Notices
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) Looking to lose that spare tire? Ideal weight 200+? Frustrated being a large cyclist in a sport geared for the ultra-light? Learn about the bikes and parts that can take the abuse of a heavier cyclist, how to keep your body going while losing the weight, and get support from others who've been successful.

HELP...Which Bike?

Old 04-27-07, 12:54 PM
  #1  
axejeep
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
HELP...Which Bike?

Whats up everyone...new guy here. I need to decide on which bike to purchase. Trek SU100 or Trek FX7.2. I want to use them for Chicago path riding and commuting to work (10 miles 1 way). They are both the same price. I am 5'10" 260lbs. All advise is welcomed!

-AXe
axejeep is offline  
Old 04-27-07, 01:28 PM
  #2  
blake711
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I would say the FX7.2 for sure. The Mountain bike tires suck so much energy from you. I have 7.2fx and its a great little bike for the money. I would ask the LBS to change those god awful tires and tubes from 700x35 to smoother 700x28 which is what I did a month after having the bike. Its much faster now and rolls so much better. Not to mention its nice to have 110 PSI vs 80psi in your tires. The benefits are unreal. I got mine a couple months ago and have around 250 miles on mine with no issues.

Blake
blake711 is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 10:15 AM
  #3  
axejeep
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
OK...I am going to pick up my new bike this evening. I've narrowed down to 3 bikes: Trek su200, 7.3fx and 7.3fx disc. My concern with the 700c wheels is...will they hold my weight (260)...not that I'm looking for pot holes etc. but you never know. Chicago has very nice bike paths...but there will be times I will need to ride the streets. I think the 26" with slicks may be ideal. Your thoughts...

-Allan
axejeep is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 10:46 AM
  #4  
ang1sgt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Chili, NY
Posts: 733

Bikes: 88 Fisher Gemini tandem, 92 Trek 970, 07 Nashbar Frame, 08 Gary Fisher Paragon

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
It's all TIRE Pressure for us larger frame folks. Check the tires before EVERY Ride and make sure you have max pressure in the tires.

The Trek 7 series of bikes are really nice. I built up a 7.5 Disc the other day and it turned out really nice. It got me to thinking that I should have bought one of those instead of building up my frame!
Never the less, I'm still having fun.

Good Luck with your purchase!
ang1sgt is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 11:52 AM
  #5  
Terrierman
Senior Member
 
Terrierman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SWMO
Posts: 3,185
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1400 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by axejeep
OK...I am going to pick up my new bike this evening. I've narrowed down to 3 bikes: Trek su200, 7.3fx and 7.3fx disc. My concern with the 700c wheels is...will they hold my weight (260)...not that I'm looking for pot holes etc. but you never know. Chicago has very nice bike paths...but there will be times I will need to ride the streets. I think the 26" with slicks may be ideal. Your thoughts...

-Allan
Do not get a bike with 26" wheels, get the 700C wheels. I'm 6'1" 250 +/-. Have both, guess which one rides a ton better? On both streets and bike paths. NO QUESTION.
__________________
It's all downhill from here. Except the parts that are uphill.
Terrierman is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 04:42 PM
  #6  
Bill Kapaun
Really Old Senior Member
 
Bill Kapaun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mid Willamette Valley, Orygun
Posts: 12,589

Bikes: 87 RockHopper,2008 Specialized Globe. Both upgraded to 9 speeds.

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1312 Post(s)
Liked 518 Times in 398 Posts
Do you need the disc? Seems like unneeded expense to me.

IF you won't be riding steep hills, you might bargin with the bike shop to put a different cassette on the back, like a 12-23???
Bill Kapaun is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 05:15 PM
  #7  
Mtbnomore
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Rocklin, CA
Posts: 333

Bikes: Trek Domane, Soma Smoothie, Surly Big Dummy/Pacer/KM/Ogre, and a revolving collection of vintage stuff

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm 6'5, 240, and I thought about the Trek FX bikes. I ended up getting a Raleigh Route 24 instead because of the componentry and the price. Check it out...

