Touring - Trek 7300 FX or Scott Sportster P4

Hi there,

I'm about to buy either a Trek hybrid 7300 FX or a Scott hybrid Sportster P4. Any experience or advice as to which one to choose? Specs, roughly: Trek's got a double butted Alpha SL aluminium and Scott goes for the hydroformed one. Trek offers life-time, and Scott 5-year guarantee for their frames. As for components, Trek merges Shimano with SRAM, whereas Scott sticks to Shimano only.

In any case, I intend to change the handlebar for a dropped one with brake+shift levers (either Shimano or Campagnolo), and perhaps change the chainrings from 48/38/28 to 50/40/28 or 52/42/30. I'll dress it with a spare panier rack and mudguards that I'll take off from another bike.

I'll use fat tires (up to Continental's or Michelin's 700x47c) at times. I have heard of some people not having been able to wedge those into their frames because of seat- or chainstay narrow tire clearance. Any experience?

All the best to everybody.

Hi there,

I'm about to buy either a Trek hybrid 7300 FX or a Scott hybrid Sportster P4. Any experience or advice as to which one to choose? Specs, roughly: Trek's got a double butted Alpha SL aluminium and Scott goes for the hydroformed one. Trek offers life-time, and Scott 5-year guarantee for their frames. As for components, Trek merges Shimano with SRAM, whereas Scott sticks to Shimano only.

In any case, I intend to change the handlebar for a dropped one with brake+shift levers (either Shimano or Campagnolo), and perhaps change the chainrings from 48/38/28 to 50/40/28 or 52/42/30. I'll dress it with a spare panier rack and mudguards that I'll take off from another bike.

I'll use fat tires (up to Continental's or Michelin's 700x47c) at times. I have heard of some people not having been able to wedge those into their frames because of seat- or chainstay narrow tire clearance. Any experience?

All the best to everybody.

Hi, the Trek is not a touring bike. I have a 7700FX and it came with some pretty big tires, 38's.
Great bike, i know nothing about the Scott

Thanx for your quick reply. Yeah, none of them are specifically touring bikes, but that's the closest-to-touring choice available in Spain. We have some nice, off-the-trodden-way tracks (or terrible roads) here that require sturdy bikes with beefy shoes to tour along though.

I think most hybrids take tires up to about 38mm. How about a cyclocross bike? Already has drops and room for wide tires. Those should be available in Spain, it's a big sport not so far north.

Yes, nice hint. Geometry-wise, cyclocross bikes are ideal to me. Thinking twice, thing is: can fenders and racks be attached to pure-breed cx bikes? If they can, any particular manufacturer known to you? Thanks.

Many true cx bikes don't have braze-ons, but quite a few do. I know Jamis does but its probably is not available there; you're probably going to have to look at the mfgrs from Europe.

I think most hybrids take tires up to about 38mm. How about a cyclocross bike? Already has drops and room for wide tires. Those should be available in Spain, it's a big sport not so far north.

Experience is the best advisor. Just in case anyone else is interested in this issue, here it goes. Trek's '04 and particularly '05 Hybrid series unfortunately suck in stays tyre clearance. The "Trek 7300 FX S" (Small size --why should it change with frame size?) hardly has room for a 34-622 (labeled 700x35c), let alone plus fenders. The room between the seatstay bridge and the tyre is a mere 7-8 mm! Down behind the bottom bracket, distance to the bridge (not a tube, but a plate) goes to nearly 1 cm and hardly any allowance for side increase in size. As for the "Scott Sportster", I have installed a gauge-measured Panaracer Smoke 45-622 (700x45c) with full mudguard with no problem. Provided that the wheel is perfectly true (usually the case), it could admit up to 47-622 with 4 mm clearance on either side of the tyre. Needless to say, the Scott is the one I bought (thanks to Carlos, my nice dealer in León, who kindly brought both bikes for me just to compare). It is a pity that manufacturers tend to go different ways from users (at least from my experience in Spain): tight tyre clearance instead of wide room, aluminium instead of Cro-Mo steel, suspension instead of rigid forks, and so on.

Cheers to all.

I have used 700 x 32 tires in the previous tours and
I am considering buy 7300FX, 7500FX or 7700FX for my next
bike. So, if i stay w/ 32 and tire clearance is not
an issue, do you think they are OK for loaded touring,
in terms of frame, wheels, chain stay length (for feet clearance),
etc etc.

Thanks.

Off the record: Why did these guys dumped the 1992 lugged steel "Trek 9700" idea? How can one stop manufacturing the perfect bike?

Back to reality: Trek bikes are otherwise suitable for everything. Good frame (Alpha SL Alu from 7300FX up) with lifetime guarantee backup, solid rims, good componentry... A couple of things to keep in mind though, touring-wise:

1. chainstays are pretty short (44.0 cm) in the series we're talking about, no matter the frame size. Depending on your rack-pannier configuration, and your foot size, you may be prone to fumble your heels with the front part of the pannier.
2. the frame looks a bit too dirt-riding-like to me, meaning that top- and seat-tube angles are shallow, top tube is short and very tilted, seat tube is very short... I think that in bigger sizes, this would be less of an issue.

Nothing that cannot be dealt with anyway with a bit of garage tooling or with the help of kind workshop guys. In case 1., you can add an extension to the rack's legs so that the rack shifts backwards as needed. In case 2., a longer or shorter stem should do, along with sliding back or forth the saddle along the rail.

Best if you can give the bike a roll if you have the opportunity.

I know that many would advise to get a touring-specific bike, but that may be too costy for some, and the best thing to do is just ... tour it!. I've seen people touring in the most unimaginable rigs (20"-wheel kid bike with towed cargo in steel hand-made trailer, monobike with backpack...)

All the best and colourful tours.

Hola, he estado leyendo tu post y tengo la misma duda. hace unos dias dudadba entre TREK 7100 y Scott P5, ahora estoy con la 7300 o la P4, creo que puedemerecer la pena gastar un poco mas segun he ido investigando. Pero ahora dudo seriamente entre esas dos, has podido llegar tu a una conclusion? yo busco pra la ciudad mas que nada y creo que esas dos son las mas adecuadas. Tiene deportividad que es importante pra mi ya que antes tenia una de carreras.

Mi principal duda esta en la posicion. En la P4 se va mas horizontal como en una decarreras y la 7300 algo mas erguido. Yo creo que esto ultimo es mejor para la ciudad donde tienes que estar pendiente de cosas. Ahora el vendedor me dice que esto hace que te canses mas ( ir mas erguido) y que la postura de la P4 es mas de hacer kilometros y no cansarte. no se , no acabo de fiarme de los vendedores y la verdad es que tengo poca idea sobre el tema, por eso te agradezco cualquier opinion.

Un saludo

Heelo, sorry for the message in spanish, I thought it was a personnal message that I was sending. I live in Spain as Bizicleto does. I have the same doubt, I am deciding between TREK7300 and Scott P4. My main concern now is the riding position. TRel is a little more upright which I think os best for the city, this is going to be my major use. In the city you have to pay attention around and the P4 more sport position may be uncomfortable. I ´think iam right, we will see. In the other aspects I don´t reaaly know which one is better, they seem to be similar for me. If I can get some advice I will apreciate it , thanks a lot

HELLO
there are "SCOTT SPORTSTER P4" in the shop with 28 inch rims but i cannot find frame size on bike.can you help me where can i find size writing on the frame?and i am 115kg 2m03cm tall man and are that rims stronger enough for me?
please help ok
thanks

3 years later?

3 years later what?