Nato10207

I am switching from touring to Racing and i want to get a lightweight bike that is dependable. These were the two I am looking at but if anybody has any other suggestions im open.

SJK

Trust me, buy full carbon and you won't have to buy another bike for some time.

timwat

I test rode both, for me the TCR composite frame was hands down a better choice and the reason I own one rather than the 2300. But the Trek's an attractive bike and a great ride if you're looking for Al.

webist

I like the Giant brand, even though I'm on a Specialized now. I've never ridden a Trek.

Waldo

If you want a lightweight bike, why are you looking at a 2300?
The Giant is a better bike to me, but the fit is one area of concern.

joop

You don't consider the 2300 light? The one I used to own was pretty damn light.

timwat

I was thinking the same thing. Honestly though, Waldo is right that fit is something to consider. Trek is traditional geometry, but seemed to run a tad small to me. Giant TCR is compact geometry, if you fit it, it's great but some folks are in the cracks between their s/m/l grid.

Waldo

Certainly not. 19+ pounds is pretty lame for a bike with the "miracle" ZR9000 alloy, particularly when you start looking at bikes like Felt and others. That said, weight is a pretty marginal consideration to me but obviously of concern to the original poster.

ShinyBaldy

Trek's allum alloy bikes aren't anything to brag about with the compeition that is out there...

Giant's alloy frames are lighter and cheaper too, with far more sophisticated tube shaping and design than the straight tubing/cut/weld/stick a generic composite seatstay... good pick for crash-replaceable frame.

badsac

Depends what year the giant is. I know a fella (6 ft 4 which could have something to do with it) who made Giant refund him the purchase price on his 04 Giant TCR 2 Composite because it was a head shaking deathtrap going downhill on the roads around here. I was suprised he got his money back as well, but I guess he must have been a persistent bugger. He's riding a Specialized Roubaix Comp now btw. That thing certainly isn't going to slap on him.

DigitalRJH

Not this year's Trek 2300, if it was an 04 I'd consder it. Had better parts (wheels) in 04, and was cheaper. Test ride them. You may prefer the feel of one over the other. If you buy the 2300, I'd suggest an upgrade to the Race Lite wheels, if you do plan on racing. If you get the Giant, I'd also upgrade the wheels.

mtnroads

Most important is what fits and feels comfortable to you when you ride it - I happen to fit well on Treks, and find them a solid value, so I tend to buy them. I also am touchy about bike handling characteristics. I have had two twitchy handling (and very expensive) roadbikes in the past two years that I sold because I knew was going to get spit off sooner or later on a fast descent. So, I finally took a long test ride on the Trek 2100 and was very impressed - it rode great, climbed great, and didn't try to kill me on a 45mph downhill. Bought it on the spot and very happy with it. It is a joy to ride, half the cost of the bike it replaced, and made in the USA.

Terex

I agree with DigitalRJH, the '03 and '04 were pretty good. The '05 is not a great value. I have an '03 purchased last fall for around $1600 new. Retail price was $1980. At that price, I've been very pleased. It's been rock solid at up to 50 mph downhill on NJ chip&seal. I've got Ultegra pedals, some nifty blue Vredestein tires, and am waiting for a new silver & blue Fizik Arione saddle (Certified OCP Compliant) If you can find an '04 cheap, it would be a good deal if the frame size and ride suits you. Good luck!

rickkko

I don't know about racing a 2300 but I own an '04 54cm that has been very dependable during its first 1400 miles of ~1-hour workout type riding (15 to 20 mile routes).

It was delivered factory stock at 18.5 lbs sans pedals.

..rickko..

chroot

I just recently bought an '04 Trek 2300 for $1499, and couldn't be happier with it. It's a great bike.

- Warren

DigitalRJH

I guess I should mention I ride an 04 2300 Project One. I'm very happy with it. I upgraded the 04 Race Lites to 05 Race X lites and I'm even more happy!!

The TCR 2 rated highly in reviews, Outside magazine gave it the buyers or editors choice award for 05. Although I wouldn't call Outside magazine as big road bike review magazine, but it is a good magazine.

Anyway, like I stated, search for an 04, it will be cheaper, and you get better wheels, a bigger upgrade in my opionion as opposed to the 9 to 10 speed Ultegra upgrade from the 04 to the 05.

