Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Hybrid Bicycles
Reload this Page >

Need some help with 3 Trek models please

Notices
Hybrid Bicycles Where else would you go to discuss these fun, versatile bikes?

Need some help with 3 Trek models please

Old 08-27-16, 04:13 PM
  #1  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Need some help with 3 Trek models please

Hi guys, been enjoying reading the board lately and decided to sign up and join the party.


I need some help with selecting the right Trek model.


I'm not sure if it matters but a bit about me - I'm 6'0, fit guy, been a 10K runner for a few years now and I really want to start riding a bike again! I'm talking about city riding, to friends and to and back from to work, around 11 K ride (one way).


I've done my research and came up with 3 models I believe will fit my needs and budget nicely :


7.3 FX :


7.3 FX | Trek Bikes


FX 3 :


FX 3 | Trek Bikes


7.4 FX :


7.4 FX | Trek Bikes




Would really help me if someone could break down the main differences in these models and rate them "best to worst". I'm not sure I can get the 7.4 (which seems to be the best one) so would be very happy to read a explanation about the difference between 7.3 and FX 3.


How come a Carbon fork in the FX3 (instead of Alloy in the 7.3) only cost 40$ more? I was led to believe Carbon cost a lot more?


Appreciate any help
RexRobinson is offline  
Old 08-27-16, 05:01 PM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
coominya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Brisbane Aust
Posts: 1,643

Bikes: Giant ToughRoad Giant talon

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 705 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
Welcome to the forum Rex.

I think I'd go with the 7.3 as first choice, that chick beside it is a total babe.
Second would be the 7.4 because of it's lovely White colour scheme
I'd put the FX3 last, because its colour scheme really doesn't do it for me.
coominya is offline  
Old 08-27-16, 05:23 PM
  #3  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by coominya
Welcome to the forum Rex.

I think I'd go with the 7.3 as first choice, that chick beside it is a total babe.
Second would be the 7.4 because of it's lovely White colour scheme
I'd put the FX3 last, because its colour scheme really doesn't do it for me.


Well this wasn't very helpful but thanks
RexRobinson is offline  
Old 08-27-16, 05:32 PM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
JerrySTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Near St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 1,471

Bikes: Giant Defy Advanced, Breezer Doppler Team, Schwinn Twinn Tandem, Windsor Tourist, 1954 JC Higgens

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked 9 Times in 7 Posts
My vote is for the 7.4 FX. It's only about $100 more than the cheapest of the 3 and has better components.

The cost of carbon components has dropped quite a bit in recent years and the quality has gone up. I've owned 2 CF bikes and my next one will probably be CF also.
JerrySTL is offline  
Old 08-27-16, 05:42 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
AU Tiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: central Pennsylvania
Posts: 489

Bikes: 2018 Fuji Jari 1.5, 2017 Kona Fire Mountain

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked 54 Times in 35 Posts
I'm not sure of this, but it looks like Trek may have streamlined its FX line for 2017 and changed the naming scheme. As such, I'd bet the 2017 FX 3 is the equivalent of the 2016 FX 7.4. The only real difference I see is the rear derailleur went from Deore to Alivio. That's down one step in the Shimano hierarchy, but since it's one year newer it might actually be the same technology. As for pricing, I know that Giant dropped their prices by a good bit for the 2017 models compared to the 2016 ones, so maybe Trek is doing the same thing.

Of the bikes and prices you asked about, the FX 3 makes the most sense. I have a Fuji which is pretty much identical to that one, and it has served me well for two seasons so far. My typical rides are about 15 miles on country roads, 3 or 4 times a week, with an occasional 30+ miler thrown in, as well as leisurely rides on rail trails. It's a great bike for that purpose, so I'm confident in saying the FX 3 would be as well.

