About Trek liquids
Hi all, I would like to know the feedback of trek liquid 25/55 owners, and the rest of people, of course :). I’m coming from a hardtail trek 6700 2003 and I would like to upgrade it. 6700 is perfect to climb up, but it’s obviously a little limited when you go down :(. For my week exists around Barcelona (Catalonia, Europe) through Collserola Park 6700 is fine. Tracks are good and you can go down faster, jumping several times. Normally you have two climbs up of about 30 minutes each one, in a typically exist of about 30 km. There are also tracks as in the Trondheim video posted some days ago in the group, but then my first problem is pedals, not the bike (well...) At the weekends I usually go to the Pyrenees, mountains up to 3,000 meters, with climbings up to 4 hours (normally 2 hours), very steep sometimes, where 6700 is perfect, but the problem is going down in terrain tracks with a lot of rocks. I’m looking for a comfortable frame, and trek it’s comfortable enough for me. I need a full suspension bike for recreational, not competition (maybe some one some day). Going down hard, jumping several times, and some technical tracks. I’m thinking in trek Liquid 25 (2500 EUR) or 55 (3500 EUR); or Fuel 95 (3000 EUR). Geometry in Liquids seems to be the same. Although I’ve not been found any official numbers, I think 25 weights about 30 lbs (13.6 kg), and 55 27 lbs (12.25 kg). Am I right? In 25 there are some LX components (I would like to improve them), brakes are different, and front fork is a Manitou Black Elite (25), and Manitou Minute 2 (55). Is it reasonable to pay 1000 EUR more for 3 lbs less, and these better components for my use? Taking in account that it’s a lot of money for me. Another thing that worries me is the behavior of rear shock in climbs. Any comment would be welcome. TIA, -- Gamarús |
On 2004-08-14, Gamarús penned:
Any comment would be welcome. Do you have any stores that will let you rent high-end bikes for a day? It's expensive, but not as expensive as buying a bike that doesn't do what you need it to do. -- monique "Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live." -- Mark Twain |
El Sat, 14 Aug 2004 08:58:28 -0600, Monique Y. Mudama
va escriu Do you have any stores that will let you rent high-end bikes for a day? It's expensive, but not as expensive as buying a bike that doesn't do what you need it to do. In Barcelona, I don't think so. But, I'm thinking in a store that inside it you can ride for a 100 meters or more track, any bike. That could provide you some basic feelings about the bike (basically, comfortability, that it's very important to me), but I'll manage to inform about this. Thanks, Monique. -- Gamarús |
=?utf-8?Q?Gamar=C3=BAs?= said...
Is it reasonable to pay 1000 EUR more for 3 lbs less, and these better components for my use? Taking in account that it’s a lot of money for me. Another thing that worries me is the behavior of rear shock in climbs. Any comment would be welcome. TIA, I don't think the 55 is worth all the extra money. LX works just fine. Both bikes have SPV shocks in the rear which should make them very good climbers, considering the type of bike they are. A Trek Fuel or other XC bike would climb better, but won't be as good on the downhills. Giant, Specialized, Kona and others sell bikes that compete head to head with Trek. I would research all of them. |
Gamarús wrote:
Hi all, I would like to know the feedback of trek liquid 25/55 owners, and the rest of people, of course :). I'm coming from a hardtail trek 6700 2003 and I would like to upgrade it. 6700 is perfect to climb up, but it's obviously a little limited when you go down :(. For my week exists around Barcelona (Catalonia, Europe) through Collserola Park 6700 is fine. Tracks are good and you can go down faster, jumping several times. Normally you have two climbs up of about 30 minutes each one, in a typically exist of about 30 km. There are also tracks as in the Trondheim video posted some days ago in the group, but then my first problem is pedals, not the bike (well...) At the weekends I usually go to the Pyrenees, mountains up to 3,000 meters, with climbings up to 4 hours (normally 2 hours), very steep sometimes, where 6700 is perfect, but the problem is going down in terrain tracks with a lot of rocks. I'm looking for a comfortable frame, and trek it's comfortable enough for me. I need a full suspension bike for recreational, not competition (maybe some one some day). Going down hard, jumping several times, and some technical tracks. I'm thinking in trek Liquid 25 (2500 EUR) or 55 (3500 EUR); or Fuel 95 (3000 EUR). Geometry in Liquids seems to be the same. Although I've not been found any official numbers, I think 25 weights about 30 lbs (13.6 kg), and 55 27 lbs (12.25 kg). Am I right? In 25 there are some LX components (I would like to improve them), brakes are different, and front fork is a Manitou Black Elite (25), and Manitou Minute 2 (55). Is it reasonable to pay 1000 EUR more for 3 lbs less, and these better components for my use? Taking in account that it's a lot of money for me. Another thing that worries me is the behavior of rear shock in climbs. Any comment would be welcome. TIA, -- Gamarús (sigh) Drum roll for Ja Dude! -- - Zilla Cary, NC (Remove XSPAM) |
Gamarús wrote in message news:opscp7l8ijyiboxa@ruc...
