alpin325

Hey Everyone,

I'm very new to biking and i'm looking at purchasing a new Trek. As a kid I loved biking , but stepped away from the lifestyle for quite awhile. I am 32 and wanting to pick up my old passion for biking. I am torn between the 7.2 or 7.3 Trek. I don't want to buy the 7.2 and regret missing out on some of the features the 7.3 has nor do i want to spend the extra money on the 7.3 if the features are not worth it. Can someone break down what i"ll be missing out on if I go with the 7.2? Thanks.

fairymuff

Basically, the 7.3 has better quality components (in particular derailleurs). There's no real difference in terms of features. If the additional cost of the 7.3 isn't too much of an issue, I'd definitely go for the 7.3. It isn't that much more expensive, particularly when you consider the number of hours you're likely/hopefully going to spend on the bike.

alpin325

Thanks for the reply. I tested out the 7.3 at a LBS and it was very smooth and it seemed pretty fast. I guess due to the lightweight. However i did not get to test out the 7.2.

fairymuff

The 7.3 is a very popular bike, and for good reason. If you can afford it, I'd definitely choose it over the 7.2.

jtaylor2

I'll start off by saying I have a 2012 7.3 FX that just turned over 1000 miles today and I like it. And I have never ridden a 7.2. Trek lists the following as the 7.3 upgrades from the 7.2:

Upgrades from 7.2 FX

IsoZone handlebar and grips
Bontrager Race All-Weather Hard-Case tires
Alloy FX fork
Shimano Deore rear derailleur
Oversized 31.8mm handlebar & stem

Of those I'm not sure I would call the IsoZone handlebar and grips an upgrade because they aren't standard and won't take standard bar end attachments (mirrors, bar ends, etc). Trek has recently came out with adapters that let you put bar ends on, but you still can't use all the standard bar accessories. The tires are nice and have handled bad roads and some packed limestone trails well with no flats, but tires are a maintenance item and you could upgrade them on the 7.2 when they wear out. The alloy fork versus the steel fork I have no idea how much difference that really makes. The big thing for me was the Deore rear derailleur on the 7.3 versus the Alivio on the 7.2. You don't have a location so I can't tell if you will be riding hills or not. If you're going to be riding hills and shifting a lot that will probably be important. Where I used to ride at some years ago it was flat and I would shift maybe once or twice an hour so I didn't care much what kind of derailleur the bike had. Where I ride now is all hills and I shift 20 or 30 times a mile so a better derailleur is important to me now.

Ride them both and see if the fork makes a difference in the ride, and than consider how much you will be riding and shifting and if the upgraded components are worth the $130 price difference.

Jim

godeacs

I'm in the same position as the OP; trying to determine if the extra $120 or so is worth upgrading to the 7.3. Where I live, and where I will be riding, it is pretty flat so I suppose I could get by with the 7.2 and spend the $120 on accessories, etc. Have tested both and can't see much of a difference - both feel and ride great. Bear in mind I haven't ridden a bike regularly in over 25 years....

tsw910

I just went through the same thing a week ago, I went to my LBS with in mind a 7.4/7.5 fx but left the shop with a 7.2fx .. to me, at this moment .. it wasn't worth the extra $$ imo. Since I am starting back into it .. all the bells and whistles meant nothing to me and can I make total use of it? will I notice a difference? i doubt it .. Maybe a few years down the road when I decide to get more serious, then all the other components will matter. BTW .. I love my 7.2fx ! flat black is just sexy!

alpin325

Thats the same thing im struggling with on deciding if its worth the xtra money for a 7.3. I can use the difference on shoes and a helmet. Did you notice a bog difference in ride?

a1penguin

Since you are new to biking, why not try to find something on Craigslist? Once you have six months under your belt, you might decide you would like a road bike instead. You don't mention what kind of riding you anticipate doing. Commuting? Errands? Longer road rides? And if you end up not riding, you won't be one of those bikes for sale on CL.

tsw910

I test rode the 7.2, 7.3 and 7.5 .. honestly .. I really couldn't tell the difference! and my LBS advised me that since you can't tell the difference and notice the difference .. get the 7.2 and if later on you get more serious, get something that is serious and use the 7.2 as a beater bike.

but then again, my point of getting a bike may be different from yours .. so that can change it all up as well! the reason i got my bike is to get more exercise !

