Will a Trek 1.1 crumble underneath 250 pounds of clyde?
#26
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Wow, again all the thoughts are appreciated. I am surprised that 700x32 could be an option. This is on the stock wheels? I am looking for a comfy ride and would gladly take a 28/32 tire if they help smooth the road a bit
#27
Banned.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Posts: 19,895
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
So you continue to concentrate on one Lemond, not both. Take a look at the first Lemond, you think that $1000 bike is US made? Does it not have the same design, tube shape and structure as the current Trek alum bikes?
#29
Banned.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Posts: 19,895
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
From "A Cannondale alum like my CAD3 with a beefy BB area" to "Cannondale aluminum".
Either way, you have seemed to miss my entire point. The Cannondale is a big beefy BB area and the TREK is a smaller diameter tube that is flexy. One is more durable than the other, I wil leave that to your imagination to figure it out.
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,956
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
Actually I did refer to both. The second one has the bolt-on seatstay arrangement that focuses bending stress on (surprise) the spot where yours broke. All current-model aluminum Treks have both stays welded. You'd have to go back a ways to find one with the bolt-up arrangement; the most recent ones to feature carbon seatstays had them bonded into lugs at the dropout.
Well, the "made in USA" sticker does sort of suggest that. Although knowing Trek, that could mean something different than it sounds
No it doesn't. To enumerate just a couple blatantly obvious differences, the 1-series are based on round tubes with much heftier welds and an externally-butted head tube, and the 2-series use hydroformed, shaped top tubes, downtubes, head tubes and stays. Just based on those traits alone, I could tell all three apart blindfolded.
For your safety, that's all. I've seen people going around with their stems barely hiding the wedge, and stems with short quills are a lot more common than stems with long ones. So just making sure
Take a look at the first Lemond, you think that $1000 bike is US made?
Does it not have the same design, tube shape and structure as the current Trek alum bikes?
Why? I could take a picture and post it but you'd look for something else to argue .
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,956
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
Last edited by mechBgon; 12-22-11 at 09:51 PM.
#32
Banned.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Posts: 19,895
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Nah, not me! I'm the check your tire pressure before every ride type of guy. Never go beyond post, stem etc limits.
#33
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Grid Reference, SK
Posts: 3,768
Bikes: I never learned to ride a bike. It is my deepest shame.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
6 Posts
Sorry man, you are lost. A Cannondale CAD3 does not represent all Cannondale aluminum. But I love the way you omit words to change the meaning of my statement.
From "A Cannondale alum like my CAD3 with a beefy BB area" to "Cannondale aluminum".
Either way, you have seemed to miss my entire point. The Cannondale is a big beefy BB area and the TREK is a smaller diameter tube that is flexy. One is more durable than the other, I wil leave that to your imagination to figure it out.
From "A Cannondale alum like my CAD3 with a beefy BB area" to "Cannondale aluminum".
Either way, you have seemed to miss my entire point. The Cannondale is a big beefy BB area and the TREK is a smaller diameter tube that is flexy. One is more durable than the other, I wil leave that to your imagination to figure it out.
But you seem to be suggesting I twisted your words. Well let's look at the sentence in question:
"Now a Cannondale alum bike like my CAD3 is a different story with it's beefy BB area. Mine is a 98 and no problem but far stiffer and less flaxy [sic] than the Trek design."
There are two ways to interpret the first part of this statement: "Now a Cannondale alum bike like my CAD3..." You could mean that there is "a" Cannondale aluminum bike (exactly 1) that has the characteristics you describe, or that 'any' Cannondale that shares the characteristics you describe is better. It seems unlikely you were referring to one single other bike, so I assumed you were making a generalization about all Cannondale bikes with a design similar to yours. Your most recent statement :"On is more durable than the other." Again leaves open the question - are you talking about all bikes that are designed similar to the Cannondale, or just "one" particular bike. If you were referring to one particular bike (you did not specify which one, just that it is like your Cannondale which has a beefy BB area.
However, if you were making a generalization, you are wrong to make said generalization based on your minute sample size. Having sold both Treks and Cannondales in the past, I can confirm that Cannondales have a similar failure rate to Treks. But what do I know - you have had one (1) trek frame that broke at the bottom bracket.
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,956
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
side_FX, as a follow-up, I grabbed the wheelset off a Trek Lane and crammed it onto a 1.2 to see if the 1-series can handle 700 x 32 tires. The tires on the Lane are legit 32s that actually measure a full 32mm wide, with lots of tread depth. BIG tires. They're too big for the 1-series; the rear tire hits the backside of the frame's seat tube just above the front derailleur, and the front tire would hit the inside of the fork legs when the wheel flexed slightly.
So 700 x 28s, or 700 x 32s that run smaller than their nominal size, would be the limit. You want some room between the tire and the fork legs or rear stays, to allow for wheel flex and out-of-true wheels.
So 700 x 28s, or 700 x 32s that run smaller than their nominal size, would be the limit. You want some room between the tire and the fork legs or rear stays, to allow for wheel flex and out-of-true wheels.
Last edited by mechBgon; 12-24-11 at 04:13 PM.