Madone 5.2 SL

To say Trek has an issue with frame finish quality is an
understatement. My frame looked like a 3rd grader finished it. I was
so excited to buy this bike, my first "high-end" road bike that I
didn't even bother to inspect the frame when I decided to buy it. I
did notice defects in the finish on the fork and let the store owner
know about it. He said he would talk to his Trek rep and see what the
deal is. As soon as I got the bike home I noticed about a dozen other
defects in the finish. Besides the fork, which looked like the paint
gun ran out of paint and just spattered its remnants, the frame itself
had about 8 to 10 air bubbles under the clear-coat. The decorative
striping was off center and wasn't parallel to the other striping.
There was an actual fingerprint in the clear-coat on the top tube.
Under the down-tube you could see where the painter overlapped the
striping and left the tape folded up. Basically the frame was crap.

The "frame" wasn't crap, but the finish sounds less-than-desirable. Treks
won't have the finish of an import frame, for several reasons.

First, the paints that are legal overseas have long been essentially banned
in the US, for environmental reasons. Wisconsin in particular has some of
the most-stringent smokestack regulations (plant emissions) in the country,
and the severely limits the types (and discourages the amount) of paint
used. Yes, you can still powder coat, but powder-coating carbon fiber isn't
a wise idea (too much heat).

Second, paint weighs something. Less paint=lighter frame. When you have a
target weight, and a choice of hitting that weight by making a better frame
with less paint or a weaker frame with more. Paint will add 1/4 pound,
sometimes more, to the weight of a frame, so on something very light, it's a
significant amount.

Third, simple priorities. How much cost into making something look really
nice vs function? This is a huge marketing issue, and is debated endlessly.
Some customers will prefer one direction, others something different. That's
always going to be the case, and that's one reason why there's room in the
market for many different brands, even when it's difficult to compete
technologically with the big guy.

Having said all that, bubble under the clear coat aren't something you can
fabricate an excuse for. The "decorative striping" is done entirely by hand
(I've been in the decal room) and will vary a small amount from
frame-to-frame. I've wondered why they couldn't come up with a template;
they say they've tried, but that overall they do very well by hand. The part
underneath the downtube on your frame sounds like something that shouldn't
be, but I'm not there looking at it, and it's not something I can judge from
description. The "actual fingerprint" most likely isn't. We've spotted some
of those and taken photos, which their engineers tell me is the way that
particular carbon cloth sometimes looks. The carbon cloth for the SL frames
is chosen entirely for weight & durability; there is different material used
for enhanced aesthetics, which is found on the slightly-heavier frames.

Having said all that, I shouldn't argue with you that the frame was crap. To
you, it was. Your perception is relevant. In our shop, we explain how the
frames are made, we show people how the tubes are connected, and how the
exposed carbon with the funny look to it may not be aesthetically pleasing
but makes sense given what Trek is trying to accomplish. It's up to the
customer to decide if that's the way they wish to go, essentially a
trade-off for a nearly-bombproof ultralight and great-riding frame vs
something with drop-dead-gorgeous aesthetics. A legitimate choice, in my
opinion.

I expressed my issue with both Trek USA and my local bike shop. Both
told me that they would have to take my frame back and strip it and
repaint it. This process could take 1 to 2 months. I didn't exactly
like this idea and just wanted a new frame. Trek wouldn't do it, but
my LBS would. The local Trek store owner allowed me to trade my 05'
Madone 5.2SL in for a 05' Trek Project One SL, which is a custom
paintjob and is the 110 OCLV frame. This cost me an additional $500.

You local dealer is doing a good job trying to get you taken care of, as the
price differential between the Project One and a stock version is quite a
bit more than $500.

I had the Shimano FlightDeck installed. It didn't work. They replaced
the computer and harness, still didn't work. They had to order new
Ultergra shifters, still didn't. 30 days later, two sets of shifters
and 4 sets of computer/harness exchanges and I finally have a 100%
working bike. I did get an upgrade to Dura Ace shifters out of the
deal.

Unfortunately a common issue lately. We've replaced quite a number of
10-speed Ultegra STI levers due to issues with the FlightDeck interface not
working. I doubt the wiring harnesses were the problem, but we've certainly
pulled out a fair amount of hair doing the same things your dealer did.
Fortunately, when we've gotten replacements directly from Shimano, they've
worked. A hassle, to be sure. Your dealer, once again, came through for you
with the Dura Ace shifter upgrade.

My point in this long post is this: Trek is so overwhelmed with orders
that they're churning out crap finished bikes. Nothing beats the 110
OCLV frame, but the rest of the bike has issues. If you buy a Trek,
take the time to inspect it head to toe and if you're putting the
flight deck on it make sure the shifter's computer chip is working.

I agree that one should look over any bike carefully before they buy it, no
question. Trek or anything else. But the only manner in which the failing
FlightDeck lever would be Trek's fault would be in the choice of component
in the first place... and generally, choosing a Shimano component is a
pretty safe way to go. And it's not as if Shimano is deliberately sending a
higher quality level of component to one manufacturer than another. You're
as likely to get a malfunctioning lever from any manufacturer.

