my intent is not controversy. i'm just a newbie who's seen this several times and would like to understand.
reasons i've heard
(1) distrust + dislike of lance armstrong, trek's sponsor. he's done more for the sport than bad and i give him the benefit of the doubt. besides, surely it can't hurt to have a top racer use your product?
(2) trek is too corporate? what companies are not? specialized?
(3) trek gives cheap components for price ranges. i only see this in comparison to companies that are not as popular and so they give better components to compete. an equally popular and successful company like specialized gives comparable components as trek iirc.
(4) everyone and their grandmom rides trek. i don't see anything wrong with this.
(5) trek has in house parts (bontrager) rather than 3rd party so they can skimp. this does worry me, it is a possibility, but it's still somewhat subjecive.
i'd like to know because in the future i'm eying a trek 6000. i want trek because i think they are the gold standard for bicycles i.e. geometry, have a good reputation, are tested by many customers, are reliable, and i'm in good company. what should i watch out for? surely trek is as popular as it is because of *some* merit and not all lance?