But ride them both.

R900

I would ride both and let that be the deciding factor. That said I really like the traditional sized frames over a compact frame (sort of feels like a mountain bike to me), just doesn't seem to handle as well or ride as smooth (based on short test rides). You might also look at Cannondale, the CAAD 8 is really nice.

I guess Trek if I had to pick over the Giant.

John

SJK

That is VERY hard to believe with all the FANTASTIC reviews and the many pros that ride the TCR frame. Oh, and I have one and I find it it steady at downhill speeds.

roadwarrior

Wow...I've sold 20 of those bikes, most of which were special order and did not have a single issue with any of them. About 15 of them are being raced.
But then all the purchasers were able to ride a two wheeler...

I guess the LBS screwed up and forgot the part about no training wheels on these...

the stuff you read out here sometimes....

roadwarrior

The 2300 is really not a racing bike...the TCR is (versus the OCR carbon which is totally diffeent)...yo want a Trek racer, get a Madone. The ZR is not really a high performance frame.

That 700 series TCR frame runs the gamut of components and price from around $1,600 to four grand.

Treak does not do that with the ZR aluminum frame. For a good reason. Nothing wrong with the bike, I've sold many. But not to racers. To guys who want to ride with their buddies, be a little aggressive with the rides, but are mostly looking for a good workout.
Had Trek wanted to make that a more aggressive frame, they could have interlocked the carbon seat stay (a la the Six/13), rather than just sticking it into the aluminum posts. I find the back of the bike real "noodly" when riding it.

steve_wmn

Why aren't you considering the Trek 5000? This is a better bike to compare against the TCR Composite 2. It's full carbon and it's cheaper than the 2300. OK, so it's got a 105 front derailleur and a Bontrager crank. I think it's the best Trek available for the money.

DigitalRJH

Personally, I'd go for better parts over just a carbon frame. That is why in 04 I chose the 2300 over the 5000. The 2300 had better wheels, better drivetrain, better seatpost, and a better fork. Looking at this year's 5000 to 2300 comparison, the 2300 has a better drivetrain, better handlebars, better cassette, etc. I'd much rather have higher end lighter components to race on, over a carbon frame with lower end parts. My 2300 (stock before any upgrades I've given it) would outperform this year's and last year's 5000. Don'y get lured into thinking because it's carbon, it's better, racers still use alloy.

Just a thought.

SJK

Which one weighs more, the 2300 or Giant TCR composite 2? If you really race buy the lighter one. If you are like most of us the slight weight differences won’t matter and fit and frame comfort become more important. I made the mistake of starting out with an Aluminum bike. I hope I can spare others the expensive lesson I had to learn. (it wasn’t a total waste as my AL bike is now my beater/commuter) Again, I would buy the carbon frame, be it Trek or Giant.

roadwarrior

First off, the components on the TCRC2 are pretty much the same as the 5000..pretty much. Except the TCRC2 has the new Ultegra....
The 5000 is the OCLV120 round tube frame that is, basically, 1998 technology. That's why they, Trek, have the Madone. Tuned ride saved weight, the whole deal. They didn't shape all those tubes for no reason.
Last...ALWAYS go frame first. Ride comfort comes from frame and wheels. You can always upgrade components.
BTW...yes, many racers do still use aluminum....Cuenego and half the Lampre team ride CAAD8's, and there are many others who prefer aluminum.
The only reason Trek makes the 5000 is that they need to compete with (and are getting killed by) Giant in the "entry" carbon area. Why buy a frame designed in 1998 for two grand whne yo can buy a better, lighter, and more comforatbale frame for about the same price? You can get a carbon frame for $1,600...which also carries a groupset for four grand.

Giant only makes one other TCR frame, the 800 and you can only get that as the T-Mobile team bike.
Trek wants you to buy a Madone for the high two to low three grand range. For Ultegra.

soccerismylife

I would suggest getting a Trek 2100 (or 2300) instead of a 5000. I tes rode both and if you are seriously thinking of racing, the AL/Carbon frame is much stiffer and responsive, but the Madone is a whole different story. I test rode all three and decided on the 2100 because I didn't have enough money for the Madone. Both of the guys at the trek store said they raced on the 2100 frame with DA 10. Who knows if that is actually the truth though.