Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  

Go Back   > >

Hybrid Bicycles Where else would you go to discuss these fun, versatile bikes?

User Tag List

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-18-10, 04:20 PM   #1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thumbs down Trek 7300, (2011 vs 2010) 7200 or GF Piranha?

Hi - visitied the local Trek shop today and came out not knowing what to do.

I went in thinking of a MTB. I currently have an old Trek 720 hybrid with steel frame and no suspension. I ride 98% of the time on maintained bike paths, but encounter the occasional root or rock.

The sales person pointed to hybrids again, but now they have front and seat suspension and aluminum is much less expensive than 15 years ago.

I'm leaning towards the 2010 7300, which has integrated suspension and is lighter. However, it is $579 compared to $529 for the 2011 7300 (with the more common fork suspension). So, the older one is about 4 lbs lighter - wondering if the difference in suspension is worth the $50? I've pretty much ruled out the 7200 since it's only $40 cheaper than the 2011 7300 and I don't like the shifters or handles (and the 7300 frame is an upgrade).

However, while there, I saw a 19" Gary Fischer Piranha (usally a $900 bike) for $550 - new. Any thoughts from more experienced people whether this is a better way to go or if the 2010 7300 is worth the extra $50 over the 2011?
bmanpgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-10, 06:33 PM   #2
I'm doing it wrong.
RJM's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,744
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3291 Post(s)
I find suspension on hybrids, where you aren't riding singletrack and trying to be like a mountain bike, to be totally pointless. I have a Specialized Stumpjumper which originally came with a rigid steel fork that I replaced with a Rock Shox fork, it did make quite a difference when out trail riding/singletracking, but only added weight and did nothing but slow the bike down when riding on a path or road. It is a good mountain bike, but a not so good path rider, which my 7.5 fx is. I am just a lot bigger fan of the fx series than the 7000 series, I find them more of a responsive bike. The one good thing about suspension seat posts is that they are easy to replace with a rigid one, just not a fan of them.

The 7300 is a solid bike that you can put front and rear racks on and ride all over with, a good do it all-er. The adjustable stem is nice as you can fine tune your comfort level up front. If its comfortable for you it seems like it would be a good choice for path riding and heck, you may really like the suspension seat post. I don't believe you need a mountain bike for that kind of riding, but if you are planning on going singletracking in the future and want to take on tougher trails than maintained paths, a mountain bike would surely be helpful.
RJM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-10, 08:41 PM   #3
Ward H
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I went back and forth on the FX and 7000 series last month. I was moving up from a Navigator.
My type of riding is mostly street and paved bike paths but I still wanted to be able to handle bumps, curbs, etc.
I really liked the FX after an adjustable stem was put on for the test ride but it was noticably rougher riding than the 7200. I was worried about getting used to the rougher ride. The LBS also told me that the tire and wheel set were much lighter and would not take the abuse the wheel set of the 7000 series would take.
Plus I needed the more upright position of the 7000 series due to being out of shape. I did not need the full suspension of the 7200 though, so I went with the 2010 7300. The wider tires, seat suspension and 1/2" stem suspension helped to smooth out the ride while not sacrificing weight and a long suspension I knew I did not need.
The upgrade in frame, same material as the FX BTW, and components over the 7200 made the 7300 worth the extra money.
I am really glad I did not wait for the 2011s if they now have the same suspension forks as the 7200. Did they down grade any other components?

Today I rode 20.6 miles, the longest ride I have ever done and I only stopped due to running out of time. I have 118 miles on it in 4 weeks and I love it, most fun I have ever had on a bike.
Ward H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-10, 11:03 AM   #4
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There's nothing like a new bike, but then there's nothing like classic steel. Unless the 820s frame and fork are trashed you may derive great satisfaction by giving it a complete updating. That said, the 7300 is a nice bike and you will not regret lighter weight. Four pounds is not insignificant especially if your local terrain tends towards hilly.
cyclistbrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-10, 06:34 PM   #5
Senior Member
big_al's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: fort lauderdale florida
Bikes: Trek 7.7 and Trek superfly Al Elite
Posts: 155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I bought my 7200 about four months ago brand new for 425.00 so I jumped on it as I have bought several bikes from this store. If i had to do it again i would had gone with a 7500 only because of the components are a huge improvement. I love my bike and dont regret it one bit though specially for the price.
big_al is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:07 PM.

  • Ask a Question
    get answers from real people!
Click to start entering your question.