Originally Posted by
purplepeople
You realize, of course, that your defence of Trek's design is also just talk.... and so far, without indication of any analysis behind the opinion.
Sadly, I think you believe this is all just Trek-hating, but it's not. I happen to have a Trek (a Fisher actually) and it's a great mtb bike. My own Trek experiences aside, if this was just an issue of style or some minor engineering gaffe, I'd probably not care. But when I see something on a bike that could be a problem, I'm going to point it out, especially on a safety issue, like handling. If a Trek designer sees this thread and they make changes before product release, that's would be the best outcome.
Credentials aside, proof is pudding. Get your cargo bike and hang 40 pounds on the tail end of the rack. If the front wheel even stays on the ground, try riding it and let us know what you think.
ensen.
If you're talking to me (I assume so, since you quoted me), all I've said about the bike is that I think it's great that a major manufacturer is releasing utility-oriented bikes for the masses. This much is clear from the mere fact that they're releasing the bike. I make no further assumptions about anything I can't possibly know. The vast majority of my discussion here was about a completely different bike (one that I
have ridden) and how well Trek did with that one.
I couldn't care less about the Trek brand name and who likes it or who doesn't. I have no idea if the bike will handle well or explode once touched. I'm just simply making the point that you cannot possibly know how a bike handles until you've ridden it. You can make assumptions based on experience, but to say you know how a bike handles just from looking at a 2 inch square picture is absurd.
And even if the design turns out to be completely flawed, I still stand by my original statement: it's great to see a major manufacturer making these kinds of lifestyle bikes.