Oh, and the 700x28 tires are smooooth.
Mtbnomore is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 06:10 PM
  #8  
CardiacKid
SNARKY MEMBER
 
CardiacKid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Austin
Posts: 2,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
The wheels shouldn't be a problem. These bikes are all similarly equipped. Only the geometry and the wheel size appear different. I wouldn't think you would need the disc brakes unless there are more hills on those bike paths than I have seen. The decision is going to come down to what you think is the most comfortable. Test ride both of them for as long as you can get away with. I wouldn't think your weight should be a real factor in picking a bike. I rode a century a couple of years ago with a guy who was about 5'6" and 275. He rode 100 miles on a $5000 Seven road bike. Of course, he didn't have weight weenie wheels.
CardiacKid is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 06:15 PM
  #9  
bdinger
Chubby super biker
 
bdinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
You won't have any problems with the wheels on the 7.3FX. I'm well over 300 and my rear withstood about 100 miles before it started having issues. We've narrowed it down to a combo of my big butt, my freakish leg muscles, and the stock build being not so hot. However, someone your size won't have any problems.

I rode both the SU and the FX, and it was no question. The FX fit better, rode better, and rode faster. I barely got the SU out of the parking lot before realizing that!

As far as brakes, the discs on the FX "disc" aren't the hottest, while the V-brakes are pretty damn decent (Avid Juicy's). THey can stop my big butt, so they'll have no problem with yours . Save the extra cash for a new saddle, that's something you WILL want to invest in
bdinger is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 07:25 PM
  #10  
geo8rge
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,015
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Consider xooter.com Swift (ask for a steel frame instead of Aluminum). Or Dahon Mu XL.
__________________
2000 Montague CX, I do not recommend it, but still ride it.
Strida 3, I recommend it for rides < 10mi wo steep hills.
2006 Rowbike 720 Sport, I recommend it as an exercise bike.
1996 Birdy, Recommend.
Wieleder CARiBIKE (folding), decent frame.
geo8rge is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 10:24 PM
  #11  
axejeep
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
OK...so I went against the grain. Trek SU200 is the winner! I couldn't be more pleased. I rode the 7.2FX for about 8 miles...yes it was faster than the SU. The SU had more of a MTB feel to it but smoother.

Thanx for all of your imput. I'll keep you guys posted.

-Allan
axejeep is offline  
Old 05-02-07, 07:45 AM
  #12  
bdinger
Chubby super biker
 
bdinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Awesome, post some pics! That's definitely a testament to the whole thing where everyone may like it, but it comes down to what YOU like since YOU will be riding it .
bdinger is offline  
Old 05-02-07, 08:01 AM
  #13  
ang1sgt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Chili, NY
Posts: 733

Bikes: 88 Fisher Gemini tandem, 92 Trek 970, 07 Nashbar Frame, 08 Gary Fisher Paragon

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
For most folks, Disc Brakes are a gimick that they don't need.

BUT... For those that ride a lot in wet weather/Rain and such I think that Discs
can be an added benefit to those folks. It is very hard to beat V-Brakes. I try and ask the customer enough questions about how and where they ride. There are certain factors that make V-Brake or Discs more desirable. The other factor is adjustments. Some folks will not pay attention to pad wear and pad adjustment with disc brakes. For these folks, V-Brakes are a better choice. For customers that tinker and have the aptitude to maintain their bikes, or those that regularly bring their bikes in for service, then Discs may be a better choice.

For myself, I am building up my first bike with Discs. I built it from the first part with discs in mind. It's been a soggy spring this year and our roads around here still really do not have the salt fully washed off of them. But, The frame and fork on this bike still have the canti braze-ons so I could switch back if needed.

Chris
ang1sgt is offline  

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.