Hybrid Bicycles - Need Help comparing the TREK 7.3 FX to the 8.2 DS
Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.
12-04-12, 06:19 AM
Doc says I need to quit walking for long time tore my plantar fasciitis. Had went from 245 to 180 walking 3.5 miles in the AM and 3.5 miles in the PM in 8 months along with changing eating habits.
Been off my feet for a month and have a need to exercise doc says I can ride so went to look at bikes. Being 57 it was shock at first at the prices. :). Bought a department store bike which is terible to say the least.
Looking for it to stay in shape and ride the parks around St. Louis and maybe the Katy Trial (follows old rail line in Missouri) with friends at times so need advice which of the twoTREK bikes would best suit me.
Been to a few stores and get different opinions and all sales reps seem to be very young kids.
Looking has been an experence in itseft and belive I like the TREks. Not sure what I need, test rode the TREKs and decided I didn't like the feel of disk breaks. The sales rep says if I am planning to ride a trail or two the DS series is what I need. I have no idea about all the different Shimano's shifters and such and want to get a bike that I don't have to replace in a few years. Or even if I need the shock on the .82 and can't understand why I can't lock it out as in the 8.3 but it has disk breaks.
Thanks for any advice in advance
12-04-12, 09:35 AM
It depends on your type of riding. I don't know how bumpy these trails are you're talking about. If they are substantially rough, I would go with the Trek DS line as the front shocks will make it a more comfortable ride. If these trails are mostly smooth and I assume your park riding will be as well, go with the FX series. The FX series can take few bumps here and there, comes with tires that will allow you to go a bit faster/smoother(700x32), has a rigid fork and is a 9-speed(28 total). The 8.2 DS doesn't have a lock out fork, meaning the shock will always be active, has slightly bigger tires(700x38) and is a 7-speed(21 total). When you bump it up to the 8.3 line it comes with a "lock-out" feature that allows you to make the shock stay in place(as if it was a rigid fork) which is good if you're riding on mainly a smooth trail and don't want your shock moving up and down. But allows you to unlock it and allow it to move again when you are riding on a bumpy trail. Based on your age and health reasons posted, I would assume you wouldn't be doing that aggresive of riding and I really don't think you would "need" a DS series bike. As far as the derailleurs go, I wouldn't worry about it too much. I don't think you'll notice a huge difference between a lot of the models in this price range. Whether it be Altus, Alivio, Deore, etc. I don't think disc brakes are necessary based on what you posted either. They also make a bike heavier. As a novice, you will probably be happy with all of the above. I suggest you look into the 7.2 FX to save a little money. It is a little cheaper than the 8.2 DS and actually has a little better components.
Having said all that, the most important thing when picking a bike over the components, how it looks, etc is how it fits you. Make sure you test ride all of these bikes and pick the one that you feel the most comfortable on. I really think that the DS line may be over kill for you and may be heavier as well. I'd go with the FX line as they're geared more towards fitness and riding on pretty tame terrain.
12-04-12, 11:27 AM
Thanks for the advice Joel. I rode the 8.2 & 8.3 DS and although I liked being able to lock out the shock on the 8.3 I didn't like the feel of the disk breaks. The store I was looking had an 8.3 FX that I sat on and liked the feel of the grips and was on sale being a 2012 100 dollars off but I didn't ride the FX model which I think I'll take your advice and go back and ride it.
12-04-12, 02:12 PM
The 7.3 has better components and narrower tires for street riding but the alum fork may be pretty jarring.
I think disk brakes are way overrated.
dont base your decision on a pair of $20 hand grips.
12-04-12, 03:18 PM
I rode most of the Treks the LBS had - and they had a good stock. From the Madrones to the FX to the DS. I chose the 8.3 DS for the components, overall feel and the fact it could, even if I never require it to, take some off-road punishment. I will admit I wish I'd had double the money and bought a dedicated flat bar road bike and a DS or MTB, but I'm loving the 8.3. The disc brakes are terrific, shifting is precise and the driveline quiet.
I live in VERY hilly country - literally right out the front door, so there are times that a lower gear is wanted - the 22/33/44 gearset from the MTB lineup would make my hills a bit easier, but I've begun finding my legs and so the 26/31 will work - just a bit tough at the beginning. I will tell you this: a road bike, downhill on a rough paved bike trail would really pound you. I've learned that early. The Suntour fork, cheesy though it may be, makes the potholes and root raises and water damage on the trail just that much smoother. Plus it makes the curbs (down) a bit easier.
I'm really enjoying it.
12-05-12, 01:10 AM
My wife has the 2012 DS 8.2 and I have the 2013 DS 8.3. Having it to do all over again we would have gotten her a DS 8.3. We are new to bike and coudnt really see the benifit of the 8.3 over the 8.2 vs cost. Well when I got my bike the store was running a sale and I ended up getting my 2013 8.3 for a little more than the regular price of her 8.2. The shifters on my 8.3 feel better than the ones on the 8.2. I also prefer having the the 32 tooth 1 gear vs the 8.2 having a 34 tooth 1st. Having 8 gears on the back in combintion with the 32 tooth 1st gear, it has a smoother transition from 1st to 2nd, and it feels like it has the correct gear for more situations. There are times where my wifes 8.2 seems like one gear is to low but the next gear is to high. It just has to cover a wide range with one less gear.
my 8 speed came with a 11-32 and I replaced it with a 13-26, which gives me MUCH closer spaced mid range gears. with a 28T granny front, thats still plenty low enough of a gear for hill climbs (I'm not touring with this bike, nor towing anything so lower gears are really unnecessary), and there's no way I'm going to be pushing a 48:11 high gear, the 48:13 high is plenty high enough.
12-05-12, 12:16 PM
I do wish the low gear was a 24 or 22, tho. 22/32 would rock those hills. Of course, that means a 44 or so high end and even with the 11, that's a bit slow, I've found, on the steep downhills. Everything is some kind of compromise.
my 48:13 pedals up to about 35MPH down a grade. past that, I tuck and coast. or not. I don't need to go faster.
12-05-12, 12:32 PM
My GPS said I hit 36 yesterday. Didn't feel like it, but now that I know, it does NOT make me thrilled! I'd prefer to keep it down a bit.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.