If you've got a Giant dealer nearby, you might also consider the Escape 1 which lists for $600.
AU Tiger is offline  
Old 08-27-16, 06:13 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: MN & AZ
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Ask yourself if you might want to consider a suspension fork to suck-up some of the city potholes?
johnu is offline  
Old 08-28-16, 12:00 AM
  #7  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Recommendation

Hi Rex,
I'm 6'4" about 200 lbs and was in the same situation. Using my bike for commuting to work grocery store beach etc... I ended up buying the 7.2 simply because the 7.3 didn't come in a 25" frame for some weird reason. Good thing though because I used the extra monies for some upgrades like a rack a bag some mud guards and reall really bright lights for my commute at night.
Perfect fit and I honestly feel better about a steel fork. In fack I just got into a bad accident (totally my fault) I had to replace the stem and handle bars (upgrade time) and no other damage to the bike.
commuterdude32 is offline  
Old 08-28-16, 05:09 AM
  #8  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JerrySTL
My vote is for the 7.4 FX. It's only about $100 more than the cheapest of the 3 and has better components.

The cost of carbon components has dropped quite a bit in recent years and the quality has gone up. I've owned 2 CF bikes and my next one will probably be CF also.


Just curious, can you explain what and why are the better components you like in the 7.4? (as opposed to the FX3)
RexRobinson is offline  
Old 08-28-16, 05:14 AM
  #9  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by AU Tiger
I'm not sure of this, but it looks like Trek may have streamlined its FX line for 2017 and changed the naming scheme. As such, I'd bet the 2017 FX 3 is the equivalent of the 2016 FX 7.4. The only real difference I see is the rear derailleur went from Deore to Alivio. That's down one step in the Shimano hierarchy, but since it's one year newer it might actually be the same technology. As for pricing, I know that Giant dropped their prices by a good bit for the 2017 models compared to the 2016 ones, so maybe Trek is doing the same thing.

Of the bikes and prices you asked about, the FX 3 makes the most sense. I have a Fuji which is pretty much identical to that one, and it has served me well for two seasons so far. My typical rides are about 15 miles on country roads, 3 or 4 times a week, with an occasional 30+ miler thrown in, as well as leisurely rides on rail trails. It's a great bike for that purpose, so I'm confident in saying the FX 3 would be as well.

If you've got a Giant dealer nearby, you might also consider the Escape 1 which lists for $600.

Appreciate it, I wonder what kind of a real life difference does the Carbon fork make in your opinion?


And if you ignore the pricing, which bike is better..the FX3 or the 7.4?
RexRobinson is offline  
Old 08-28-16, 05:50 AM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
AU Tiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: central Pennsylvania
Posts: 489

Bikes: 2018 Fuji Jari 1.5, 2017 Kona Fire Mountain

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked 54 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by RexRobinson
Appreciate it, I wonder what kind of a real life difference does the Carbon fork make in your opinion?
Since the only bike I've owned as an adult is the one I have now, I can't really make a comparison. The general consensus on this forum is that carbon does make a noticeable difference, especially when compared to aluminum (as opposed to chromoly steel). Given the small difference in price in the models you referenced, I wouldn't even consider the 7.3.

And if you ignore the pricing, which bike is better..the FX3 or the 7.4?
The FX 3 has an 11-34 cassette, and the 7.4 has an 11-32. This gives the FX 3 a very slight advantage if you will be riding a lot of hills. The 26-34 combination produces a 0.765 gear ratio, while the 26-32 produces 0.813. In reality, you may not even be able to notice that difference, but technically the lower ratio will make it more suited for climbing. The trade-off is that since they are both 9-speeds, there will be a bigger gap somewhere in the progression for the 11-34 compared to the 11-32, which would matter (again, very slightly) if you ride more on relatively flat roads.

Other than that, it's just the Deore vs Alivio rear derailleur. Deore is one step up from Alivio. But if you're comparing this year's Alivio to last year's Deore, it may be the same. And if that's the case, then you might also expect that on the front derailleur, this year's Acera is better than last year's Acera. If so, then the FX 3 would be slightly better than the 7.4 FX. But understand, I'm just guessing about the FX 3 being newer than the 7.4 FX, and about the year-to-year comparison between Deore and Alivio.