Bunnicula

Well, I guess I differ, because I could tell the difference and preferred the 7.3 over the 7.2. Then again, I liked the 7.5 even better. So for me, the better components are worth the extra money.

carta

Similarly as Bunnicula, I fell in love with the FX 7.2. But researching these forums about moving up a notch to the 7.3, I was tempted to try a 7.4 in order to experience the carbon fork. My LBS had a 7.5 on the floor and I really like it, especially the weight difference compared with the 7.2.

But there's some good thinking in these posts about fitting the bike to your current and near-future needs. You don't want a bike that's more capable than you'll ever discover because of the riding you do. For me, I'm finding the 7.5's lightness an encouragement to ride hills and into wind that my old cruiser would discourage me to do. Hard to say if I wouldn't be writing the same thing having just bought the 7.2, as you're contemplating.

Six-Shooter

When I got my 7.3 back in 07' or thereabouts, I tried it and a 7.2. The overall improvement with the 7.3 was instantly noticeable. I'm glad I spent the extra. Years later, I don't even remember--or care about--the exact price difference, but I still get great enjoyment out of the bike

alpin325

Thank you all for the replies. I will be using the bike for fitness/getting in road riding shape. I had another question though. Would any of you prefer the cannondale quick5 over the trek 7.3? Just one more option before i pull the trigger. Thanks.

mac61

I was in your shoes back in May - went in looking at the 7.2 -- rode out on a 7.3 and never looked back. Now 750 miles later i made the right choice -- go with the 7.3

richard4993

I rode a 7.2 around the block once and I enjoyed riding it alot to the point where I'm thinking of getting a higher up FX model to ride a century with next summer. I might pick up a used one as my commuter as well if the price is right and and get rid of the 7200. I have only rode a Cannondale once and it was old and beat up and I have no idea how it made it a mile so i can't say anything about Cannondale.

a1penguin

The 7.3 has higher model derailleurs. The gearing is identical and both have 32mm tires. I don't know how weights compare; scumbag bike manufacturers refuse to provide weights. Brakes look pretty similar. The top bar on the Trek looks flatter. The only size adjustments are seat height and stem. Try them both :-) You might find that one geometry feels a lot better to you.

Price difference (MSRP) is $120. Personally, I think better derailleurs might be worth the extra $; those have moving parts and get used a lot. The Trek dealers in my area seem to sell Treks below MSRP (10% on the 7.5). If you like haggling, perhaps you can get a deal :-) Or a 2011 model.

richard4993

The 7.2 actually has 700x35 tires whereas the 7.3 has the 32's.

alpin325

I went by another lbs today to take a look at a cannondale,and they had a quick 4 on the floor. Man this bike looks fantastic! The carbon fork, color scheme, and wheels are very well put together. The bike also seemed a bit lighter than the trek(carbon fork I assume). I test rode the bike and I am sold. Im gonna pull the trigger nxt week. I have to get a bike rack first.

zerogravity

Did you try the 7.5? Seems like that is the bike you are aiming towards if you wanted a lighter bike with Carbon fork...i think it would be better to compare bikes with similar components to make a better choice but then again, if you are sold on the canondale, then congrats on your search.

alpin325

You're absolutely correct about comparing similar bikes, but i love that cannondale! Thanks for the response.

SlimRider

Good Choice.

The Cannondales are phenomenal bikes!

richard4993

I've always been a Trek guy but I do have to say that the current Quick models are some nice looking bikes.

alpin325

Thats interesting, youre the first person (i have seen) praise cannondale quick bikes. I was getting the vibe that everyone loves Trek more.

bikejrff

My 2009 Quick 1 w/Ultegra, Alum Frame Carbon Fork & rear stays blows away my brother's 2011 Trek FX 7.6. We think the Quick is more of a road bike, in the geometry and in the gearing compared to his FX 7.6. I've got 4700 miles on my Quick, never had one issue. Great bike.