Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-20-10, 08:58 PM   #1
joe_mn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: mpls, mn
Bikes: raleigh peak
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
trek nav query

only have 1 bike. its a raleigh peak. ya its old but full deore XT parts. great shape too except i need new rims. hubs are fine. i only use it on bike paths. no amount of positive thinking will change the frame geometry or easily raise the flat handlebar. i really want a trek navigator 1.0 don't need more than 7 speeds. don't want any suspension. don't want a suspension seat. i can get a 21" 1.0 for $320 now. any other bikes/models i should look at in the <350 range?
joe_mn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-10, 12:13 PM   #2
KungPaoSchwinn
Senior Member
 
KungPaoSchwinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ms/Ca, USA,Earth.
Bikes: 2009 Trek FX 7.3 ( pimp moment )
Posts: 705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The 1.0 doesn't have suspension fork and seatpost? I didn't know that. i been thinkin about a 3.0 too.
KungPaoSchwinn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-10, 08:37 AM   #3
joe_mn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: mpls, mn
Bikes: raleigh peak
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
your FX is very similar to my peak. i plan on keeping my peak but don't plan on riding it. might get a few bucks if i sold it but that is down the road. i got a set of decent used wheels and replaced my rear wheel. so now my bike is cobbled up. am looking at 1.0 only due to price. is 2.0 or 3.0 better for my needs? all have same frame geometry.
joe_mn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-10, 12:57 PM   #4
KungPaoSchwinn
Senior Member
 
KungPaoSchwinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ms/Ca, USA,Earth.
Bikes: 2009 Trek FX 7.3 ( pimp moment )
Posts: 705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If price is not a subject, the 3.0 has better components and it has trigger shifters as oppose to grip shift on the 2.0.
KungPaoSchwinn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-10, 09:06 PM   #5
joe_mn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: mpls, mn
Bikes: raleigh peak
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
why do you have a newer FX and now want a nav? different biking needs i suppose. thought the FX was a good bike for urban treks and cruising the bike paths?
joe_mn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-10, 07:34 AM   #6
KungPaoSchwinn
Senior Member
 
KungPaoSchwinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ms/Ca, USA,Earth.
Bikes: 2009 Trek FX 7.3 ( pimp moment )
Posts: 705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe_mn View Post
why do you have a newer FX and now want a nav? different biking needs i suppose. thought the FX was a good bike for urban treks and cruising the bike paths?

Correct, i can't tolerate the jolts from uneven pavement much longer,i am giving up speed and sportiness of the FX for a laid back riding style of the Navigator, the bike shops have raised the MSRP over about $100,that's what keeping me from buying one right now.
KungPaoSchwinn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:56 PM.