What I get from all of this are two things. Make sure you understand the
pros and cons of what your getting, and that you're getting it from a dealer
who won't run away from problems.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


"tntcoach" wrote in message
oups.com...
TIA-Alan,

I'm an 05' Trek Madone 5.2SL owner. Here's my story of woe...

To say Trek has an issue with frame finish quality is an
understatement. My frame looked like a 3rd grader finished it. I was
so excited to buy this bike, my first "high-end" road bike that I
didn't even bother to inspect the frame when I decided to buy it. I
did notice defects in the finish on the fork and let the store owner
know about it. He said he would talk to his Trek rep and see what the
deal is. As soon as I got the bike home I noticed about a dozen other
defects in the finish. Besides the fork, which looked like the paint
gun ran out of paint and just spattered its remnants, the frame itself
had about 8 to 10 air bubbles under the clear-coat. The decorative
striping was off center and wasn't parallel to the other striping.
There was an actual fingerprint in the clear-coat on the top tube.
Under the down-tube you could see where the painter overlapped the
striping and left the tape folded up. Basically the frame was crap.

I expressed my issue with both Trek USA and my local bike shop. Both
told me that they would have to take my frame back and strip it and
repaint it. This process could take 1 to 2 months. I didn't exactly
like this idea and just wanted a new frame. Trek wouldn't do it, but
my LBS would. The local Trek store owner allowed me to trade my 05'
Madone 5.2SL in for a 05' Trek Project One SL, which is a custom
paintjob and is the 110 OCLV frame. This cost me an additional $500.

The story doesn't end there.

I had the Shimano FlightDeck installed. It didn't work. They replaced
the computer and harness, still didn't work. They had to order new
Ultergra shifters, still didn't. 30 days later, two sets of shifters
and 4 sets of computer/harness exchanges and I finally have a 100%
working bike. I did get an upgrade to Dura Ace shifters out of the
deal.

My point in this long post is this: Trek is so overwhelmed with orders
that they're churning out crap finished bikes. Nothing beats the 110
OCLV frame, but the rest of the bike has issues. If you buy a Trek,
take the time to inspect it head to toe and if you're putting the
flight deck on it make sure the shifter's computer chip is working.

Other bikes: The Specialized Roubioux is a comfort bike, more upright.
The Tarmac is more race inspired but more $$. For a little more money
Serrotta makes one hell of a custom built bike. Cervelo is also
turning out some nice bikes for the money.

Good luck and be carefull with Trek.
-Mike

Fascinating. Did the two of you make the comparisons with bicycles
having the same geometries, fit, saddles, bars and bar tape, gloves,
wheels, tires, tire pressures, shorts, and roads?

*slaps forehead*

I forgot to eliminate the bar tape variable!

I'm surprised you guys left out color. Look at how much more money Canon
gets for lenses, just by painting them white. Obviously there's no
difference in optics, focusing speed or durability. In cameras, just like
bikes, everything's exactly the same, the only differences are that some
people believe otherwise and spend more money for something.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

I am not going to go through the whole store with my Trek frame problems but
I sent mine back and after 3 weeks got it back worse. Paint was flaking off.
I sold it on E-Bay and bought one of the European bike with the good paint.
1 1/2 years later could not be happier.

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:06:54 GMT, "Hans C."
wrote:

I will inspect any frame I consider. Do you think you just got a lemon?

A lemon? It's a bike. Apart from the computer it was working fine.

I don't understand these concerns about finish, but for those of you
who do, well knock yourselves out.

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

In article , Hans C.
wrote:

I am considering the purchase of a stock Madone 5.2SL. The only other
carbon bike I've tested is a VERY expensive Scott. They rode very
differently and I prefer the Trek. Two questions. First, can any of you
folks recommend other carbon frames that I should consider? Secondly, any
thoughts good/ bad or personal experience with the Madone. I currrently
ride a custom steel frame. I was amazed at the comfort of the ride compared
to my old steel bike.

TIA-Alan



Alan,

I think the popularity of carbon is going to increase -- just look at
the choices available now with carbon frames from many makers. It will
be a matter of time before the Asians perfect the art and bring prices
down as they do with aluminium.

Having said that, when buying any carbon frame, fitting is very
important. I take it that you took your old custom steel bike over to
your Trek and Scott dealer so they did look over and try to duplicate
the same cockpit length as your steel bike??

I am not familiar with the Scott frames, but I have always been amazed
by Trek's carbon bike handling characteristics. Obviously, they have
done their homework very well, possibly getting some input from Mr.
Armstrong in the design stages of their latest frames.

As far as comfort goes, well made and designed carbon frames do dampen
some high frequency vibrations. Some dampen too much, whereas some
don't. But it is hard to quantify physically, because some people
don't feel this zen thing (probably their big muscles dampen vibration
and shock well already).
I do have to admit that after riding 3000 miles on my new carbon bike,
it does dampen vibrations very well. But then, I recently read a
review of a bike with Bontrager Race Lite wheels and found out that,
this wheelset gives a cushier ride than a pair of standard 32 spoke
wheels. Go figure!

