|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
need advice on: Trek 1600 or Felt z70?
Both are standard made in china aluminum bikes. For a great
alternative to commute and ride for fun fitness etc is the Bianchi Volpe. The steel frame will be more comfortable . But of the two I'd take the trek---what the heck's a "felt"? I have similar wheels on my Lemond and they have remained perfectly true since 2002!!!! The trek just looks better. On May 13, 9:46*am, wrote: Hello, I am interested in buying a new street/road/racing bicycle. I looked around some of the local shops in my area (louisville) and test road a couple as well. At the first shop, which is about 2 miles to my house, I test rode a Felt z70. The sales man said he was going to give it to me @ $1050. At the second shop, which is about 10 miles from my house, I looked at two bycicles though, I test rode only one.. they are Trek 1600 priced at $1000 and Trek 2.1 priced $1150. I like the Trek1600 as well as the Felt z70. I wanted to know how the brands compare against each other and which one would be a better purchase or should I pay slightly *higher and get a better one. I do not want to go over the $1000 mark by too much. My primary reason is to enjoy the bike (casual riding in the evenings) and commute to work which is about 10 miles away. My heart is set on a racing bicycle .. and must admit that I am very excited about this purchase. I want to make the better investment here. Which is the newer/better model, reliable, better parts used is what I would like to know. I appreciate (and am looking forward to) your comments. :-) Thank you. Zee. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
need advice on: Trek 1600 or Felt z70?
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
need advice on: Trek 1600 or Felt z70?
| 1. 4130 CroMoly versus aluminum
This is an advantage because? You are well aware of the advantages. Indulge me again. Why is it that a virtually impossible-to-kill aluminum frame (we're not talking something on the bleeding edge of lightness) is a bad choice. How is it an advantage that you can replace a tube in a steel frame for more than the cost of a new frame. And explain how it is that a steel frame is somehow more comfortable when the compliance of a 28c tire renders differences in frame compliance irrelevant because it's so many orders of magnitude greater. Steel is all about fashion. Which is fine! People should just be willing to admit it. Higher handlebar positions are becoming in style these days (they were always more practical for many, but "style" kept people from wanting to ride that way... thankfully, "style" is subject to change, and for the time being, change for the better). IYO. Well, yes. You don't like the trend towards higher handlebars? Sure, you can go too far (it generally becomes more difficult to climb as bars raise above the level of the saddle, particularly for taller folk), but for most people, the only thing "wrong" with standard road bikes has been their nose-in-the-gravel bar vs seat positioning. --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA "SMS" wrote in message ... Mike Jacoubowsky wrote: | That's good advice. The Surly Crosscheck Complete has several very big | advantages over the Treks and the Felt. | | 1. 4130 CroMoly versus aluminum This is an advantage because? You are well aware of the advantages. | 2. Non-compact frame (the 1600 appears to also have a non-compact frame, | but the 2.1 and the z70 have compact frames Have you looked at a 2.1 or a Pilot-series Trek? They're not "compact" in the sense most people think. It's a traditional frame that slopes *UP* to the front, allowing the bars to be 3cm higher than a "traditional" flat top tube bike. And given that they come in umpteen-different sizes, it's not as if they're doing something to simplify stock at the expense of fit. Yes this is true. | 3. More versatile. With the rims on the Crosscheck you can put on some | 700x23 tires for a "racing bike" for centuries or long road rides or use | the 700x32 tires for commuting or leisurely rides. True. If you need 32c tires, a Crosscheck is the better bet. If 28c will do, the 1600 or 2.1 will do fine. | Of the three original choices, I'd get the Trek 1600. $1000 is a good | price, that's usually the end-of-the-year closeout price around here. Is | this for the latest model, or last years model (not that it matters)? The 1600 is an '07; it doesn't exist in the '08 line. Trek went to upward-sloping tubes for virtually all models below $3k That's too bad. Higher handlebar positions are becoming in style these days (they were always more practical for many, but "style" kept people from wanting to ride that way... thankfully, "style" is subject to change, and for the time being, change for the better). IYO. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
need advice on: Trek 1600 or Felt z70?