So all-in-all, there's not much difference between those two bikes... not enough to justify the $70 price difference. If I'm right about the FX 3 replacing the 7.4 FX in the Trek lineup, then your LBS might drop the price of the 7.4 FX to match the price of the FX 3. I know my local Giant dealer did that this year with the 2016 models when the lower-priced 2017 models were released. If they do that, then it really would just boil down to a color preference in my opinion.
AU Tiger is offline  
Old 08-28-16, 07:34 AM
  #11  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Los Alamitos, Calif.
Posts: 2,478

Bikes: Trek 7.4 FX

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1026 Post(s)
Liked 913 Times in 535 Posts
The 7.4 has a carbon fork.
TakingMyTime is offline  
Old 08-28-16, 08:52 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
JerrySTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Near St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 1,471

Bikes: Giant Defy Advanced, Breezer Doppler Team, Schwinn Twinn Tandem, Windsor Tourist, 1954 JC Higgens

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by RexRobinson
Just curious, can you explain what and why are the better components you like in the 7.4? (as opposed to the FX3)
The carbon fork. I'd have to go back to look at the specs to see if anything else was different.
JerrySTL is offline  
Old 08-28-16, 10:11 AM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 275

Bikes: 2015 Giant Roam 1 | 2002 Giant Sedona LX | 1980s Norco Monterey SL

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by AU Tiger
Since the only bike I've owned as an adult is the one I have now, I can't really make a comparison. The general consensus on this forum is that carbon does make a noticeable difference, especially when compared to aluminum (as opposed to chromoly steel). Given the small difference in price in the models you referenced, I wouldn't even consider the 7.3.


The FX 3 has an 11-34 cassette, and the 7.4 has an 11-32. This gives the FX 3 a very slight advantage if you will be riding a lot of hills. The 26-34 combination produces a 0.765 gear ratio, while the 26-32 produces 0.813. In reality, you may not even be able to notice that difference, but technically the lower ratio will make it more suited for climbing. The trade-off is that since they are both 9-speeds, there will be a bigger gap somewhere in the progression for the 11-34 compared to the 11-32, which would matter (again, very slightly) if you ride more on relatively flat roads.

Other than that, it's just the Deore vs Alivio rear derailleur. Deore is one step up from Alivio. But if you're comparing this year's Alivio to last year's Deore, it may be the same. And if that's the case, then you might also expect that on the front derailleur, this year's Acera is better than last year's Acera. If so, then the FX 3 would be slightly better than the 7.4 FX. But understand, I'm just guessing about the FX 3 being newer than the 7.4 FX, and about the year-to-year comparison between Deore and Alivio.

So all-in-all, there's not much difference between those two bikes... not enough to justify the $70 price difference. If I'm right about the FX 3 replacing the 7.4 FX in the Trek lineup, then your LBS might drop the price of the 7.4 FX to match the price of the FX 3. I know my local Giant dealer did that this year with the 2016 models when the lower-priced 2017 models were released. If they do that, then it really would just boil down to a color preference in my opinion.
I think the "this year vs. last year" discussion about components is misleading... Shimano does NOT upgrade or trickle-down technologies in all of its component groups every year. In fact, many of them stay static for several years at a time. You can check their detailed yearly product spec book on their Web page to confirm, they have the Pdf's archived back to 2009.

For 2016/2017, I'm pretty sure only SLX was upgraded with trickle-down from XT. It's model numbers have changed from m690 to m7000. Deore, Alivio, Acera and Altus all appear to be the same as the 2015 models.

Cheers TRJB
therealjoeblow is offline  
Old 08-29-16, 02:19 AM
  #14  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by therealjoeblow
I think the "this year vs. last year" discussion about components is misleading... Shimano does NOT upgrade or trickle-down technologies in all of its component groups every year. In fact, many of them stay static for several years at a time. You can check their detailed yearly product spec book on their Web page to confirm, they have the Pdf's archived back to 2009.

