|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Compare Cannondale RW 1000 vs. Trek 7700
Hi Folks,
I'm looking to upgrade to one of these bikes. I would be doing my first century on this. I like these hybrids because I think the geometry and handlebar setups are more comfortable for me. Could somebody help me to compare the components between these two bikes? http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/04/c...del-4HS1Y.html http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2004/citybike/7700.jsp I like the suspension on the Cannondale, but I would want to switch it out for a HeadShok Super Fatty Ultra DL so I could lock it out on the fly (I don't think the HeadShok Slice Ultra does that). I mostly ride on the road, but I think I want the front suspension. I think that the gearing is about the same on both since one has a larger 3-gear front chainring but lesser range in the rear cassette and vise vera on the other. Is this a fair assessment? I think I like the Trek better except for the fact that you can't lock out the front suspension. Any opinions about these component sets or the bikes in general? Thanks, Warren |
Ads |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Compare Cannondale RW 1000 vs. Trek 7700
David Kerber wrote in message ...
In article , says... Hi Folks, I'm looking to upgrade to one of these bikes. I would be doing my first century on this. I like these hybrids because I think the geometry and handlebar setups are more comfortable for me. Could somebody help me to compare the components between these two bikes? http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/04/c...del-4HS1Y.html http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2004/citybike/7700.jsp I like the suspension on the Cannondale, but I would want to switch it out for a HeadShok Super Fatty Ultra DL so I could lock it out on the fly (I don't think the HeadShok Slice Ultra does that). I mostly ride on the road, but I think I want the front suspension. Why, if you keep it on the road? Or do you occasionally go on moderately rough trails as well? I think that the gearing is about the same on both since one has a larger 3-gear front chainring but lesser range in the rear cassette and vise vera on the other. Is this a fair assessment? No. They both have about the same high gear, but the Trek's granny is MUCH lower: a 28x34, vs a 30x26. That may not seem like a lot of difference, but believe me, it is if you have many steep hills, or take it off road. The Trek also has 35mm tires, vs 25 for the C-dale. I think I like the Trek better except for the fact that you can't lock out the front suspension. Any opinions about these component sets or the bikes in general? The Trek is much more off-road oriented, with its lower gearing and much larger tires. With the fat tires, you probably wouldn't need the front susp at all, unless you are taking it on trails. Thanks David. The reason for the suspension is that the roads are terrible around here (Long Island, NY) and I want a more rugged bike than what I see as a traditional road bike with skinny rims and a slight frame. Even if it cost me a little speed. I have a 15 year old Giant Iguana that I use on tours now and there's no suspension, but I can keep pace with the B riders at a solid 13-14 mph avs. I just want to move into something a little better for the road, but I don't want the skinny tires and drop handle bars. I'm always seeing the guys who race past me on their high-end road bikes a few miles futher doen the road changing their flats where I rarely get a flat. As for the drop bars, I'm actually used to a Brahma bar which looks like a trial bar. I gives me a wider grip with lots of different hand positions and plenty of control. I'm just not a "tucked in" as someone on a traditional road bike. Thanks for the advice. Warren |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Compare Cannondale RW 1000 vs. Trek 7700
"Warren Ginn" wrote in message om... David Kerber wrote in message ... In article , says... Hi Folks, I'm looking to upgrade to one of these bikes. I would be doing my first century on this. I like these hybrids because I think the geometry and handlebar setups are more comfortable for me. Could somebody help me to compare the components between these two bikes? http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/04/c...del-4HS1Y.html http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2004/citybike/7700.jsp I like the suspension on the Cannondale, but I would want to switch it out for a HeadShok Super Fatty Ultra DL so I could lock it out on the fly (I don't think the HeadShok Slice Ultra does that). I mostly ride on the road, but I think I want the front suspension. Why, if you keep it on the road? Or do you occasionally go on moderately rough trails