Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    What Exactly makes a "Fitness" (hybrid) Bike a Fitness Bike???????

    As the title states, what exactly makes a Fitness Bike a Fitness Bike? .... instead of just calling it a Hybrid? I know that Trek has a Hybrid line & then the Fx series, which is the Fitness line....

    What makes it Fitness instead of just another Hybrid?

  2. #2
    M_S
    M_S is offline
    All Mod Cons M_S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Face down in a snowbank
    My Bikes
    K2 Enemey Cyclocross franken build; Redline D660 29er, Volpe SS Cross
    Posts
    3,694
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's just a marketing gimmick. And also perhaps an attempt to break hybrids into sub-categories. This isn't bad idea, since "hybrid" is such a broad term, but the problem is that every manufacturer has their own labels for different kinds of hybrids, rendering the labels pretty much useless as "fitness hybrid," for example, simply becomes another word for "Trek FX series," just like "Dual Sport" actually only refers to three bikes made by Gary Fisher.

    It's easier to break mountain bikes into categories since those categories have been determined by the industry/sport as a whole (cross-country, freestyle, downhill, etcetera).

  3. #3
    cyclepath daredevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    "The Last Best Place"
    My Bikes
    2005 Trek Pilot 5.0, 2001 Specialized Sirrus Pro, Kona Lava Dome, Raleigh hardtail converted to commuter, 87 Takara steel road bike, 2008 Trek Soho
    Posts
    3,552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBnOH
    As the title states, what exactly makes a Fitness Bike a Fitness Bike? .... instead of just calling it a Hybrid? I know that Trek has a Hybrid line & then the Fx series, which is the Fitness line....

    What makes it Fitness instead of just another Hybrid?
    I'll take a shot.

    Less suspension, not built quite as much for comfort. Tires would typically be a bit thinner. A fitness bike would be more of a flat bar road bike. The gearing might be a little higher as well.

    I agree with the above post though. A lot of it is just marketing. Any bike obviously can help make you fit.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Without music, life would be a mistake."
    -- Friedrich Nietzsche

  4. #4
    Seņior Member ItsJustMe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Michigan
    My Bikes
    Windsor Fens, Giant Seek 0 (2014, Alfine 8 + discs)
    Posts
    11,552
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "Fitness" in the US is a term for metal sculpture, shaped like various kinds of exercise equipment, that you buy to put in your living room and hang clothing on.
    Work: the 8 hours that separates bike rides.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    so it's mostly just marketing then?
    the thinner tire part is one of the few things i thought of...

  6. #6
    not a role model JeffS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    4,644
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Trek's line doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

    They have overlap between fitness and hybrid and between hybrid and comfort.

    In general, fitness has more of a road bias than hybrid. It's at the bottom end of each line that the lines star to blur. Even more confusing is that the parent category of all of these is "bike path". Seems like a marketing attempt at social categorization of their bikes - making people feel like they're choosing just the right model for them.

    I think Trek has too many models. Stores, at least the ones near me, can't even stock all the models, much less a variety of sizes in each. Stores are going to steer customers to something already on the floor. Seems like a setup for disappointment for a customer whose been to the website before going to the store.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    191
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    my GF has a 7.3 FX, which i commuted to work on for a week while my cannondale bad boy was in the shop getting the bottom bracket replaced.

    The FX surprised me by how much faster it was than my bike. I had a feeling the 7.3 FX was faster since it felt a whole lot lighter but it felt almost 1-2 mph faster. It kind of pissed me off and made me wish i had not paid extra for the bad boy. I plan to do a review on both bikes and post it here considering they are both brand new 07s just purchased in april. Ill get around to it shortly.

    so with that i think the fitness thing has to do with the fact that its faster than a regular hybrid. I feel like i get a better work out on the 7.3 than my bad boy since i go faster.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by viros20
    my GF has a 7.3 FX, which i commuted to work on for a week while my cannondale bad boy was in the shop getting the bottom bracket replaced.

