and the Lance will run you over, dude.

All I know that I had a Trek tri-bike and used it for my first three Ironman triathlons. I then switched to the Specialized transistion S-works and not only did I have a faster bike time, my run splits were faster because the bike is so adjustable it fits everyone. I have only done 6 ironman triathlons so I quess I do not know much about biking. By the way, my last Ironman I had a 9 hour 43 minute total time. My bike split was 5 hours and 5 minutes. I quess that is only a 22 mile per hour average. So I quess you know more about biking.

Personally, even after selling Trek bikes, and riding a 2002 cyclo-cross bike from them, I wouldn't buy there bikes. As a company there are making it impossible for independent shop owners to succeed. In Southern California they have forced shops out of business by buying up two or three shops and underselling everyone else. Their reps are jerks and in general they are killing American cycling by styming the creativity in the industry. Oh and their full-suspension mountain bikes are horrible. They have set up entire shops that try to look like a shop selling several brands but all they do is trick the customer, there is no difference between a Trek road bike and a Lemond, there is very little difference between a Trek mtn bike and a Gary Fisher, they then only carry sub brands of Trek which limits the diversity of the market and makes for a horrible shop.

Just my two cents (well more than two cents).

Message:

"All I know that I had a Trek tri-bike and used it for my first three Ironman triathlons. I then switched to the Specialized transistion S-works and not only did I have a faster bike time, my run splits were faster because the bike is so adjustable it fits everyone. I have only done 6 ironman triathlons so I quess I do not know much about biking. By the way, my last Ironman I had a 9 hour 43 minute total time. My bike split was 5 hours and 5 minutes. I quess that is only a 22 mile per hour average. So I quess you know more about biking."

I don't know what my average MPH is when I'm riding, because I stop and walk my bike across the streets, but I have NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER that I ride well in excess of 22MPH on the long stretch of sidewalk between Maple Ave. and Schoolhouse Road, because the crossing guard always yells at me to slow down before I hit another kid.

-And I"m not faster than you just because that stretch is downhill - it's mainly because of the awesome, sweet TREK machine that top riders like the Lance and myself drive.