as well? I think that the gearing is about the same on both since one has a larger 3-gear front chainring but lesser range in the rear cassette and vise vera on the other. Is this a fair assessment? No. They both have about the same high gear, but the Trek's granny is MUCH lower: a 28x34, vs a 30x26. That may not seem like a lot of difference, but believe me, it is if you have many steep hills, or take it off road. The Trek also has 35mm tires, vs 25 for the C-dale. I think I like the Trek better except for the fact that you can't lock out the front suspension. Any opinions about these component sets or the bikes in general? The Trek is much more off-road oriented, with its lower gearing and much larger tires. With the fat tires, you probably wouldn't need the front susp at all, unless you are taking it on trails. Thanks David. The reason for the suspension is that the roads are terrible around here (Long Island, NY) and I want a more rugged bike than what I see as a traditional road bike with skinny rims and a slight frame. Even if it cost me a little speed. I have a 15 year old Giant Iguana that I use on tours now and there's no suspension, but I can keep pace with the B riders at a solid 13-14 mph avs. I just want to move into something a little better for the road, but I don't want the skinny tires and drop handle bars. I'm always seeing the guys who race past me on their high-end road bikes a few miles futher doen the road changing their flats where I rarely get a flat. As for the drop bars, I'm actually used to a Brahma bar which looks like a trial bar. I gives me a wider grip with lots of different hand positions and plenty of control. I'm just not a "tucked in" as someone on a traditional road bike. Warren, what you need is either a touring bike or a cyclocross bike. Why? Because they do everything you want them to do. They have enough clearance for big tires (knobbies, slicks, or city tread). They use drop handlebars, which gives you much better top speeds (try 'em and you'll see). Touring and cyclocross bikes are very similar, in many ways, which is why I group them together. However, some "CX" (cyclocross) bikes are very race-specific. The touring bike will have a longer frame, to give your heels clearance when the rear rack is fully loaded up with panniers. It will have "slack" geometry, which gives a stable "all day" ride quality. Cyclocross bikes will probably have 32c knobby tires, and a fairly racy geometry. They'll feel more like a road-racing bike; but may also have rack and fender mounts (which I highly recommend for added versatility and all-weather commuting, training, etc.) Many different brands make touring and/or cyclocross bikes, including Fuji, Giant, Cannondale, Trek, Specialized and others. Prices are all over the map; but you should be able to find a good one for around $1,000. The Trek 520 touring is a classic, as is the Fuji Touring bike. If you want something lighter, a cyclocross bike might be a better choice. Test ride a few, and see if they work for you. Cheers, Rocketman |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Compare Cannondale RW 1000 vs. Trek 7700
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Compare Cannondale RW 1000 vs. Trek 7700
"Rocketman" wrote in message news:tpnfc.135872$gA5.1600658@attbi_s03...
"Warren Ginn" wrote in message om... David Kerber wrote in message ... In article , says... Hi Folks, I'm looking to upgrade to one of these bikes. I would be doing my first century on this. I like these hybrids because I think the geometry and handlebar setups are more comfortable for me. Could somebody help me to compare the components between these two bikes? http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/04/c...del-4HS1Y.html http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2004/citybike/7700.jsp I like the suspension on the Cannondale, but I would want to switch it out for a HeadShok Super Fatty Ultra DL so I could lock it out on the fly (I don't think the HeadShok Slice Ultra does that). I mostly ride on the road, but I think I want the front suspension. Why, if you keep it on the road? Or do you occasionally go on moderately rough trails as well? I think that the gearing is about the same on both since one has a larger 3-gear front chainring but lesser range in the rear cassette and vise vera on the other. Is this a fair assessment? No. They both have about the same high gear, but the Trek's granny is MUCH lower: a 28x34, vs a 30x26. That may not seem like a lot of difference, but believe me, it is if you have many steep hills, or take it off road. The Trek also has 35mm tires, vs 25 for the C-dale. I think I like the Trek better except for the fact that you can't lock out the front suspension. Any opinions about these component sets or the bikes in general? The