Tires are a SMALL part of a bike's "ride" . Steel is by far the more
cofortable frame. There may be no way to scientifically prove differences in ride quality but they are real for a cyclist. I dont car about replacing tubes etc. Bike gets trashed its an excuse for a new one!!!! I put the same tire 700x37 on my Bianchi san jose steel frame /fork and on my Cannondale xr800 al frame/carbonfork (the oe alum fork shook my fillings) and by far the san jose is more plush and comfortable (brooks b17 on both) same handlebars etc. The frame material does matter. Dont let anyone tellyou otherwise. Sizing and fit are #1 but allthings equal a steel bike will be more comfortable. On May 13, 7:41*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote: | 1. 4130 CroMoly versus aluminum This is an advantage because? You are well aware of the advantages. Indulge me again. Why is it that a virtually impossible-to-kill aluminum frame (we're not talking something on the bleeding edge of lightness) is a bad choice. How is it an advantage that you can replace a tube in a steel frame for more than the cost of a new frame. And explain how it is that a steel frame is somehow more comfortable when the compliance of a 28c tire renders differences in frame compliance irrelevant because it's so many orders of magnitude greater. Steel is all about fashion. Which is fine! People should just *be willing to admit it. Higher handlebar positions are becoming in style these days (they were always more practical for many, but "style" kept people from wanting to ride that way... thankfully, "style" is subject to change, and for the time being, change for the better). IYO. Well, yes. You don't like the trend towards higher handlebars? Sure, you can go too far (it generally becomes more difficult to climb as bars raise above the level of the saddle, particularly for taller folk), but for most people, the only thing "wrong" with standard road bikes has been their nose-in-the-gravel bar vs seat positioning. --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA "SMS" wrote in message ... Mike Jacoubowsky wrote: | That's good advice. The Surly Crosscheck Complete has several very big | advantages over the Treks and the Felt. | | 1. 4130 CroMoly versus aluminum This is an advantage because? You are well aware of the advantages. | 2. Non-compact frame (the 1600 appears to also have a non-compact frame, | but the 2.1 and the z70 have compact frames Have you looked at a 2.1 or a Pilot-series Trek? They're not "compact" in the sense most people think. It's a traditional frame that slopes *UP* to the front, allowing the bars to be 3cm higher than a "traditional" flat top tube bike. And given that they come in umpteen-different sizes, it's not as if they're doing something to simplify stock at the expense of fit. Yes this is true. | 3. More versatile. With the rims on the Crosscheck you can put on some | 700x23 tires for a "racing bike" for centuries or long road rides or use | the 700x32 tires for commuting or leisurely rides. True. If you need 32c tires, a Crosscheck is the better bet. If 28c will do, the 1600 or 2.1 will do fine. | Of the three original choices, I'd get the Trek 1600. $1000 is a good | price, that's usually the end-of-the-year closeout price around here. Is | this for the latest model, or last years model (not that it matters)? The 1600 is an '07; it doesn't exist in the '08 line. Trek went to upward-sloping tubes for virtually all models below $3k That's too bad. Higher handlebar positions are becoming in style these days (they were always more practical for many, but "style" kept people from wanting to ride that way... thankfully, "style" is subject to change, and for the time being, change for the better). IYO.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
need advice on: Trek 1600 or Felt z70?
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
need advice on: Trek 1600 or Felt z70?
On Tue, 13 May 2008 15:38:20 -0700, SMS
wrote: Crosscheck is especially impressive as they're using the more expensive tubing than most of the CroMo models which are using 520. Barends are much cheaper than integrated shifters and very nearly as easy to use. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
need advice on: Trek 1600 or Felt z70?
"Will" wrote in message
... | On May 13, 2:00 pm, SMS wrote: | | No such thing as peddles. | | Time to sell the Google stock. The spell checker missed it. Both | times. I guess there is something called a "peddles". Maybe it's a | verb. | | As for the little ring... I can see it for loaded touring. But on | bikes with carbon forks and carbon seat stays??? That's design | confusion... (or maybe the Marketing V.P. got his way). Triples aren't just about "touring." It's a style of riding. Probably 90% of the road bikes we sell have triples, as the only real disadvantage anymore is about 6 ounces extra weight. By "style" of riding, I mean that they're very useful for those who would rather stay seated on a long climb, *or* those who imagine finding some super-steep climb that might otherwise be impossible to get up. They're also useful for those who like to vary their cadence and/or effort to keep things from getting monotonous on a long climb. Still, it's wrong to believe that, if you have a low-enough gear, you can climb all day and not get tired. You still need to be in shape. --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
need advice on: Trek 1600 or Felt z70?
In article ,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote: "Will" wrote in message ... | On May 13, 2:00 pm, SMS wrote: Triples aren't just about "touring." It's a style of riding. Probably 90% of the road bikes we sell have triples, as the only real disadvantage anymore is about 6 ounces extra weight. By "style" of riding, I mean that they're very useful for those who would rather stay seated on a long climb, *or* those who imagine finding some super-steep climb that might otherwise be impossible to get up. They're also useful for those who like to vary their cadence and/or effort to keep things from getting monotonous on a long climb. Still, it's wrong to believe that, if you have a low-enough gear, you can climb all day and not get tired. You still need to be in shape. --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com Okay Mike, essay time: triple or compact double, and why? -- Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/ "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls." "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them." |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Advice on Replacing Trek-700 for Urban Commuting | AEngineerDU | General | 3 | July 2nd 07 05:18 AM |
FS: Trek Fuel 98 OCLV 17.5" 2004 ridden 60mi $1600 | oclvframe | Marketplace | 0 | December 8th 05 08:10 PM |
Opinions on Felt frames and Felt Components | [email protected] | Techniques | 1 | August 22nd 05 08:11 AM |
Sigma BC 1600 | B.T. | Australia | 4 | September 30th 04 02:23 AM |
advice for a beginner on a Trek 1500 | rastakaram | Techniques | 5 | September 19th 04 10:30 AM |