Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

New here, trying to understand Trek's Aluminum frames

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

New here, trying to understand Trek's Aluminum frames

Old 07-26-10, 07:13 AM
  #1  
derek.fulmer
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
derek.fulmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
New here, trying to understand Trek's Aluminum frames

Hi all,

I recently put a 2011 1.5 on lay away. I contacted Trek via email to see what frame it was using and they verified that the 2011's are still using the Alpha White frames. This is my first road bike and wanted a good bike to get into riding and didn't want to spend over a thousand dollars. I know that for a few hundred more, I could have bought a 2.1 or 2.3.

My question is this - Are the Alpha White frames a lesser quality frame than the Alpha Black? I know they are both made from 6000 series aluminum, so must similar to some extent. However, the FX series for example use the Alpha Black frames on their lower and even middle and upper end models for half the price of my 1.5.

I'm confused as to the quality of the Alpha White frames against their other (alpha black and alpha red) frames.
derek.fulmer is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 07:17 AM
  #2  
tsohg
Senior Member
 
tsohg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
In 2009, it seemed that the main differences were shaping of the tubes (2.1 and 2.3 were less tubular, more hydroformed maybe), the black frames had nicer cosmetic welds, and back then the black frames had carbon seat stays.
tsohg is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 07:20 AM
  #3  
derek.fulmer
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
derek.fulmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Yeah, Trek says the black were utilized for "hydroforming." I did extensive research for a few months before settling on a brand and a model. I just want to be sure I'm getting a quality bike with a quality frame.
derek.fulmer is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 08:45 AM
  #4  
sirious94
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 697
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Did you miss the CAAD9?
sirious94 is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 08:55 AM
  #5  
derek.fulmer
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
derek.fulmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
No, I looked at the CAAD9. I didn't want to spend more than a grand on a bike and the 1.5 was $999 plus tax.
derek.fulmer is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 09:07 AM
  #6  
derek.fulmer
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
derek.fulmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Have been doing more research these past few days and I'm considering having my LBS order a 2.1 for me, it's only 3 or 400 $ extra.
derek.fulmer is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 09:34 AM
  #7  
tsohg
Senior Member
 
tsohg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Fit and groupset are probably more important the the vagaries of frame materials at this price point (or any for that matter ).
tsohg is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 09:43 AM
  #8  
derek.fulmer
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
derek.fulmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The extra 3 or 400$ would get me the 105 groupset on the 2.1, which is what I've been told all along to get. I think I'd rather have better components to start.
derek.fulmer is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 10:10 AM
  #9  
superNoid
Senior Member
 
superNoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Anaheim Hills, CA
Posts: 104
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I was in similar shoes but on a smaller budget. I was more torn between 1.1 and a 1.2 but ended going with a Fisher Rail at a discounted price (since the Fisher line is going away and melding directly into Trek), which is about in between a 1.1 and 1.2 as far as specs go. I sat on and wanted a 1.5, then saw the 2.1 and felt the same. I left the store, came back the next day more level headed realizing this was my first real road bike and decided on the Fisher. In 3+ years I'll likely upgrade to something better but thats assuming I'm still very much into the hobby then as I am now.

Ultimately always spending more is going to seem better, but it comes down to needs. If getting the 105s is important (trust me I wish it was for me), then spend the extra few hundred and be completely satisfied with your bike, no buyers remorse. If you're thinking about already regretting a 1.5, my advice is just to get the 2.1 and grin walking out of the LBS. If being practical is more akin, get the 1.5 and perhaps part upgrade 105s over the coming years (even though it may cost more in the long run).
superNoid is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 10:29 AM
  #10  
derek.fulmer
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
derek.fulmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by superNoid
I was in similar shoes but on a smaller budget. I was more torn between 1.1 and a 1.2 but ended going with a Fisher Rail at a discounted price (since the Fisher line is going away and melding directly into Trek), which is about in between a 1.1 and 1.2 as far as specs go. I sat on and wanted a 1.5, then saw the 2.1 and felt the same. I left the store, came back the next day more level headed realizing this was my first real road bike and decided on the Fisher. In 3+ years I'll likely upgrade to something better but thats assuming I'm still very much into the hobby then as I am now.

Ultimately always spending more is going to seem better, but it comes down to needs. If getting the 105s is important (trust me I wish it was for me), then spend the extra few hundred and be completely satisfied with your bike, no buyers remorse. If you're thinking about already regretting a 1.5, my advice is just to get the 2.1 and grin walking out of the LBS. If being practical is more akin, get the 1.5 and perhaps part upgrade 105s over the coming years (even though it may cost more in the long run).
I have to agree with you. I totally fell in love the 1.5, however, there were several things that the 2.1 has that the 1.5 does not. The 105 groupset is incredibly smooth and worthwhile. I was told by my LBS that upgrading to 105 by itself is about a grand.
derek.fulmer is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 10:31 AM
  #11  
intence
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Not to knock Trek, but if you're looking for value, i'd suspect there are better deals out there. There's nothing special or magical about almost any entry level bike, they mostly all use similar aluminum frames, and similar components. There's nothing wrong with the Trek, but why not ride both bikes (in the 2010 models). If you can't tell a different i'm sure it would be fine.
intence is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 10:33 AM
  #12  
CCrew
Older than dirt
 
CCrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Winchester, VA
Posts: 5,342

Bikes: Too darn many.. latest count is 11

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Trek has three frame levels:
White
Black
Red

White is heavier tube and a different alloy than Black both are 6000 series, but different tubing. White is a much cheaper and heavier frame and reserved for their low end.

FX uses the White frame now at the 7.1 level. ie: bottom of the line. Used to be at the 7.2 level.

Best bang for the buck in the Trek line is actually the 2.1

Last edited by CCrew; 07-26-10 at 10:37 AM.
CCrew is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 10:35 AM
  #13  
derek.fulmer
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
derek.fulmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by intence
Not to knock Trek, but if you're looking for value, i'd suspect there are better deals out there. There's nothing special or magical about almost any entry level bike, they mostly all use similar aluminum frames, and similar components. There's nothing wrong with the Trek, but why not ride both bikes (in the 2010 models). If you can't tell a different i'm sure it would be fine.
There are definitely great brands out there. I checked out Specialized, Cannondale, and Felt to name a few. However, my LBS mainly sells Trek and they've given me the best service during the whole process of choosing the right bike, getting fitted, etc. They also have great freebies if you buy through them ie- free service packages, discounts on accessories and clothing, etc. I've sat on a few different brands and models and for the time being, Trek just suits me the best.
derek.fulmer is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
novecho_delta
Mountain Biking
4
02-03-19 07:59 AM
sigg.switz
Road Cycling
54
10-05-17 10:10 PM
Ferrino
Road Cycling
25
05-02-16 04:35 PM
RamirAngeles
Road Cycling
12
04-14-15 09:24 PM
SlimRider
General Cycling Discussion
99
10-07-11 03:39 AM

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.