Another thing that worries me is the behavior of rear shock in climbs. Ride a hardtail then. JD |
"Gamarús" wrote in message news:opscp7l8ijyiboxa@ruc... Hi all, I would like to know the feedback of trek liquid 25/55 owners, and the rest of people, of course :). I'm looking for a comfortable frame, and trek it's comfortable enough for me. I need a full suspension bike for recreational, not competition (maybe some one some day). Going down hard, jumping several times, and some technical tracks. I'm thinking in trek Liquid 25 (2500 EUR) or 55 (3500 EUR); or Fuel 95 (3000 EUR). Is it reasonable to pay 1000 EUR more for 3 lbs less, and these better components for my use? Taking in account that it's a lot of money for me. Another thing that worries me is the behavior of rear shock in climbs. Any comment would be welcome. TIA, -- Gamarús Gamarus, I bought 2 Trek Liquid 25's back around last Christmas, one for myself and one for my girlfriend. When I bought my Liquid, I was weighing 237 pounds, and needed the 5 inch full suspension to make very rooty trails more comfortable to ride---I believe a rider over 200 pounds "needs" more travel than a 145 pound rider, due to the greater inertial mass. In any event, the Trek Liquid worked perfectly for me, and handled plenty of abuse. I'm now at 203 pounds, and its still a hot ticket for me. I use Panaracer FR 2.4 tires on front and rear, and the bike rips turns better than most of the people that I ride with, can do with typical X-country bikes or Hard tails. Clearly I'm at a small disadvantage when having to rapidly accelerate from a near stop to 10 miles per hour in a few feet, but better technique is preventing most near stops, and when I can "carry" the speed, I don't feel any liability from the extra weight. Even when my body fat hits 8% and I weigh 185 pounds, I will still have an issue with constant re-acceleration if riding terrain that causes this, if the people I am riding with are 150 pound racer types. Since my weight is more of an issue than a few pounds for my bike, picking a bike and tires that can "carry" speed better though turns and technical sections, seems a better way to go. For my girlfriend, the Liquid has been awesome. She a Cat 3 Women's road racer, with few mountain bike skills. She loves mountain biking, but when she comes to a log or big rock, rather than clearing it by lifting the front end, her motus operandi is to ram it at high speed, rarely lightening the front end very much. The Liquid gets her over almost everything, whereas previous mountain bikes she rode ( Cannondale hardtail with Monoshock, and Trek hardtail) would send her over the bars in the same scenarios. The Liquid has made her really like mountain biking, so once her road season is over in the fall, she may actually ride the Liquid enough to learn some techniques :-) As to high speed descending, I have been riding this bike in Florida so far, with the largest vertical descents at Razorback. Others on this list can rate the downhills at Razorback for you, but my description of them is very steep, about 30 to 60 foot lengths, allowing speeds on these downhills over 35 miles per hour. They are littered with rocks and boulder type debris, and most would consider fast descents on these as technical. My Liquid seemed to handle the downhills much better than my friend's Santa Cruz, though this may be partly because I run light Downhill tires, and he rides X-country tires. In any event I rode the downhills much faster than the people I was with, because my bike was far more stable and responsive going very fast over lots of good sized rock and debris. Sudden turns thrown in to the mix, were easy for the liquid, and it tracked like it was made for exactly this type of environment. I'll have it in the North Carolina area soon, where I can ride on some real mountain sized downhills, but for now I feel confident in saying the Liquid is a good bike. Regards, Dan Volker |
