Originally Posted by Digital Gee
The Trek 7.5fx has a triple crank, 48/36/26, and lists at $700. The 7.6fx had a double crank,50/36, and the bike lists at $1040. There are other differences between the bikes, as well, but obviously Trek feels that the double is an upgrade to the triple crank.
Can someone explain what's better about the double, what's gained and what's lost? Which is better for hills, the triple or the double? It's not just a weight thing, right?
This is non-fact-based speculation, but a few possibilities occur to me:
1. The 7.6 might have better components somewhere else. I have no idea; I don't know what's on either bike.
2. Frame might be different, too. Some manufacturers change tubing, etc., as cost goes up.
3. Wrongly, in my opinion, some riders equate triple cranks with newbies, freds or casual riders. They may figure "real" cyclists will NOT WANT a triple bad enough that they'll pay extra for a double.
4. Maybe they thought nobody would notice. A wannabe racer who's excited about getting a new bike probably isn't even going to look at a triple--he'll see a decent bike at a reasonable price. The would-be triple owner will see the same bike with the crank he wants at a lower price and think he's getting a bargain.
But I don't actually KNOW anything...it's just a slow day at work.