Trek is much more off-road oriented, with its lower gearing and much larger tires. With the fat tires, you probably wouldn't need the front susp at all, unless you are taking it on trails. Thanks David. The reason for the suspension is that the roads are terrible around here (Long Island, NY) and I want a more rugged bike than what I see as a traditional road bike with skinny rims and a slight frame. Even if it cost me a little speed. I have a 15 year old Giant Iguana that I use on tours now and there's no suspension, but I can keep pace with the B riders at a solid 13-14 mph avs. I just want to move into something a little better for the road, but I don't want the skinny tires and drop handle bars. I'm always seeing the guys who race past me on their high-end road bikes a few miles futher doen the road changing their flats where I rarely get a flat. As for the drop bars, I'm actually used to a Brahma bar which looks like a trial bar. I gives me a wider grip with lots of different hand positions and plenty of control. I'm just not a "tucked in" as someone on a traditional road bike. Warren, what you need is either a touring bike or a cyclocross bike. Why? Because they do everything you want them to do. They have enough clearance for big tires (knobbies, slicks, or city tread). They use drop handlebars, which gives you much better top speeds (try 'em and you'll see). Touring and cyclocross bikes are very similar, in many ways, which is why I group them together. However, some "CX" (cyclocross) bikes are very race-specific. The touring bike will have a longer frame, to give your heels clearance when the rear rack is fully loaded up with panniers. It will have "slack" geometry, which gives a stable "all day" ride quality. Cyclocross bikes will probably have 32c knobby tires, and a fairly racy geometry. They'll feel more like a road-racing bike; but may also have rack and fender mounts (which I highly recommend for added versatility and all-weather commuting, training, etc.) Many different brands make touring and/or cyclocross bikes, including Fuji, Giant, Cannondale, Trek, Specialized and others. Prices are all over the map; but you should be able to find a good one for around $1,000. The Trek 520 touring is a classic, as is the Fuji Touring bike. If you want something lighter, a cyclocross bike might be a better choice. Test ride a few, and see if they work for you. Cheers, Rocketman Thanks, Rocketman. I'll take a look. Is speed and wind resistance the only reason to use drop bars? My perception is that the weight distribution for drop bars is like you're doing "push-ups" while riding whereas using bars that place more weight on the seat like the ones I use keep me from placing too much stress on my shoulders in exchange for possibly a sore butt on long rides. Is this your impression? Warren |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Compare Cannondale RW 1000 vs. Trek 7700
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Compare Cannondale RW 1000 vs. Trek 7700
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Compare Cannondale RW 1000 vs. Trek 7700
"Warren Ginn" wrote in message
om... Hi Folks, I'm looking to upgrade to one of these bikes. I would be doing my first century on this. I like these hybrids because I think the geometry and handlebar setups are more comfortable for me. IMVAIO these are not good choices for a century ride. There are several road bikes available with the handlebar set-ups that would meet your desires. In the $1000 range, look at the Trek-Lemond Wayzata, and the Motobecane Cafe Noir. Both of these bicycles have chro-moly frames, while both of the models you mentioned are aluminum. Even the Motobocane Café Latte is a better choice than the Trek or Cannondale. You may want to add a headset extender (or Speedlifter), for a more upright position. Suspension is unnecessary on road bikes, especially on century rides. Personally, I'd spend the $1000 on one Motobocane Café Latte ($550) or Bianchi Brava ($510), and one KHS Crest ST 2003 ($400). You'll get two mid-range bicycles, each well-suited to its particular purpose, rather than one hybrid which is not well suited for either century rides or for off-road. Steve http://nordicgroup.us/bikerec/ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Compare Cannondale RW 1000 vs. Trek 7700
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Trek 2300 or Cannondale R1000 or other? | Roger W | General | 22 | March 26th 04 12:44 AM |
trek 7500 or Cannondale 400 | zfc6e | General | 3 | March 16th 04 09:01 PM |
opinions? - Trek 1000 | Dhananjay Adhikari | General | 16 | February 19th 04 05:21 PM |
trek 1000 vs cannondale R400 Triple | mark watkins | General | 2 | September 12th 03 06:49 PM |
Trek 1000 vs. 1000C | Preston Crawford | General | 5 | August 12th 03 04:49 AM |