Want to buy road bike - head spinning.

I could appreciate some guidance on purchasing a new road bicycle.

I am attempting to find a suitable road bike for serious fitness riding
(soon to be ex-runner 50 to 60 miles running per week). I have no plans
to race, but could imagine doing 1 or 2 centuries per year.

I went to my Trek dealer and my head started to spin.

I looked at a Trek 1000, 1500, and 2100. I left very confused. Any of
these bikes are vastly superior to my deceased 1980's schwinn 10-speed.
From that perspective the Trek 1000 would be the nicest bike that I
would have owned. On the other hand, I really don't want to buy it and
find out in a year that I should have bought the 2100.

My gut feeling is that the 1000 series should contain a bike that would
work well for my purposes.

I would appreciate input from anyone who has been in a similar situation.

Thanks,

Greg

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:01:20 -0500, Local wrote:

I would appreciate input from anyone who has been in a similar situation.

Thanks,

Greg

Test rides, test rides, test rides! Go to different dealers and try
different bikes, different brands. Also think about 'shopping' for a
bike shop. Sounds like you are going to be making changes and buying
new equipment (if only shorts, etc.) over the next year, so find a
dealer that you are comfortable with.

http://www.chainreactionbicycles.com...etestrides.htm

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/fitting.htm

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-sizing.html

Local wrote:
I looked at a Trek 1000, 1500, and 2100.

i vote 1500.

well, actually i vote 5200..

the delta between the 1000 and 1500 is in better components, wheels and
a carbon fork (notably 105 shifters over sora). the delta between the 1500
and 2100 seems to be mostly in the frame (carbon seat stays, prob'ly not
worth it).
--
david reuteler

Local wrote in news:spam-88F83F.21011922072004
@corp.supernews.com:
I am attempting to find a suitable road bike for serious fitness riding
(soon to be ex-runner 50 to 60 miles running per week). I have no plans
to race, but could imagine doing 1 or 2 centuries per year.

I went to my Trek dealer and my head started to spin.

I looked at a Trek 1000, 1500, and 2100.

Any of those bikes will be suitable for 2 centuries a year. The better ones
will be slightly faster on very hilly rides. All should be very durable if
maintained properly.

In article , Ken
wrote:

Any of those bikes will be suitable for 2 centuries a year. The better ones
will be slightly faster on very hilly rides. All should be very durable if
maintained properly.

Thanks for the input, Ken.

In article ,
David Reuteler wrote:


well, actually i vote 5200..

hehe...

the delta between the 1000 and 1500 is in better components, wheels and
a carbon fork (notably 105 shifters over sora). the delta between the 1500
and 2100 seems to be mostly in the frame (carbon seat stays, prob'ly not
worth it).

David, thanks for the advice. I find that the most confusing aspect of
making this selection is knowing which deltas are important. With no
experience, it is hard for me to tell if an upgraded component like a
seat stem is a big deal or not.

So, I end up feeling like I am guessing in the end.

Thanks, Dan. Good links.

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:01:20 -0500, Local wrote:

I looked at a Trek 1000, 1500, and 2100. I left very confused.

Take your time, read about them, test ride, check out other brand name bikes, find one
that fits your goals and body.


---
"BitwiseBob" - Bob Anderson
Eugene Oregon

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:59:26 -0700, Bob Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:01:20 -0500, Local wrote:

I looked at a Trek 1000, 1500, and 2100. I left very confused.

Take your time, read about them, test ride, check out other brand name bikes, find one
that fits your goals and body.


---
"BitwiseBob" - Bob Anderson
Eugene Oregon

For the more 'mature' rider, you might even look at the 1800C. It has
nice components and less severe angle from seat to drops, plus brake
levers for the straight bar section.

-B

Local Wrote:

I am attempting to find a suitable road bike for serious fitness
riding
(soon to be ex-runner 50 to 60 miles running per week). I have no
plans
to race, but could imagine doing 1 or 2 centuries per year.



Based on the fact that you logged 50 - 60 miles running a week, I would
guess you would log around 150 miles on the bike assuming you keep
dedicating the same amount of time. With that in mind, you should get
a bike with Ultegra components. They are going to hold up to your
increased usage the best. If you were interested in racing, then I
would suggest Dura Ace, but not. 105 components are good but they will
not hold calibration as long as Ultegra and this will cause sloppier
shifting over time and require more maintenance.

That means that the lowest Trek bike you should be looking at is the
2300, which rules out your three choices. Also keep in mind that Trek
bikes have a name brand premium price built into them and cost more
than other bikes of the same quality. Look around at other brands
(such as Felt, Fuji and Jamis for example) and look for end of season
sales comming in the next month or so to get the best overall bang for
the buck.

I got my Jamis Ultegra bike for less than a 105 bike because I bought
it as the new year models were comming out.


--
jitteringjr