WillisB

I have been think about switching from a mountain bike to a road bike primarily so I can fit more miles into the same time. I was in the LBS picking up some chain lube and mentioned this desire to the clerk.

He introduced me to a Pilot 1.0. I think I am in love.

Tell me that I shouldnt.

Digital Gee

Actually, you should. I think the Pilot is a great series, and the 1.0 is the most affordable, so you should buy it and then give a full report as soon as possible so I'll know whether to keep it on my list. Buy it. Go on, buy it! Get going! What are you waiting for? It's a beautiful day for a ride on new bike, so get going! Git! Git!

CrossChain

Am I wrong to think that DG's reply drips, gurgles, bubbles, seethes with IRONY?

Digital Gee

Yes, you are wrong.

Truth is, it GUSHES with irony.

BAL

Some would say that the Trek Pilot is a knock-off of the Specialized Roubaix. I think both bikes look great. Before you make your "final" decision it would be a good idea to look at both the Pilot and the Roubaix. Of course both come in various models and price points.

Additionally, while the bike shops are lowering prices on the 2006 models to clear them out, you may want to wait for the 2007 models to get the latest.

CrossChain

[QUOTE=BAL]Some would say that the Trek Pilot is a knock-off of the Specialized Roubaix. I think both bikes look great. Before you make your "final" decision it would be a good idea to look at both the Pilot and the Roubaix. Of course both come in various models and price points.QUOTE]

As a potential new bike shopper for next season, I would be curious have someone knowledgable with both Roubaix & Pilot compare/constrast the two bikes other than in their spec'ed componentry-- which may be very similar at each price point. They seem to be rivals for the same market segment-- us guys here at BF50 and others into comfort/performance.

stapfam

Depends on the type of riding you do. If solely on the road then go for the pilot, or the roubaix. Look at a couple of manufacturers and weigh up the choices. Now if you are still going to ride offroad- then stay with the MTB and get a spare pair of wheels fitted with slicks for the road use. Or if you are serious about both types of riding then buy a road bike and keep the MTB.

I am a mountain biker and I recently got a road bike for midweek rides. They are completely different beasties though, and riding both gives me an insight into both types of riding. Mountain bikes will keep you fit and road bikes you can do the milage. Whichever way you do go- it is all cycling and all good.

CrossChain

Stapfam...some of my roadriding friends see mountain bikers as GenX crazies with tongue studs and tatoos who scratch, phart, shout sex jokes, and are way too friendly, dude.

stapfam

Have doubts about the Tongue studs as They get in the way of the breakfasts but the rest is probably true- Unrtill they start going up the technical trails and no time to do the rest. As to being friendly- Thats only the bikes- They do like to kiss each other at 40mph on the 45deg downhills.

LastPlace

WillisB,

You might not want to test a Pilot until you have some money in your pocket, or there could be a big dent on your credit card.

I put about 1k on my Trek 1200 last year and 500 miles on it this year before moving the components to a Soma steel frame. I have ridden that about 500 miles so far and think it is a big improvement over the Trek.

This weekend I rented a Trek Pilot 5.2 and rode about 15 miles yesterday getting the bike set up and it was a revelation. It felt like I was a kid again and nothing hurt. Today I rode my twenty five mile loop and it wasn't a dream. The shifting seemed better than the Ultrega on my Soma for some reason, and the ride is teriffic. I rode on one street that is parallel to my usual loop just to get the feel of a really rough road and it felt like it had just been repaved.

Using cars for comparison, my Trek 1200 was a great entry level bike and remindes me of the VW Beetle that I drove for 21 years. It got the job done and gave me no problems. The Soma is like my Honda when it was a bit newer. The Pilot is like a friends Lexus.

Right now I'm trying to figure out what I can sell/pawn to get a Pilot frame.

If you are older and need a smoother ride I wouldn't ride one unless you have the money. You have been warned. Good luck.

will dehne

CC:
You know that I have the same interest. Last week, I visited two Trek dealers 400 miles apart. Both owners are serious bikers. They looked at my Cannondale, listened what I want to do, looked at me and both steered me away from the Pilot to the Madone. I do not think it was just a fiscal reaction.
My next step is to get a Madone fitted to me and try it out for a full day. I let you guys know the results.
I know this park-road very well. If I can get well over 20 MPH average in 50 miles or more, I will be happy.

CrossChain

Will, I'll be eager to read your impressions after a lengthy test ride. I suspect we're mostly talking about a difference in body position and handling between Madone/Pilot. Maybe road "feel", too?

will dehne

CC:
I think it may also be what I told them:
I said that I would consider this bike purchase ONLY IF I can see an advantage over the Cannondale. You know that Cannondale is not junk. It is a fine bike and it will take something to better it. Well, there will be at least 7 lb. difference all other things equal. I am not experienced enough to know what that means except what I read in Lance's book.

