Originally Posted by coominya (Post 19015496)

Welcome to the forum Rex.

I think I'd go with the 7.3 as first choice, that chick beside it is a total babe.
Second would be the 7.4 because of it's lovely White colour scheme
I'd put the FX3 last, because its colour scheme really doesn't do it for me.

Originally Posted by JerrySTL (Post 19015538)

My vote is for the 7.4 FX. It's only about $100 more than the cheapest of the 3 and has better components.

The cost of carbon components has dropped quite a bit in recent years and the quality has gone up. I've owned 2 CF bikes and my next one will probably be CF also.

Originally Posted by AU Tiger (Post 19015555)

I'm not sure of this, but it looks like Trek may have streamlined its FX line for 2017 and changed the naming scheme. As such, I'd bet the 2017 FX 3 is the equivalent of the 2016 FX 7.4. The only real difference I see is the rear derailleur went from Deore to Alivio. That's down one step in the Shimano hierarchy, but since it's one year newer it might actually be the same technology. As for pricing, I know that Giant dropped their prices by a good bit for the 2017 models compared to the 2016 ones, so maybe Trek is doing the same thing.

Of the bikes and prices you asked about, the FX 3 makes the most sense. I have a Fuji which is pretty much identical to that one, and it has served me well for two seasons so far. My typical rides are about 15 miles on country roads, 3 or 4 times a week, with an occasional 30+ miler thrown in, as well as leisurely rides on rail trails. It's a great bike for that purpose, so I'm confident in saying the FX 3 would be as well.

If you've got a Giant dealer nearby, you might also consider the Escape 1 which lists for $600.

Originally Posted by RexRobinson (Post 19016178)

Appreciate it, I wonder what kind of a real life difference does the Carbon fork make in your opinion?

Originally Posted by RexRobinson (Post 19016176)

Just curious, can you explain what and why are the better components you like in the 7.4? (as opposed to the FX3)

Originally Posted by AU Tiger (Post 19016198)

Since the only bike I've owned as an adult is the one I have now, I can't really make a comparison. The general consensus on this forum is that carbon does make a noticeable difference, especially when compared to aluminum (as opposed to chromoly steel). Given the small difference in price in the models you referenced, I wouldn't even consider the 7.3.


The FX 3 has an 11-34 cassette, and the 7.4 has an 11-32. This gives the FX 3 a very slight advantage if you will be riding a lot of hills. The 26-34 combination produces a 0.765 gear ratio, while the 26-32 produces 0.813. In reality, you may not even be able to notice that difference, but technically the lower ratio will make it more suited for climbing. The trade-off is that since they are both 9-speeds, there will be a bigger gap somewhere in the progression for the 11-34 compared to the 11-32, which would matter (again, very slightly) if you ride more on relatively flat roads.

Other than that, it's just the Deore vs Alivio rear derailleur. Deore is one step up from Alivio. But if you're comparing this year's Alivio to last year's Deore, it may be the same. And if that's the case, then you might also expect that on the front derailleur, this year's Acera is better than last year's Acera. If so, then the FX 3 would be slightly better than the 7.4 FX. But understand, I'm just guessing about the FX 3 being newer than the 7.4 FX, and about the year-to-year comparison between Deore and Alivio.

So all-in-all, there's not much difference between those two bikes... not enough to justify the $70 price difference. If I'm right about the FX 3 replacing the 7.4 FX in the Trek lineup, then your LBS might drop the price of the 7.4 FX to match the price of the FX 3. I know my local Giant dealer did that this year with the 2016 models when the lower-priced 2017 models were released. If they do that, then it really would just boil down to a color preference in my opinion.

Originally Posted by therealjoeblow (Post 19016525)

I think the "this year vs. last year" discussion about components is misleading... Shimano does NOT upgrade or trickle-down technologies in all of its component groups every year. In fact, many of them stay static for several years at a time. You can check their detailed yearly product spec book on their Web page to confirm, they have the Pdf's archived back to 2009.

For 2016/2017, I'm pretty sure only SLX was upgraded with trickle-down from XT. It's model numbers have changed from m690 to m7000. Deore, Alivio, Acera and Altus all appear to be the same as the 2015 models.

Cheers TRJB

Originally Posted by RexRobinson (Post 19017955)

I'm' not sure if Disc breaks require a "special frame" for them to fit or could they simply be installed on any bike.

Originally Posted by AU Tiger (Post 19016198)

The FX 3 has an 11-34 cassette, and the 7.4 has an 11-32. This gives the FX 3 a very slight advantage if you will be riding a lot of hills. The 26-34 combination produces a 0.765 gear ratio, while the 26-32 produces 0.813. In reality, you may not even be able to notice that difference, but technically the lower ratio will make it more suited for climbing. The trade-off is that since they are both 9-speeds, there will be a bigger gap somewhere in the progression for the 11-34 compared to the 11-32, which would matter (again, very slightly) if you ride more on relatively flat roads.

Originally Posted by Leisesturm (Post 19020783)

I like the feel of an 11-32 vs an 11-34. All 11-34's I have ever seen cluster (see what I did there) the steps of the first seven (or eight) speeds and then you have a 10 tooth drop to the 34. The 11-32's are a smoother progression to the 32. FWIW.