El Sat, 14 Aug 2004 19:51:23 GMT, SuperSlinky va
escriu I don't think the 55 is worth all the extra money. LX works just fine. Both bikes have SPV shocks in the rear which should make them very good climbers, considering the type of bike they are. A Trek Fuel or other XC bike would climb better, but won't be as good on the downhills. Giant, Specialized, Kona and others sell bikes that compete head to head with Trek. I would research all of them. Yes, LX really works fine enough. I have LX at my Trek 6700 :). But, Liquid 25 has a mix of LX/XT components and other brands in brakes, and as I'll upgrade to a better bike, I would like a complete XT. No worried about, I think I'll be able to change in the shop. The question is if the frameset is exactly the same in liquid 25 than in Liquid 55. I think is the same material and the same geometry, but I don't know if weights the same or not (any structural change). Anybody knows about it? If the answer is Yes, then there is any complaint, the front fork is the only difference important to me if I change into XT components. If not, well... On the other hand I tested some Kona. Geometry is agressive, and I'm looking for a comfortable enough :). Maybe is the age... Last week, I tested a Specialized Epic in a rocky forest track, and worked really fine compared to my hardtail. But, although geometry is also a little agressive, I read in some magazine that the suspension system is something between Hardtail and All-mountain, beeing in the last not good as a typical all-mountain. However, I'll test inside the shop, before purchasing a Trek, some Kona, Cannondale, Gt, Specialized and some local brand (that are cheaper). I also read, that 2005 Liquids would change slighty the rear suspension system, improving perfomance and travel, and the higher bar would have more sloop, having a more agressive look (I don't know is overall geometry will change). A true redesign of the Liquid's series. In Fuel series also would increase travel's suspension into 100 mm. Regards, -- Gamarús |
"Dan Vo2lker" wrote in message ...
I bought 2 Trek Liquid 25's back around last Christmas, one for myself and one for my girlfriend. When I bought my Liquid, I was weighing 237 pounds, and needed the 5 inch full suspension to make very rooty trails more comfortable to ride--- HAHAHAHA I believe a rider over 200 pounds "needs" more travel than a 145 pound rider, due to the greater inertial mass. Can you say "fallacy"? Nobody *needs* travel, except goobers who are conned by the marketing creeps. In any event, the Trek Liquid worked perfectly for me, and handled plenty of abuse. Yeah, we've seen how "abusive" your trails are. What a laugh...again. snip more non-expert opinion As to high speed descending, I have been riding this bike in Florida snip laughable claims/terrain Tell us all, Vo2lker, how does one descend a molehill? What's the high point in Fla? I'll have it in the North Carolina area soon, where I can ride on some real mountain sized downhills, but for now I feel confident in saying the Liquid is a good bike. A glowing review from someone who doesn't know jack shiite, except the sad little world of Fla "mountain biking". What a joke. JD |
El Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:10:26 -0400, Dan Volker va
escriu (...) Thanks Dan for providing such generous information :). And, what say you about uphills with a Liquid 25? Rear shox moves, bounce? I'm more worried about uphills behaviour, than downhills, as I think you always have to suffer in uphills, and have fun in downhills. I'd prefer less suffer than more fun :). But obviously, I need more fun than a downhill with a hardtail. Best regards, -- Gamarús |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:21 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com