Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) (http://www.bikeforums.net/clydesdales-athenas-200-lb-91-kg/)
-   -   help me choose between these bikes... (http://www.bikeforums.net/clydesdales-athenas-200-lb-91-kg/287813-help-me-choose-between-these-bikes.html)

jorpe 04-14-07 09:32 AM

help me choose between these bikes...
 
http://denver.craigslist.org/bik/311662049.html

http://denver.craigslist.org/bik/309313758.html

http://denver.craigslist.org/bik/310994350.html

My gut is to go with the $200 trek and beat it to death to see how I deal with day in and day out commuting. The primary use of this bike will be to ride on paved trails in a mostly dry climate carrying a backpack to and from work.

I usually just take a backpack to work and leave a handful of myoplex shakes in the fridge so I dont carry much at all. I'd like to be comfortable riding this bike on a longer ride on the weekends also. I'm just geting into ''cycling''. I weigh 205 lbs and am 6'2''. I've had a MTB for a few years and it's been a sidewalk/dirt trail queen.

Tom Stormcrowe 04-14-07 10:08 AM

If you are planning on commuting, either the Trek or the Specialized. The Cannondale is a TT/ Tri bike and I suspect you might find it unsuitable for commuting or much else besides racing.

The Trek has brazeons for that rear rack, has friction shifting (Simplicity and reliability), and if it fits you properly, that's the one I'd lean toward, personally.

DT shifters are......well, an adjustment, but I use them myself and frankly, I've grown to love them!

Tom Stormcrowe 04-14-07 10:09 AM

Add in the fact that the Trek is actually designed for touring, so it will have a more relaxed geometry, hence more comfort on long rides!

old and new 04-14-07 10:34 AM

Gut feeling ? the Trek is the choice as a bike to use and abuse as a comm. bike. The others two look nice. Nothing to compare to the Trek. It would be more sensible to compare a new 5-8 hundred dollar bike to the Trek than the c.dale or spec... don't ya think ?

murphjam 04-14-07 08:08 PM

The Specialized is sweet. I was actually looking at that bike last year. I like the Trek as a commuter. How much do you really want to spent would be the big factor.

chipcom 04-15-07 09:11 AM

The Trek is the obvious choice for commuting...if it fits you. I'm 6'1" and usually ride 56-58cm frames. You may stand over the frame ok, but you might be uncomfortable with the reach, in which case a shorter stem might fix you right up (adjust the saddle for proper position of your legs in relation to the pedal spindle, not to compensate for reach).

cyccommute 04-15-07 09:48 AM

Forget the Cannondale. It's a race bike pure and simple...and for a very specialized type of racing at that.

The other 2 have pros and cons that you need to consider before you decide. I'll start with the Specialized

Pros:

Modern equipment. No need for upgrades

Nice light bike.

Very nice stuff hanging on it. Dura Ace is the top of the line for Shimano road stuff.

A little smaller if you have fit issues

Cons:

For a commuter bike, you probably want something with a rack to carry stuff. Backpacks are fine but they can become uncomfortable for some people. There are ways around this but a rack on the bike is going to be problematic plus you'll get major fred points.

It's a pretty short wheelbase bike. Fast but not necessarily comfortable.

It's $1100.

It has very nice stuff hanging on it:eek:

For us larger guys (you aren't that heavy) 28 spoke wheels probably aren't the best choice. For a commuter bike, they are probably an even worse choice. You could end up with a spoke popper.

Carbon fiber fork with carbon fiber steer tube would cause me some concern. I have a bike with a carbon fork but it has a aluminum steer tube. It still kinda gives me the willies to ride it.

The Trek:

Pros:

It's cheap.

It doesn't have anything modern hanging on it so the risk of theft (especially in Denver) is kinda low.

It's got a longer wheel base and more comfortable ride.

It has rack and fender mounts.

Steel fork.

Cons:

It doesn't have anything modern hanging on it. That stuff may need to be replaced at some point and that can add cost. It can be done but all it takes is money.

It may have 27" wheels (may not, too). 27" tires are harder to find and you don't have much selection.

It has downtube shifters. That's not too bad but they aren't as easy to get use to as STI. You have to reach a ways to get to them.

It has a rack but it looks like the rack is for a mountain bike, i.e. too small. It would need replacing but that's not too expensive. I'd look for a Delta Universal rack.

Overall, if you want a bike for commuting, I'd go with the Trek. If you want a bike for fast weekend rides, the Specialized would get my vote. If you want a bike for long weekend rides, the Trek would be a slightly better choice. And, finally, if you want a bike that people will drool over, the Specialized wins hands down.

geo8rge 04-15-07 11:18 AM

1) Look at the hubs. If the $1000 bike has sealed hubs and the old $200 bike does not, you might have to overhaul the hubs and BB. I would guess a total overhaul of a bike runs $100-$200.

2) Having bought many older bikes, the hub cones and possibly the BB might need to be replaced.

3) The older the bike, the cheaper the parts, the more likely there is a time consuming problem. Every bike I have bought has had a significant unforeseen problem with it, so I can attest to the fact that trying to save money does not always work as planed.

On the other hand $200 leaves room for upgrading and there is no reason to think the $1000 bike is perfect.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:54 PM.