General Cycling Discussion - Trek Navigator 2.0 thoughts?

I am looking to get into cycling to get in shape. I will probbaly ride mostly street with the occasional light trail riding. The person at the bike shop showed me a 4300 and a Navigator, but recommended the Navigator because it provides a good street ride and can be used off-roads as well. I cannot find a lot of information on it though. Any thoughts?

My wife rides a navigator and I ride a 4500. If being able to plant your feet on the ground is important pick the navigator. Otherwise you will probably be happier with the 4300 longer. I don't think the navigator would be suitable off road at all, unless you mean bike trail.

torgrot

the navigator is heavy. I'd buy the 4300 and just change the tires, maybe a lockout fork for pavement.

+1
I can certainly attest to its weight. As I lift it onto the rack on the back of the car. I have put hybrid tires on my 4500, just to tool around on.

torgrot

What about the 7000 Hybrid series? Maybe this would be a better option for me?

I got the Navigator because of the upright position and cushiness of the ride. I have a bad back that goes out on me every once in a while and that provides me with something I can ride even though it hurts. It has a suspension on the seatpost and also on the front. It to me is more of a cruiser style bike without the cruiser look.

The Navigator is heavy indeed but if you are using for bike paths, running errands or just a little excercise around the block I find it to meet my needs. I don't use it for dirt paths really, it's just nice to be able to cut through the dirt if need be.

The 7000 Hybrid series has the larger tire that is thinner. It is a faster bike, due to the less weight, less amount of contact and tire resistance on the pavement. It has no suspension from what I remember so the ride will be harsher (suspension fork adds more weight).

I chose the Navigator between the two because of the back issue. From there I went to full suspension mountain bike because I wanted to go a little more aggressive. I now have a road bike on order, that is being built with my back problems in mind - geometry wise.

trek is making an urban sport bike. It looks like a mountain bike with a rigid fork. If you are going to ride on the road mostly, I would buy a bike with a rigid fork or a bike with a lockout fork. From my experience suspension forks absorb energy on the road. Seems like every time you pedal the fork compresses. Just my experience.

My Dad bought a Navigator last Fall and it is perfect for him. It is very upright and immediately comfortable. The drawback to it, is that it is not going to be very fast. Maybe you don't want to go fast but make sure before you buy.

If you end up riding paved roads with someone that has a road bike, you will be left in the dust. I always recommend that people start on a mountain bike. The reason is that most people are like you and come into cycling with no idea what they really prefer, be it riding on paved roads, unpaved roads, or off road.

The mountain bike is the only one that is good at all of the above. You can put slick, skinny tires on it and go for a road ride with a road bike group and be only slightly slower than a comparable rider. YOu can put 2.0 semi slicks on it and go for a long ride on rough unpaved roads, or you can put aggressively knobbied tires on it and go off road. LBS reps tell you that hybrids are the ticket for this, because they are supposed to be a "hybrid" of all of these things.

Log a couple thousand miles on a rough gravel road on a hybrid and then report back. You'll be lucky to still have all of your teeth. To me the mountain bike is THE most versatile bike and will always be my favorite. I have owned a hybrid, road and mountain bikes over the years.

the navigator is heavy. I'd buy the 4300 and just change the tires, maybe a lockout fork for pavement.

I suspect the Navigator and the Trek 4300 are within a lb or two of each other. Not a BIG difference.


If you are going to ride on the road mostly, I would buy a bike with a rigid fork or a bike with a lockout fork. From my experience suspension forks absorb energy on the road. Seems like every time you pedal the fork compresses. Just my experience.

A lot of people say suspension forks "rob you of power." THis is overstated unless you are a very heavy rider possibly. I have ridden thousands of miles on my Trek 4300 with a rigid fork and thousands on my 4300 that is suspended. The average speeds were always comparable. I also just bought a new Trek 6000 which has a crappy Rock Shox dart 1 fork with no dampening. I have been averaging almost 2 mph faster on this bike compared to my 4300's. I think a lot of this is due to the fact that i installed a road cassette on it at the time of purchase.

Regardless, the point is that a suspension fork will do very little if any to slow your average speed unless like i said, you are VERY heavy.

the nav 300 I have sitting in the garage (collecting dust because my wife never rides it) weighs 33 lbs. My klein mtn bike weighs 26 lbs. not sure what the 4300 weighs, but I'd supspect it to be around 30lbs.I think portis is right. I don't think you'll notice a difference in weight.

the nav 300 I have sitting in the garage (collecting dust because my wife never rides it) weighs 33 lbs. My klein mtn bike weighs 26 lbs. not sure what the 4300 weighs, but I'd supspect it to be around 30lbs.I think portis is right. I don't think you'll notice a difference in weight.

This thread talks about hardtail weights. My 4300 was 32 lbs back then with a rack on. It is maybe a little lighter than that now, but i haven't checked in awhile. http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=182571&highlight=trek+4300+weight