I'm not really comprehending what your saying. What exactly do you find comical about this set up and how does it look like an old Volvo again?

Why is the TT curved on the blue one?

Both are not hot, but for different reasons.

I didn't realize it until he mentioned it, but I'm assuming he means the "subdued" navy blue paint and matte wheels scheme. Nonetheless, that gets a hot from me (and I don't even like Volvo's!)

I think it's because the angle of which the photo was taken. The camera position is low and shooting up towards the top tube, where the blue one is more straight profile

Yes, that's the main thing. The first impression is "subdued" and "safe".
more significant than the color, though, is the way everything is relatively smooth and integrated. The brakes and seatpost, for example, seem to be bright alloy only because someone thought the trim should be chrome, not because those parts should have an identity of their own: they seem formally subservient to the whole. The stem also seems designed specifically for that bike.
The thing is, as much as we've come to expect this kind of total design in automobiles, it's hardly expected with bicycles.
It's only comical to the extent that it reminds me so much of a car. As a design exercise, though, I'd give it a thumbs up. (But not a hot)

So is the tube curved or flat?

Sloped top tube. (Curved)

It is an integrated 1 piece stem/handlebar meant specifically for this bike. All the cables go through the bar and stem, into the top tube to its location.

My problem with that blue Madone is that it's an absolutely amazing bike and I think it's really unique and looks great, but man... if I owned that thing, I'd feel obligated to be blazingly fast all the time because that thing has "PRO RACE RIG" written all over it and to ride it slowly or be at the back of any group would be doing it a disservice.

Hopefully your buddy that owns it is lapping Cat 1 fields and turning down contract offers from UCI teams to continue saving abused puppies or something.

Holy cow that is hot! I would be terrified of chipping that paint... not usually something I worry about, but that is seriously unique! Bravo.

He is coming up in his field. He is just am instagram friend, not someone I ride with. No way I could hang. He won his first Cat 1 race by a large margin the first time he raced on this bike. Here is a photo of his finish...

what's his IG name?

Trek has 2 different frames (fit) for each road model.

The Blue Madone has a H1 frame profile. It has a shorter headtube for more agressive and aero position. So the TT was designed to curve down because of the shorter head tube.

The pink one has a H2 frame profile with longer head tube and thus a straight TT.

Turbomate

thanks, always looking for good Bike IG threads

Check out my page if you get around to it. "Nickarend"

will do. I'm therealdougphoto

GoPro or it didn't happen.

I'm not really concerned if it did or didn't really happen. I'm just going off of what he posts. Always has to be a crowd of doubters though, doesn't there?

Color me impressed. Bike = earned if you are winning at that level in a competitive region.

I think he is from Sydney Australia.

Dan, I have to say I agree with you on about 99% of your posts, but I think the whole "earning" the bike by competing is crap. Between my components, wheels, and frame, my bike is over $10k new. I don't race nor do I have much desire to. Does this mean my bike isn't earned? Sorry, but **** that!

Ok, I agree and I should clarify. I don't begrudge anyone else the need to "earn" something when a bike is clearly expensive. I was more thinking of how I personally would feel owning that particular bike, which I really like seeing as I already have the bottom of the barrel bike from that line. To me, it is an exact copy of what someone like Cancellara is riding, and I'd feel slightly bashful about showing up at a cat 4 race on that bike. If someone else does, good for them, it's just a personal feeling and I was projecting when I said "earned" for that guy because he's doing exactly what I'd like to do on that bike- gapping high caliber fields at the finish.

It's like pro team kit. Some of my best buddies ride in it all the time and I don't care in the least, but I personally wouldn't wear it out and about. Definitely don't need to open that can of worms on the 41, though.

Since all the main characters are here, I have always wondered: I assume most people can tell aesthetically what bike is good looking and which look ugly/ not as "clean". One friend told me " wow, that bike looks clean" when comparing an obviously better set up bike/ more expensive compared to a standard setup. etc. If you spend $10,000 on a bike, how likely would it be for it to be ugly compared to a cheaper bike? It probably has good looking carbon wheels and matching bottle cages + good looking stem+handlebar setup and agreeable color matching throughout. I feel like anyone with a decent eye for looks and design can not **** up a bike when they spend so much on a bike. So how much of the "hotrnot" is just on how expensive the bike is?

Ok, I'm back to agreeing with you! It's those damn 80mm carbon wheels that make it look so serious.

This is a difficult question and it's fair to say that more money can equal more "hot" votes, but there are plenty of hot bikes out there that don't cost a fortune. I think it's more about setting up the bike in a visually pleasing manner.

I mean, this LOOK 795 is rocking some badass components and $4000 wheels but I just can't get into the shape of the frame.


Meanwhile, this CAAD 10 is an affordable frame rocking affordable components but is put together in a manner that is fairly subtle but has a bit of flash to set itself apart from the rest of the pack. I dig that.


For the most part, it's all subjective.