    The FX surprised me by how much faster it was than my bike. I had a feeling the 7.3 FX was faster since it felt a whole lot lighter but it felt almost 1-2 mph faster. It kind of pissed me off and made me wish i had not paid extra for the bad boy. I plan to do a review on both bikes and post it here considering they are both brand new 07s just purchased in april. Ill get around to it shortly.

    so with that i think the fitness thing has to do with the fact that its faster than a regular hybrid. I feel like i get a better work out on the 7.3 than my bad boy since i go faster.
    what do you have? a 7.2 fx?

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    191
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBnOH
    what do you have? a 7.2 fx?

    I have a Cannondale Bad boy, my GF has a 7.3fx

  10. #10
    `````````````` CaptainCool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    san jose
    Posts
    765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Stop making threads about this bike and go buy the damned thing.

    I have a 7.2FX. It's great. Bought it a year ago and have used it almost every day since then for commuting, groceries, and shopping. Done two centuries and several self-supported metrics. Upgraded with 28mm tires, clipless pedals, bar ends, rack and panniers, new saddle. I'll probably upgrade in a year but I think this one would make a good xtracycle.

    Fitness is Trek's name for the road end of hybrid bikes. That much is obvious from two looks at the product page. No suspension and narrower tires compared to the 7000 line. Flat bars and a huge gear range compared to road bikes. A forward-leaning position compared to comfort bikes.

    And color was the last thing on my mind when I bought it. Think about how much riding you'd be doing already if you weren't fretting about your color options.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by viros20
    I have a Cannondale Bad boy, my GF has a 7.3fx
    that's cool....... so you wish you would've went w/ the fx series by trek?

    now i have the option to get a bright blue 7.3fx for $100 more......but it didn't feel that much different to me & i thought w/ the slightly wider tires, the 7.2fx would be more of a bike for me since i could do very light trails on it.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Reston, VA
    My Bikes
    2003 Giant OCR2
    Posts
    2,369
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBnOH
    As the title states, what exactly makes a Fitness Bike a Fitness Bike? .... instead of just calling it a Hybrid? I know that Trek has a Hybrid line & then the Fx series, which is the Fitness line....

    What makes it Fitness instead of just another Hybrid?
    It's 75 pounds, so you WILL get fit.

    Kidding...

    Took a look at the site, and this may be a bit of an overgeneralization, but the FX series is basically road bikes with flat bars (Tiagra components, etc). The hybrid series is more of a typical hybrid line, with components that look to be mountain bike stuff.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Underbridge
    It's 75 pounds, so you WILL get fit.

    Kidding...

    Took a look at the site, and this may be a bit of an overgeneralization, but the FX series is basically road bikes with flat bars (Tiagra components, etc). The hybrid series is more of a typical hybrid line, with components that look to be mountain bike stuff.
    so you think this line of bike is better for what i'll be using it for?

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Reston, VA
    My Bikes
    2003 Giant OCR2
    Posts
    2,369
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBnOH
    so you think this line of bike is better for what i'll be using it for?
    Depends what all you want to use it for. The gearing, tires, etc probably wouldn't be ideal for significant trail use. Other than that, I'm sure the 7.X will work fine for you, but I think Trek's hybrid line will probably be OK too.

    I suppose the question is this: do you plan to do 95% of your riding on paved surfaces upon which you plan to go fast? Do you plan on pedalling hard on downhills? Will it irritate you if you have to crank away at 100 RPM to get up to 30 mph? If that's the case, definitely get the 7.X.

    On the other hand...

    Do you want to ride occasionally on some rutted dirt/gravel roads/trails? Do you plan to roll off curbs? Do you need to climb steep, possibly non-paved hills? If so, you might want to think about the hybrid line or even a hardtail.

    Basically, the 7.X are road bikes. If you want to take them off road much, that's probably not the right bike.

  15. #15
    Senior Member avmanansala's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    My Bikes
    Cannondale Road Warrior
    Posts
    401
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by viros20
    my GF has a 7.3 FX, which i commuted to work on for a week while my cannondale bad boy was in the shop getting the bottom bracket replaced.

