trek or avalanche
 

hello all
i am looking to change my rather tired old mountain bike, and so far have
seen an avalanche 2 for £385 and a trek6000 for £499 in the local bike
shops. Both these look fine to me but i was wondering what more experienced
heads on here might think.Is there £100 worth of difference in the two?

usually only do 20-25 miles per week of mixed on and off road,though hold
ambition to do c to c one day

any help or opinions much appreciated

thanks

trek or avalanche
 

On 13 Jun, 07:23, "mart99" wrote:
hello all
i am looking to change my rather tired old mountain bike, and so far have
seen an avalanche 2 for £385 and a trek6000 for £499 in the local bike
shops. Both these look fine to me but i was wondering what more experienced
heads on here might think.Is there £100 worth of difference in the two?

usually only do 20-25 miles per week of mixed on and off road,though hold
ambition to do c to c one day

any help or opinions much appreciated

thanks

Just looking at the specs I can't see £100 worth of difference
either. My other half has an Avalanche 1.0 (which I guess is pretty
similar to the 2.0 but with slightly posher bits on) and it is a
brilliant bike. It has that "just feels right" factor. However, as
you've seen them both in local shops I suggest you arrange a decent
test ride on each before making up your mind, you might well find the
Trek fits or suits you better.

trek or avalanche
 

mart99 writtificated

hello all
i am looking to change my rather tired old mountain bike, and so far
have seen an avalanche 2 for £385 and a trek6000 for £499 in the local
bike shops. Both these look fine to me but i was wondering what more
experienced heads on here might think.Is there £100 worth of
difference in the two?

usually only do 20-25 miles per week of mixed on and off road,though
hold ambition to do c to c one day

any help or opinions much appreciated

The Trek seems to have the lighter frame (double butted rather than single
butted), better brakes, gears (Deore rear mech AND shifters give it 9 speed
against the GT's hobbled 8 speed Deore/Alivio setup). The Trek will prolly
have better hubs, headset etc too.

More importantly the Trek has mountings for a rack. This'll be essential
for the coast to coast[1].

What really counts is how the bike fits you. Pop along for a test ride.
Get the bikes tyres pumped up, saddle adjusted to fit you etc and go off
for a good 10 minutes on each. I suspect both have a pretty sporty
geometry so will suit a fast rider. If you're more of a trekking cyclist
then a less sporty geometry might suit better - handlebars higher than the
saddle. This will give a more relaxed riding position.


[1] Well, not essential but will make things sooo much more pleasant than
using a sweaty rucksack you'd be crazy not to sling everything in a
pannier.