daredevil

That's all I got. Had another extremely nice ride today.

Digital Gee

I happen to know where you can get two dark blue size 56 2005 5.2 Pilots for $2,200 each ($500 off!).

Just saying.

DnvrFox

Craigslist?

Big Paulie

The Adams Family Cyclery?

will dehne

Can you please tell me how the Trek Pilot 5 compares with the Trek Madone? My LBS is trying to sell me on a Madone for $2,500.

Digital Gee

San Diego Trek Superstore, Kearney Mesa

bobkat

My wife got a Trek Pilot 5.0 (the women's one) earlier this year and absolutely loves it! But I tell her I still don't trust that look in her eye when she eyes my comfortable recumbent after a long ride when she has her numb wrists, stiff neck and back, and sore bum! At that point she oogles my 35 pound bent!

But the original question - yes, they are great bikes!

jwbnyc

The Carbon Pilots are sort of a performance comfort bike with longer headtubes set higher, on a compact frame, than the Madones which allows for handlebar height being set closer to saddle height, either above or below, with less tinkering about.

They also use a slightly different Carbon with the added designation of VC which stands for Vibration Control. This stuff really seems to soak up road vibration.

They will run larger tires - 28 with full fenders - 32 without full fenders - and have eyelets for said fenders which the Madones do not.

The geometry is more stretched out compared to the Madones.

They are not race bikes.

They will efficiently cruise along at a pretty good clip just the same.

The old guys' Cruise Missile is how I like to look at them.

CrossChain

LOL.

And Will, let us know your impressions after you test ride the two. I'm looking, for next year budget willing, at Roubaix, Pilot, etc.

NembaBruce

In looking for my first road bike, I was torn between the Pilot and the Madone...performance vs comfort. The Pilot just felt right for me and I have no regrets. Great bike, good performance and very comfortable.

-BF

Chuck5.2_in_CA

I so wanted the Pilot when it first came out. It seemed to be built for the over 50 newbie cyclist. I could not stand however to be put on the waiting list ! My LBS offerred me a Red white and Blue Madone 5.2 ( full Ultegra) Double. I love the bike and will put her over 10,000 miles next month. I bought her in December '04. The only major change I made was going to an FSA Compact early this year. If you're going to do any hills you will want either the compact or the triple if you go with the Madone. I think it comes down to whether you feel comfortable riding less upright. I ride 50% or more in the drops, try to catch anyone I see in front of me and especially like to hammer past 30 something's in full Disco kits !! If your inner competitor has gone to sleep however the Pilot is a fine bike and everyone I talk to loves theirs.

will dehne

Chuck:
I feel that your post was directed at me a little. Here is some information: I am looking for a bike to be a little faster. I have this Cannondale R2000 Aluminum bike. It is a good bike but about 25 lbs. It is also very harsh on bumpy roads (very harsh). The Madone worries me a little because the bars are so low compared to the saddle. On the other hand, I have been lowering the bars at my Cannondale quite a bit with no ill effect. I think I am getting more fit.
The goal is another cross country tour at top speed. Perhaps closer to 100 miles/day in 5 hours. (plus stops)
Currently I am doing it in six. (plus stops)
Most tour riders used Litespeed. I am looking at that too. Any comments are welcome.

Chuck5.2_in_CA

I think you will hard put to do sustained 20MPH on the Pilot. You are just giving up too much to the wind. I have ridden top of the line litespeeds as well and find the carbon Trek a bit more comfortable than the Litespeeds. The Geometry of the Litespeeds however were closer to my Madone than they were to the Pilot. I road an old aluminum Trek before the Madone and the difference in ride comfort was nite and day. I dont think you can go wrong with any of the bikes you're looking at but IMHO I would go with the Trek Madone triple or a compact and then see if the LBS will exchange the stem to give you a little more upright position. BTW I do one 100 miler in about 5:45 with plus 2-3 stops on a basically flat course solo. I cant even imagine 5:00 flat unless someone else was doing most of the pulling; let alone repeating the distance day after day cross country. It hurts just to type it !!!

jppe

Will-I still can't believe you did the cross country on that harsh a ride. I would probably have stopped in Arizona. Your Cannondale sounds a lot like the first road bike I had which was a GT.

For me, comfort comes first before being perfectly aero. Having said that, you could alway use a stem with some rise on the Madone and get it to where it was closer to a neutral position. Or, you could go to a slightly larger frame to where you didn't have quite as much difference in the saddle and the bars. I really enjoy my Madone but it is a bit stiffer than a Trek 5200 or a 5900.

A lot of folks around here are buying Orbea's. I have not researched them that much but some of the top riders around here really enjoy there's.

will dehne

Thanks Chuck and jppe: This is this forum at its best. Here am I not wanting to make a mistake at possibly the last fast bike I want to buy.
FWIW, the fastest biker on that tour had an Orbea. I must say that he was adjusting it quite a bit.
Another fast guy had Colagno. He had no trouble. Ditto a guy with a Trek TT type bike.
The Madone is attractive to me because of local LBS support. I am a bit helpless without an LBS. Funny because I am an Engineer but do my best to rely on others. (not like you, jippe.)
Actually I feel better about the Madone after reading your posts.
Will

Carusoswi

This description of harsh vs. comfort confuses me. I now do most of my riding on an '05 Cannondale Cyclocross Disc. I hear it is not supposed to be all that comfortable. Then, again, I read that carbon frames are also very harsh.

I have 4500 miles on the c'dale since picking it up in July of '05. My longest rides run 80 miles - and I do that two or three times a month - takes me six hours including a total of one hour in stops. Parts of the ride are gently rolling, some areas include climbing - around 2350 ft in climbing total on my favorite route.

The terrain varies from smooth to quite rough, although I'd say 80% is what I would consider smooth.

However harsh my bike is supposed to be, I can't say that I've ever been bothered by it (or the '73 steel Schwinn LeTour that I rode before purchasing the cyclocross).

I did have the opportunity to ride one carbon frame during a week when my Schwinn was in for rebuilding. This bike was made by Calfee. I guess my ignorance shown because I never realized that it was a carbon frame until I brought it back to the LBS. As for comfort, I cannot say it was better or worse than the Schwinn - just different.

I do remember climbing a few hills on that bike thinking to myself that I must really have had my Wheaties that day because I went up hills with an ease previously unknown to me.

I think that, someday, I might like to own a carbon fiber bike and would love to read more comments about them as well as some the ways in which you feel and/or evaluate a bike for its comfort/harshness.

Caruso

will dehne

FWIW, I biked side by side with bikers cross country. Many hours. The roads were terrible. Some secondary roads were just gravel held together with tar. I am talking down south were roads are not build for snow and ice.
On these roads, my Cannondale was noticeably vibrating more than the Litespeeds next to me or the Colagno or the Storck or the Trek CF.
BTW, I had 700 x 28 tires and all of them had 700 x 25 or less.
I did use 120 PSI which probably could have been reduced to 100 to 110. However I had only 3 flats as were as some bikers had 20 or more in 3000 miles.
More BTW, the Cannondale was one of the heaviest bikes on that tour with over 30 bikers.