New to Road Bikes. Please help?
 

Hello bike community:thumb:,

First of all thank you for taking the time to read my post as I am fairly new to road bikes. With any luck I will be purchasing a road bike tomorrow afternoon. I Found a TREK 1000 2007 Road Bike for $375 and I also found a Cannondale R600 Road Bike 2002 for $375. After reading many reviews I am concerned about purchasing the Trek 1000, they all led to negative reports. The Cannondale R600 has Shimano 105 shifters, rear der and front der and aluminum frame with carbon fork. The Cannondale R600 also has mavic wheelset. The original price point for the Trek in 2007 was $689 and the Cannondale was $1400+? I am new to these bikes and would assume the Cannondale would be the better buy going off price points alone. But the factor of year difference in technology might be bothering? Can anyone recommend one or the other bikes for me? It might be a lot to ask but I'm looking for a reliable Road Bike. One last note here... My budget is $400 for the bike alone so getting one of these higher price points bikes for an inexpensive buy would be great for me!

I am really looking forward to riding my bike for commuting to work and around town, using my car only when I HAVE to. If my wife would let me sell my car I would!

Once again thank you all in advance:D,

palenciarides

Have you seen them? What shape are they in?

Same size bikes, and more important, the size that will fit you?

Yes the bikes are both in "good" condition. No dings, scratch yes, only minor cosmetic damage that would be expected. I am 6'1" and the frames are 56cm. I calculated my frame size from a website using my height and inseam length. I hope that helps!:D

Thanks again,

palenciarides

Don't pay much attention to negative reviews on bikes like the trek 1000. Most entry level road bikes will simply have more negative reviews than the more expensive models (kind of seems obvious - but is often due to people thinking that the front derailleur shifts too slowly, or not liking the 8 speed "thumb" part of the STI unit, etc.). Even the trek 1000 will have shifters and components that are light-years ahead of entry level road bikes from 20 years ago.

The biggest issue I take with such bikes is that they are often supplied with pretty weak wheelsets -- but those can be upgraded and the rest of the components are usually quite nice. Heck, I still use downtube shifters and center-pull cantilever brakes! ;)

Ah hah! I was reading about "trickle down technology" so it is true! :thumb:
Thanks for all the helps guys. You have answered my questions! By this afternoon I'll be official road bike owner. Maybe I'll post a picture!:D

Thanks a ton,

palenciarides

Bike = Frame + parts fitted, they all come in many price point levels,
to reach that sum.

A 56 is a bit small for a 6'1" rider, a 58 is better. 60 may better yet.

measure the inside leg, crotch to ground, rather than trouser inseam.

When I first got back into road bikes I went through 5 bikes in the first 18 months..I expect you will do a few change ups pretty quickly. It takes a while to figure out what you have vs. what you want.
I started with a vintage steel 58cm and worked my way over to a full carbon 54cm. Right now I have what I want but that will change in a while as well.
I don't think you have to agonize over B1..it's just a starting point.

Mike

The Cannondale is a higher level bike. With its component mix, it is an "entry level" racer. However, if you have to replace any components like shifters, it may be a bit hard to get replacements.

The Trek 1000 is basically an entry level road bike. It is about the low end of what a recreational rider should be riding. However, it is a more recent bike which has some advantages.

Also, if you take your new bike to the local bike shop, for a small fee, they will tune it up for you. They will also tell you the sorts of things you might want to get for it: accessories, tools and so on.

The thing about bikes is that except for wear parts: brake pads, chains, rear clusters, and tires, bike parts last a long time. Most only start wearing out at around 30,000+. A high mileage cyclist would put on about 5000 miles per year and very, very few cyclists ride that much. I would just bet that both of the bikes you are looking at probably have relatively little wear on them.

Both bikes are good bikes by the way.

Hey guys!
Thanks again for all the great advice. How lucky are we to have these forums!

So this is what I ended up with...

SS with freewheel for now!
Keep in mind I live in TEXAS so it's all flats around here. :lol:
60cm Cannondale R700 2005 Frame.
Brakes are 2010 Shimano 105.
Surly 16t cog SS Components are 2009.
Surly 22t cog SS Components are 2009. (for more hills I suppose)
Front wheel is ultegra.
Rear wheel is 2009 racelite bontrager raceli.
Clip on pedals/platform pedals.
Truvativ cranks.
FSA headset and handlebars.
A Seat that is not very comfy but will upgrade later!

This WAS originally a R700 2005 full ultergra bike. The guy I am purchasing it from converted it to a SS with a free wheel. He took most the Ultergra parts and put them on his brothers bike. I have no worries about the parts as they are good components right now. And I also plan on upgrading SLOWLY over the years as I get stonger. I plan on purchasing whatever is needed to make this bike have gears like the original condition. But for now for $450 I'll take this fun bike.:thumb:

Here is a photo.
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=182089

I'm really excited!!!:D
And in terms of looks... I for one... Love it.

I hate the bullhorn bars you have on your bike. I believe they were made by cutting off the original drops. I have a 105 bike, and the hoods of the brake levers make just as great a place to put your hands as those bars (when you want to ride more upright), but you can still "get aero" when you want.

JFTR I think you got the better bike, unless the difference in age implies a difference in wear and tear. Many say the 105-level components are as good quality-wise as the best Dura-Ace stuff fielded in the Tour De France, but is heavier because they don't use the same lightweight materials.

People often don't take the age of a bike into consideration when they purchase used. It does matter. As someone mentioned earlier, the older the bike, the more wear and tear. My wife's first bike, purchased this year, is a 2001 LeMond. It is reaching the point where maintenance costs are not worth it. Sometimes spending more money up front will end up saving you money and time in the long run. In my opinion, used bikes are all but valueless unless you have proof of a good maintenance history.