David.

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
The "frame" wasn't crap, but the finish sounds less-than-desirable. Treks
won't have the finish of an import frame, for several reasons.

First, the paints that are legal overseas have long been essentially banned
in the US, for environmental reasons. Wisconsin in particular has some of
the most-stringent smokestack regulations (plant emissions) in the country,
and the severely limits the types (and discourages the amount) of paint
used. Yes, you can still powder coat, but powder-coating carbon fiber isn't
a wise idea (too much heat).

Curious, I thought the consensus was that European paint jobs were
inferior. Torelli imports euro bikes unpainted and has them painted in
the US to please us fussy customers - at least that's the way my bike
came - and it's not powder coating as far as I can tell.

Mark

Larry Coon wrote:
41 wrote:

Fascinating. Did the two of you make the comparisons with bicycles
having the same geometries, fit, saddles, bars and bar tape, gloves,
wheels, tires, tire pressures, shorts, and roads?

*slaps forehead*

I forgot to eliminate the bar tape variable!

I see. Since for bicycles, the bar tape variable is far more important
in vibration absorption than the carbon fiber- metal variable, from
this I infer that you didn't really control any of the important
variables- how could you control chainstay length, for example- and the
improved vibration damping characteristics you note in fact result from
all the cash you've got tied up in that thing.

So why not just stuff your custom steel frame tubes with dollar bills
and get the same heightened vibration damping?

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

I'm surprised you guys left out color. Look at how much more money Canon
gets for lenses, just by painting them white. Obviously there's no
difference in optics, focusing speed or durability. In cameras, just like
bikes, everything's exactly the same, the only differences are that some
people believe otherwise and spend more money for something.

Canon was the first to make fluorite element lenses generally available
and since these elements are very temperature sensitive, the lenses had
to be finished white instead of the black that was in vogue at the
time. There certainly was a difference in durability, as in addition to
its temperature sensitivity, fluorite is moisture sensitive and
scratches more easily than glass.

On the other hand, as with carbon vs. metal bicycle frames, the shock
and vibration damping characteristics showed no significant
differences. However flourite did improve the optics, and apparently
for many people carbon has a similar effect on bicycle frames, and so
commands a similarly premium price.

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

I'm surprised you guys left out color. Look at how much more money Canon
gets for lenses, just by painting them white. Obviously there's no
difference in optics, focusing speed or durability. In cameras, just like
bikes, everything's exactly the same, the only differences are that some
people believe otherwise and spend more money for something.

Canon was the first to make fluorite element lenses generally available
and since these elements are very temperature sensitive, the lenses had
to be finished white instead of the black that was in vogue at the
time. There certainly was a difference in durability, as in addition to
its temperature sensitivity, fluorite is moisture sensitive and
scratches more easily than glass.

On the other hand, as with carbon vs. metal bicycle frames, the shock
and vibration damping characteristics showed no significant
differences. However flourite did improve the optics, and apparently
for many people carbon has a similar effect on bicycle frames, and so
commands a similarly premium price.

I'm surprised you guys left out color. Look at how much more money Canon
gets for lenses, just by painting them white. Obviously there's no
difference in optics, focusing speed or durability. In cameras, just like
bikes, everything's exactly the same, the only differences are that some
people believe otherwise and spend more money for something.

Canon was the first to make fluorite element lenses generally available
and since these elements are very temperature sensitive, the lenses had
to be finished white instead of the black that was in vogue at the
time. There certainly was a difference in durability, as in addition to
its temperature sensitivity, fluorite is moisture sensitive and
scratches more easily than glass.

My response was firmly tongue-in-cheek. I own a 70-200F4 "white" (L-series)
lens. Very nice piece of glass.

On the other hand, as with carbon vs. metal bicycle frames, the shock
and vibration damping characteristics showed no significant
differences. However flourite did improve the optics, and apparently
for many people carbon has a similar effect on bicycle frames, and so
commands a similarly premium price.

The pricing of carbon-fiber bicycle frames has much more to do with the cost
of materials (and labor in fabrication) than it does anything artificial
that inflates the price. It's simply expensive stuff to work with. We are
presently seeing some lower-price options, but those are coming from
sourcing the frames in places where labor is cheap, lowering the cost of
production. If carbon-fiber bicycles became less popular, I'm not convinced
that prices would come down, as the industry has plenty of other ways to
produce bicycle frames at low cost. Carbon-fiber would simply be a
more-exclusive, and perhaps even more-expensive option.

As materials become more popular, whether it be aluminum some years ago, or
perhaps carbon down the road, they move towards commoditization and lower
prices/profit. Carbon may eventually follow this pattern. It may seem
counter-intuitive (that popularity would lead to lower prices) but history
says that, in the absence of monopolies (such as deBeers), that's usually
the case.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com