    The FX surprised me by how much faster it was than my bike. I had a feeling the 7.3 FX was faster since it felt a whole lot lighter but it felt almost 1-2 mph faster. It kind of pissed me off and made me wish i had not paid extra for the bad boy. I plan to do a review on both bikes and post it here considering they are both brand new 07s just purchased in april. Ill get around to it shortly.

    so with that i think the fitness thing has to do with the fact that its faster than a regular hybrid. I feel like i get a better work out on the 7.3 than my bad boy since i go faster.
    When I was looking to buy, I narrowed my list down to the 7.5FX, Specialized Sirrus Comp and the Cannondale Road Warrior 500. I also looked at the C'dale Bad Boy but crossed it off the list after talking to the sales person who helped me. While I do like the BB, I'm glad I went with the RW500, great bike, for me.

    When you say it "felt almost 1-2 mph faster," I take it you didn't use a cyclocomputer. Why not buy one and find out. My point is, it could have been several factors that made the Trek seem faster than the C'dale - and it may have been. Both are great bikes, in any case.

    To the OP, it seems to me that "fitness" bikes lean more towards the road end of the spectrum than the mountain end having skinnier 700x28 or so tires, no front suspension, more road oriented gears, more forward leaning riding position than relaxed (while still being upright) and (at least on lower end models) a suspension seat post (higher end models I glanced at had CF seat posts, as I recall).
    "Study your math, kids. Key to the Universe." - Gabriel in The Prophecy

  16. #16
    Disgruntled grad student beingtxstate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Champaign, IL
    Posts
    443
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCool
    Stop making threads about this bike and go buy the damned thing.

    I have a 7.2FX. It's great. Bought it a year ago and have used it almost every day since then for commuting, groceries, and shopping. Done two centuries and several self-supported metrics. Upgraded with 28mm tires, clipless pedals, bar ends, rack and panniers, new saddle. I'll probably upgrade in a year but I think this one would make a good xtracycle.

    Fitness is Trek's name for the road end of hybrid bikes. That much is obvious from two looks at the product page. No suspension and narrower tires compared to the 7000 line. Flat bars and a huge gear range compared to road bikes. A forward-leaning position compared to comfort bikes.

    And color was the last thing on my mind when I bought it. Think about how much riding you'd be doing already if you weren't fretting about your color options.
    +1 There sure are a lot of threads about this bike! It seems people are polarized about the FX line also. Just ride it, if you like it better than the 7000 series, it's good...

    The FX line drops the suspension (though I think some of them have susp. seatposts), has a slightly more aggressive stance, and better wheel options IMHO. My wife and I love ours, and ride them daily training towards a metric century. It will be a fine bike for this. Eventually we'll get road bikes and use the FX bikes as commuters.
    1990 Trek 330
    2006 Trek 7.2FX
    2006 Trek 7.3FX (Wifey's Steed)

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by beingtxstate
    +1 There sure are a lot of threads about this bike! It seems people are polarized about the FX line also. Just ride it, if you like it better than the 7000 series, it's good...

    The FX line drops the suspension (though I think some of them have susp. seatposts), has a slightly more aggressive stance, and better wheel options IMHO. My wife and I love ours, and ride them daily training towards a metric century. It will be a fine bike for this. Eventually we'll get road bikes and use the FX bikes as commuters.
    what colors did you guys end up with?

  18. #18
    `````````````` CaptainCool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    san jose
    Posts
    765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBnOH
    what colors did you guys end up with?
    are you serious you can't be serious

  19. #19
    derailleurs are overrated bigbenaugust's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    KIGX
    My Bikes
    2009 Motobecane Fantom CX, 2012 Motobecane Fantom Cross Uno SSCX
    Posts
    1,720
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBnOH
    As the title states, what exactly makes a Fitness Bike a Fitness Bike? .... instead of just calling it a Hybrid? I know that Trek has a Hybrid line & then the Fx series, which is the Fitness line....

    What makes it Fitness instead of just another Hybrid?
    Marketing, capitalism, etc.