CrossChain

Imagine slapping 7 one pound packages of hamburger on to your waistline or in a saddle bag and riding out. It may well make a difference. I demo'ed a Cannondale Synapse today....my first time on carbon fiber--with no bottles, no bags. I easily felt the weight difference from a loaded steel bike going up a few short hills.

will dehne

I am soo.. exited about such a bike and going XC. I have a possible retirement comming up due to change of owners of my employer of over twenty years. Those are stressful times.
This biking thing is a great diversion and the Trek Madone looks very sexy. (a lot cheaper than a GF, says my wife of 45 years)

jppe

7 lbs--I've made that jump from my old GT to a Carbon Fiber. For me there were two major differences-You can feel the lighter bike accelerate under you and climbing is much quicker. The quicker acceleration is very helpful when trying to close a gap or stay with a fast group on a hill. The heavier weight is not that much of an issue on the flats, though. The lighter weight does help in the longer rides-not quite as tiring on the legs--but if you're like me you will probably stomp on the pedals on the hills anyway because it feels so wonderful!!

edp773

I think the Pilot is a knock off of the 1000c without the adjustable stem. The Specialized
Sequoia would be a similar bike also.

If you can get a good price on the Pilot I would consider it strongly. I am still looking for a 1000c or 1200c in my size.

will dehne

Hey guys, lets help each other.
I was quoted a Trek Madone for $2,500. (Ultegra)
A Trek Pilot for $1,700. (Not Ultegra)
What do you think about these prices?
I also need a triple ring and something better than Bontrager Race wheels. Bontrager has the wheels with eylets. (I think Race lites?)

wagathon

Maybe true but they would be wrong about that. For the M-XL frame sizes, the geometry of a Pilot and e.g. a steel Lemond or Bianchi, for example, are the same pretty much: layed-back seat post angle, average sharp head tube angle, same head tube length, shortish wheelbase and chain stay lengths.

The Pilot has the sloping top tube but many of the Lemond and Bianchi models come that way now too. You can achieve the same body geometry on all three of these bikes, size for size.

The effective top tube length of the Pilot isn't even much shorter . . . the same as for a Bianchi and about 1.5c shorter than a Lemond road bike, which has the reputation of having a longish top tube.

Compared to these bikes, the Roubaix has a longer wheelbase and chainstay length and a lot longer head tube length--maybe the longest of any road bike, and the largest size isn't quite as large as an, e.g., 61c Lemond or a 63c Pilot or Bianchi.

At least, that's been my experience.

stonecrd

I have a Pilot 2.1 and I am very happy with it. I test road the Specialize Roubaix, Allez and the Pilots. I felt all were good bikes and I don't think I would have been disapointed regardless of choice. In my case the decision came down to price. The Roubaix's MSRP was cheaper than the Pilots but the Trek store had a Pilot 2.1 in my size and it was end of season so they were willing to deal. I got it for $1,000 and I have not regretted it. I also have plans for a new bike in the future, but I am saving for a bling bike, either a all CF Obea or a Scott.

bpisciot

Interesting thread for me, since I picked up a Pilot 1.2 yesterday. I'd really wanted the 2.1, but my budget would just not stretch that far. There are some selective upgrades I'm considering for my new bike (swap out the toe clips for clipless, e.g.), but so far I'm okay with the stock components.

First ride this morning was great--very different from my old hybrid, but very comfortable. Since I've been riding a hybrid exclusively for the past year, I wasn't sure what to expect, but the Pilot provides a good transition to road biking, IMHO. My plan is to ride this for a year, and look into a higher level road bike next fall.

Bob P.

JPW

Some would say that the Trek Pilot is a knock-off of the Specialized Roubaix.
I tried both Pilot and Roubaix carbon fiber bikes. I bought the 05 Roubaix Comp and just love the ride. Do your self a favor and try a carbon Roubaix. John

stapfam

This is only gained from Mountain bikes but some of the Points are valid for road bikes too. Trek use a lot of inhouse parts- possibly less on the better bikes- but that inhouse name is Bontrager. I have a problem with Bontrager parts as although they are not poor quality- they are not the top quality they seem to be deemed as. In particular I have a problem with the wheels. They look good- are of sensible quality- price is right and they do the job. However, changing a tyre on a bontrager wheel is a 3 tyre lever job. They are probably the tightest rims to get get a tyre onto that I have ever come across. One of my riding partners has a trek and he is the only person I know that uses steel levers. Strength cannot be faulted- neither can looks or quality- but repairing a puncture on these things is impossible.

On the triple ring- Jppe has got on very well with the Compact Double Ring Crank and changing the rear cassette and and derailler. For not gaining the extra weight of a triple and for a gearing that seems to be a bit more flexible, this is a good alternative.

wagathon

Comparing similar models--as far as components go--you would be looking at a Pilot 5.2 if you want Shimano's Ultegra components. I think that all Pilots come with a triple so that's not an issue there and apparently the '07 Madone 5.0s come with a triple as well.

will dehne

For the record: Bontrager Race Wheels did not hold up on a XC ride. Four or more spokes cracked the wheel. I did discuss that with my LBS and he agreed but claims that problem does not exist with Bontrager Race lite which has eyelets. My weight is 195 lb. and not much fat. That means a lot of torque into the rear wheel. I could use Mavic 32 spoke wheels but the weight would be up.
Fixing tires is more difficult with Bontrager. I use 700 x 28 which helps but, yes, I need two strong tire levers.
Triple visa Compact Double is over my head. There is much debate on this subject. I need the low ratio to spin at 80 to 90 RPM if going up 15% incline for miles. I had a double with 39 crank and 32 Cassette. I had to stand on it to make it move.