For 2016/2017, I'm pretty sure only SLX was upgraded with trickle-down from XT. It's model numbers have changed from m690 to m7000. Deore, Alivio, Acera and Altus all appear to be the same as the 2015 models.

Cheers TRJB




That's good to know, interesting stuff.


Unrelated question - I noticed that all these Trek models come with V brakes. I wonder if it would be possible to upgrade them to hydraulic Disc break if I wanted to in a few months?


I'm' not sure if Disc breaks require a "special frame" for them to fit or could they simply be installed on any bike.
RexRobinson is offline  
Old 08-29-16, 09:32 AM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 54

Bikes: 2017 Giant Quick-E, 2015 Trek Domane 4.0 Disc, 2014 Trek 7.2FX

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Have you seen the Allant 7.4? Allant 7.4 | Trek Bikes
rolandk is offline  
Old 08-30-16, 06:57 AM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
gemini's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Turku, Finland
Posts: 109

Bikes: Trek Allant 7.2, Trek Soho S

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RexRobinson
I'm' not sure if Disc breaks require a "special frame" for them to fit or could they simply be installed on any bike.
I have the 2016 Allant 7.2, which is the same as FX 7.2 but with mechanical disc brakes. The frame and fork have mounts for disc brakes and there's no mount posts for V-brakes. You can't switch an Allant from disc to V, or an FX from V to disc (without doing something to the frame/fork). You can change or upgrade the Allant to different disc brakes, of course.

Some of the Surly frames, e.g. Troll, are compatible with both discs and rim brakes.

Last edited by gemini; 08-30-16 at 02:02 PM.
gemini is offline  
Old 08-30-16, 09:17 AM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,970
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2475 Post(s)
Liked 722 Times in 513 Posts
Originally Posted by AU Tiger
The FX 3 has an 11-34 cassette, and the 7.4 has an 11-32. This gives the FX 3 a very slight advantage if you will be riding a lot of hills. The 26-34 combination produces a 0.765 gear ratio, while the 26-32 produces 0.813. In reality, you may not even be able to notice that difference, but technically the lower ratio will make it more suited for climbing. The trade-off is that since they are both 9-speeds, there will be a bigger gap somewhere in the progression for the 11-34 compared to the 11-32, which would matter (again, very slightly) if you ride more on relatively flat roads.
I like the feel of an 11-32 vs an 11-34. All 11-34's I have ever seen cluster (see what I did there) the steps of the first seven (or eight) speeds and then you have a 10 tooth drop to the 34. The 11-32's are a smoother progression to the 32. FWIW.
Leisesturm is offline  
Old 08-30-16, 10:17 AM
  #18  
Senior Member
 
AU Tiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: central Pennsylvania
Posts: 489

Bikes: 2018 Fuji Jari 1.5, 2017 Kona Fire Mountain

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked 54 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by Leisesturm
I like the feel of an 11-32 vs an 11-34. All 11-34's I have ever seen cluster (see what I did there) the steps of the first seven (or eight) speeds and then you have a 10 tooth drop to the 34. The 11-32's are a smoother progression to the 32. FWIW.
Yep. Even my 11-32 has a bigger gap at the high end than what I like. If I lived in a relatively flat area, I'd probably replace it with an 11-28 or something like that. But with the hills I ride, I like having the 32. It's a trade-off, and boils down to the type of riding you'll do.
AU Tiger is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
yashinon
Hybrid Bicycles
21
02-28-15 09:27 PM
MichelleOH
Hybrid Bicycles
27
05-28-14 09:54 PM
Simon7
Hybrid Bicycles
4
06-11-13 03:58 PM
MarTay6
Hybrid Bicycles
10
01-02-12 09:19 AM
kmv787
Hybrid Bicycles
3
01-01-10 03:18 AM

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.