    Some people may not know that the 20-year-old MTB in their garage is no less a "fitness bike" than a brand-new 7.3fx. But they might buy that new fitness bike because it's labeled as such.

    And that's how you make tons of money.
    --Ben
    Carrboro Bike Coalition - putting the "bike" in "CARrboro" :)
    2011 Motobecane Fantom Cross Uno, 2009 Motobecane Fantom CX
    Previously: 2000 Trek 4500 (2000-2003), 2003 Novara Randonee (2003-2006), 2003 Giant Rainier (2003-2008), 2005 Xootr Swift (2005-2007), 2007 Nashbar 1x9 (2007-2011), 2011 Windsor Shetland (2011-2014)
    Current Linux Usage (by machine): Arch: I Debian: I openSUSE: II

  20. #20
    Erectible Member pedalMonger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Enroute
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBnOH
    what colors did you guys end up with?
    If you post a question about color preferences one more time, I am going to slap you silly!

    I admit its something I thought about too, but, color should be low on your priority list. The only thing a crappy bike with a nice color is good for, is looking at, its no good for riding, so will be in the garage (or storage shed, etc), where nobody ever sees it anyway.

    And color is such a personal preference anyway, its no good to ask others what they think. You might get a color you like, and others will think its hideous, or vice versa.
    Milky Is The Way
    -----
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] : http://www.gravel2008.us : Democracy.mp3

  21. #21
    Erectible Member pedalMonger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Enroute
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just kidding about slapping (in case its not obvious), I am a non-violent person (unless backed into a corner and its for self defense). Besides, you might slap me back!

    But anyhow, I just was reminded of a story. I once bought a used BMW motorcycle, that was Robin's Egg Blue. I really hated the color, but the bike was such a good deal, I bought it anyway. Then, when I was riding it about and meeting strangers, they often complimented me on the color of the bike! So the color ended up growing on me, and I liked it in the end
    Milky Is The Way
    -----
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] : http://www.gravel2008.us : Democracy.mp3

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    191
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by avmanansala
    When I was looking to buy, I narrowed my list down to the 7.5FX, Specialized Sirrus Comp and the Cannondale Road Warrior 500. I also looked at the C'dale Bad Boy but crossed it off the list after talking to the sales person who helped me. While I do like the BB, I'm glad I went with the RW500, great bike, for me.

    When you say it "felt almost 1-2 mph faster," I take it you didn't use a cyclocomputer. Why not buy one and find out. My point is, it could have been several factors that made the Trek seem faster than the C'dale - and it may have been. Both are great bikes, in any case.

    To the OP, it seems to me that "fitness" bikes lean more towards the road end of the spectrum than the mountain end having skinnier 700x28 or so tires, no front suspension, more road oriented gears, more forward leaning riding position than relaxed (while still being upright) and (at least on lower end models) a suspension seat post (higher end models I glanced at had CF seat posts, as I recall).

    i have a sigma 1606 computer on both it was constantly showing me going faster and felt alot smoother and effortless. i thought it was the fact that there was less wind or i was more rested but the results lasted a whole week and its the same commute ive put 500 miles on my Cdale bad boy. I have no doubts the 7.3fx was faster, and a lot lighter as well.

  23. #23
    Disgruntled grad student beingtxstate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Champaign, IL
    Posts
    443
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    MTBnOH, check your PM's
    1990 Trek 330
    2006 Trek 7.2FX
    2006 Trek 7.3FX (Wifey's Steed)

  24. #24
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    16
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have a 7700 FX that I bought 3 years ago and I still love it. I also checked out the Cannondales when I was shopping around. The cannondales look pretty but they cost signifacantly more for a compariable Trek.

    Also, I agree that the Cannondales didn't quite feel as fast and agile as the Trek FX line did. I thought it was just me and my build for the bike or something, but it's interesting that others have said the same.

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic
    My Bikes
    A bunch
    Posts
    891
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Dunno.

    Maybe because they're so heavy that by riding one you can cut the rest of your workoput by half? Or maybe that they're so ugly that other cyclists pedal faster to get away from being seen with you?


    ;-)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •