Trek Bicycle Fans - Please Help

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by puma1552, Jun 20, 2016.

  1. puma1552, Jun 20, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2016

    puma1552 macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #1
    So I've decided to pick up an urban/hybrid bike. Going to be doing mostly paved paths, and a little bit of exercise/fitness. I don't want to spend more than $500 max, which puts me squarely in the entry level range, which is fine for my needs.

    I've really got my eye on the Trek Allant 7.2, in Waterloo Blue. Trek lists this as a $600 bike, but my local bike shop sells it new for $480:

    http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/b.../allant/allant-7-2/p/1359000-2016#buying-zone

    [​IMG]

    But as I look online for info on the Allant, I'm also seeing the 7.2 FX pop up a lot. The Trek site lists this as a $490 bike, but I can get it for $450 at the local bike shop, again brand new:

    http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/bikes/city-bikes/fitness-bikes/fx/7-2-fx/p/1323010-2016

    [​IMG]

    The problem is the more I search for info on the Allant, the less info I can find and for some reason the more info I can find on the FX. Clearly the FX is the far more popular bike, but I'm not sure why unless you are strictly looking at manufacturer prices, then the FX is much cheaper. But real world I can get the Allant for nearly the same price, which seems like a better bike. I'm kind of concerned though that there's barely any info/reviews out there about the Allant and I'm not sure why; also not sure why it's discounted so much from the manufacturer's MSRP whereas the FX isn't?

    I'm not really sure what all the differences are between the two, other than the Allant has disc brakes whereas the FX doesn't. Also if you look at the links I posted, you'll see the Allant is classified as an Urban/Commuter bike, whereas the FX is classified as a fitness bike. What distinction is there between the two that results in the different classification? Is there any reason at all someone would pick the FX over the Allant if the prices are nearly the same?

    Anyone have any info on either of these, particularly how they compare?

    EDIT: Noticed a chat box on Trek's site, turns out the reason I can't find any info on the Allant is because it just got rebranded this year, previously it was known as the FX Disc. Also he said they are essentially the same bike outside of the disc brakes, so the Allant seems like a no brainer at $30 more.

    DOUBLE EDIT: I originally cited the Allant as having a $750 MSRP, but that was the Canadian price - the US MSRP is $600.
     
  2. r0k macrumors 68040

    r0k

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Location:
    Detroit
    #2
    Another thing to try is to look for last year's model at a discount. I picked up a higher end Trek "city bike" at an entry level price by choosing an older model a local shop still had in stock. I have hydraulic disc brakes on mine and I love them. There's no way I'd want to go back to rim brakes.

    They have two lines DS and FX. The DS are more like mountain bikes and the FX are more like road bikes. The 7.0 (lower end) FX can be had for around $400 and the 8.0 (lower end) DS can be had for a little more. The higher end of these 2 series can go for over $1200 but that's where looking for last year's model still in stock may provide a good deal.
     
  3. puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #3
    thanks.

    btw, trying to figure out the right size frame for me - im 5'5" 140 lbs, 30" inseam. the 15" allant has a 54.4 cm effective top tube and the 17.5" has a 54.8 cm effective top tube, so not much different.

    i cant tell if i should be on a 15 or 17.5" frame? sems like most charts i find say i can do either.
     
  4. ActionableMango macrumors 604

    ActionableMango

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    #4
    I am a size that also fell right between two frame sizes. I decided to go with the larger frame, probably because of machoness. But in retrospect I think that was a mistake. At certain specific troublesome moments, I would definitely have preferred to have had more room between the top bar and my "nether regions".

    Based on that, I would go with the smaller one. Unless of course you are a younger person that still has some growing to do, in which case the larger of the two would be better for the future obviously.
     
  5. puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #5
    thanks for that as well, i think ill need to go to a bike shop and take a look at both.

    that said, im having a hard time visualizing how the same model of bike can range from a 15" length to a 25" length? without direct comparison pictures im trying to figure out how the same bike frame can come in a 10" frame variation, as 25" is 70% longer than 15". surely the top tube and tube that connect to the rear hub are angled differently? i cant imagine the 25" just has 10" of extra seat tube extending upwards beyond the rest of an otherwise identical frame...
     
  6. 5684697 Suspended

    5684697

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2007
    #6
    Do not buy a bike without riding it and getting a basic fit from a local shop.
     
  7. curmudgeonette macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2016
    Location:
    California
    #7
    Almost every tube of the bike frame will be different for each size. The angles too. Various components can also be different: the seat post, the stem (holds the handle bars), and the handle bars themselves may be a different length (width).

    Let the bike shop take care of fitting you to the correct size. In a good fitting, some parts like the stem might even be changed to a different size - though a shop might not do this at the $500 level.
     
  8. puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #8
    stopped by a bike shop today to test sizes, i could do a 17.5 but the 15 is a better fit...unfortunately the allant is out of stock in 15" only and according to trek it looks like thats it, the 17s are around the corner. so im kinda SOL for a blue 15" 2016 allant.
     
  9. curmudgeonette macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2016
    Location:
    California
    #9
    Have you considered the 7.2 FX? The big reason to go with disc brakes on a bike like this is for riding in bad weather. Commuters may need to ride in the rain or snow, hence the Allant is described as a commuter bike. For fitness riding, you'd likely skip your ride when the weather is bad. Thus, rim brakes are fine for your use.
     
  10. hallux macrumors 68020

    hallux

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    #10
    100% agree. I also wouldn't go to a "big box" place like Dick's, I would go to a dedicated bike place. I bought my Trek road bike at a small bike shop. He took some measurements, did some calculations and got the seat height pretty much spot on. Sadly, while he was one of the beast "wheel guys" in the area, he's now retired and the shop is closed.
     
  11. puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #11
    I did, but the disc brakes seem like a no brainer for $30. I am in no rush to buy, so I can certainly wait to see what the '17s bring.

    I also quite like the Specialized Sirrus Disc, which is for all intents and purposes an identical bike except it has plastic pedals:

    https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/fitness/sirrus/sirrus-disc/107451

    [​IMG]

    Though the local shop isn't discounting it currently, but I'm sure they will or I'm sure I could find somewhere that is. MSRP is $600, same as the Trek Allant 7.2.
     
  12. BernyMac macrumors regular

    BernyMac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Location:
    USA
    #12
    Marketing is a beast isn't it? that classification is made to encourage one rider over the other. It is meant to take the money off the consumer depending on what the consumer feels they need. If it eases the consumer to buy one over the other...money in the bank. The rider feels they accomplished something. Now, riding it will be another matter.

    Can you not use a fitness bike to commute and vice versa? Heck, you can get a Walmart bike, ride it to the ground and get fit over someone who rides a full carbon Record equipped sub 14 pound bike once a month.

    The key thing here is fit. I am one of those who are in-between. I opted for the smaller size, as the adjustments I can make are easier, equipment wise. Stems, seat posts, handle bars, crank arms can be adjusted/replaced if too small. A bigger frame is a lot harder to make smaller than it is to change out parts for a custom fit.

    You've already made a decision regarding your fitness, that's the most difficult part. Get the bike that fits and one that fits your sensibilities, wallet-wise and then pick the bike that you think looks much cooler over the other. You'll ride it more. Aside from other places that use bikes as a matter of necessity, very few people are motivated ride an ugly bike. :p
     
  13. daflake macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    #13
    Don't totally buy into the disc brake hype. As a serious cyclist, the only bike I own with disc brakes is my MTB (Fuel EX 8) and it probably needs it most. The rest are just more marketing.

    I have worked for a Trek dealer in the past and looked at Dex for you. Yes the 15" is out of stock with no ETA sadly. That being said, I would look at the FX as well and see if they have something that you like as it is the same line and geometry. As others have posted, find a good bike shop who is willing to both work with you and fit you, it makes a world of difference.
     
  14. puma1552, Jun 30, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2016

    puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #14
    So, still researching.

    Let me ask you guys this -

    How bad of a ride does an aluminum fork really give? I've heard lots of talk about giving you a buzzy ride, compared to a steel or carbon fork which are supposed to be much smoother.

    Reason I ask is I could get the Specialized Sirrus Disc, with 8 speeds and a steel fork for $600. I could also get the Specialized Sirrus Sport (non disc sport is the same price as the base Sirrus Disc, but I could get a Sirrus Sport Disc for $100 more) with 9 speeds and an aluminum fork.

    I've read a lot of things that say the 9 speeds >>>> 8 speeds, but it seems to be offset by the worse ride of the aluminum fork. The aluminum fork seems to be marketed as an upgrade, but I'm not so sure - if I'm spending $500-$700 on a bike, it needs to be damn smooth, which makes me think I'm better off with steel.

    Or maybe a better way to phrase this question is, of these three bikes, which would you buy?

    Sirrus Disc - 8 speeds, steel fork, mechanical disc brakes, $600:

    https://specialized.com/us/en/bikes/fitness/sirrus-disc/107451

    Sirrus Sport - 9 speeds, aluminum fork, V-brakes, $600:

    https://specialized.com/us/en/bikes/fitness/sirrus-sport/106264

    Sirrus Sport Disc - 9 speeds, aluminum fork, hydraulic disc brakes, $700:

    https://specialized.com/us/en/bikes/fitness/sirrus-sport-disc/106268

    I don't particularly want the base non-disc Sirrus, as I don't really like the color options and I'd like to stay away from the basest of base they make, I want to at least feel like I got something a little better up the food chain than the absolute base model (I know, I know, just how I am).

    I figure if the buzzy ride from the aluminum fork is just way overblown, than the Sport or Sport Disc is a no-brainer.
     
  15. daflake macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    #15
    Aluminum versus steel is more a weight thing to be honest so it is an upgrade of sorts. My advice is to go ride them and see which one speaks to you the most. In terms of money, the more you spend, the lighter the bike gets and the better the components get. I would probably go with the hydro brakes and aluminum fork if I had the money just because I hate the feel of mechanical disc brakes.

    Bottom line is that you are looking at entry level bikes. All of those bikes will do what you want them to do and last you a lifetime if you take care of them. My bigger guess is that color will be a bigger deal in the long run for you, so find one that you like, buy it, and go ride!

    I'm heading to Sedona to mountain bike ride this weekend and we are totally amped about it!
     
  16. puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #16
    Thanks, your post reminded me that the Sport Disc has hydraulic brakes vs. the mechanical ones on the base Sirrus Disc. On that note, I've also read a lot that says while the hydraulics are much more powerful than mechanicals, they require regular bleeding and even have fluid boil as a potential negative...though I don't expect to be running the bike hard enough for fluid to boil.

    All in all, it seems there is compromise in every option at this price point so like you said maybe it just comes down to which bike looks the coolest as they will all get the job done. To which I say the orange base disc is the best looking.

    What is it about mechanical disc brakes that you don't like? I have heard that cheaper disc brakes have less stopping power than a good V-brake at this price point, but again the disc will at least stop the same in all weather conditions, so again, a trade off it seems.
     
  17. daflake macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    #17
    Trust me, you are not going to be taking that bike down any hills even close to getting them near a boiling point. I'll be bombing down some serious hills Saturday with my hydro disc brakes (Fuel EX 8) and them failing is the last thing on my mind. ;) You will be fine with your selection.

    That orange is a nice color indeed! My road bike is matte black and orange and she looks hot!

    No problem with the advice, if you need anything else, please feel free to fire away!

    FYI, here is my MTB!

    [​IMG]
     
  18. BernyMac macrumors regular

    BernyMac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Location:
    USA
    #18
    Too much hand wringing on a first time bike. Aluminum vs steel vs carbon are all different but will not really come into play unless you are concerned with weight and ride quality during long rides. And once you start getting into longer rides, you will want a different bike. You may then want a road bike...that's a whole knew ball game once you get into it. Or you may want a full-on mountain bike. Another different ball of wax.

    Buy the bike that fits with the budget you have. The ride quality is something you will really not know unless you have a point of reference. "Harsh", "noodly", "laterally stiff yet vertically compliant (the most useless yet overly used buzzword)", etc. are all going to be useless/senseless words for a new rider with 0 miles under the butt. If you haven't been riding a lot, you won't know what you can or cannot tolerate on a bike.

    The most important thing is get riding. Ride lots. From there you can gauge how well you can stick to the sport.
     
  19. daflake macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
  20. puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
  21. BernyMac macrumors regular

    BernyMac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Location:
    USA
    #21
    9 speed...justification...all of them are valid. More is more awesome...Just wait until you discover 11 speed electronic shifting (even more awesomer):p

    Will you be wearing spandex? Will you want clipless pedals? Look, Speedplay,?Which shoes, mountain or road? Which helmet? Gloves or no gloves? Shimano, Campagnolo, SRAM? Electronic or mechanical shifting? Do you want a bike computer? With or without cadence? With or without a heart rate monitor? GPS? Yeesh!

    Whatever happens, do not get a soft gel type saddle (new riders call it a seat) nor get a pair of shorts with gel inserts. Do get a pair of shorts with decent chamois.

    No cotton clothes on a ride, no cotton socks.

    Learn how to change and patch your tire or inner tube in the comfort of your home and not during a ride.

    You, my friend, have a lot to think about!

    Buy the bike and get riding!
     
  22. puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #22
    Thanks, I was reading some old threads online for bikes from 5-6 years ago and back in the day the base had a 7 speed and the sport had an 8 speed, so I guess I'm ahead of the curve anyway compared to a few years ago.

    Gonna go look at the bike shop later tonight I think.
     
  23. puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #23
    went to the bike shop tonight. they didnt have a sirrus base disc in my size built, so i tried a base sirrus non disc just to get a feel for the steel fork and 8 speed, and i tried a sirrus sport with the 9 speed and aluminum fork.

    i took the sport out first, and it seemed to ride harsh tbh. i also had a hard time getting the front derailer to kick the chain up from the middle sprocket to the biggest one, maybe it just needed an adjustment? i wasnt super impressed overall. however, this bike was pretty light by my nonexistent beginner standards.

    then i tried the base model, and i honestly kind of liked it more. it didnt ride as harsh (rode more like i expected it to), and the 8 speed is way more than enough, and it worked well. that said, i was talking to the girl there and mentioned that i thought the steel fork one was smoother and she was quick to notice that the tires werent quite as inflated as the sport and that may have been part of the reason for that...both bikes felt like they had adequate tire pressure, the sport may have been overinflated actually from my feeling but not sure. i forgot to lift this bike to see how heavy it was.

    i did see the base disc in orange...fuuuugly. what a shock compared to online.

    more thinking to do, im leaning towards a base disc, but the orange disc is ugly and the other blue color option is MIA. could wait for the 17s and hope the components dont get downgraded or colors get uglier, or try and track down a couple treks to try out.
     
  24. Snoopy4, Jul 3, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2016

    Snoopy4 macrumors 6502a

    Snoopy4

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    #24
    Sirrus Sport. Thank me later, maybe even try an Allez E5. Whatever you were riding needed fine tuning. Ridgedness is more likely tied to the upright riding position of the hybrid. Add some Ergon GP3 grips to it for more hand positions. I ride a Roubaix SL4 on long rides and if I'm commuting to work and feel the need for a faster ride. I ride a Sirrus Sport for quick jaunts and the occassional commute to work. They are nearly identical in geometry. I did strip down the Sport and rebuild it with Sora Compact double. The triple was the wrong gearing for me. The Roubaix has 105, but it's not worth putting 105 on a flat bar. The speed delta is 2-3 mph favoring the Roubaix. The proper size is about 1-2 inches less than your inseam on both. Ride the thing. Your legs may say one thing and your torso another.

    Also, you're buying it for the frame. As your speed and ability improves you can always swap out the parts. As mentioned, I do advise that you try a drop bar bike. I road heavily for years and got out of it. I bought the Sirrus for comfort figuring I wasn't going to get into it like I once was. I was wrong so now I have two bikes. I also despise the disc brake trend. Disc brakes are for mountain bikes, tandems and some touring bikes. It's insane they are putting these on road bikes and hybrids.

    BTW... It's been my experience that Trek is slightly over priced vs. Specialized when it came to my purchases. This is likely due to overhead with their branded stores.
     
  25. puma1552 thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #25
    thanks, i had been wondering about road bikes too - what i really want the bike for is fitness and the plan is long rides, so i wonder if i should be looking at road bikes instead? never been on one but the drop bars look uncomfortable, but what do i know.

    also i was thinking, is there a price point in the hybrid line beyond which is just a waste of money? does anyone spend $2k-$3k on a hybrid, or is it just a waste of money since a hybrid presumably is good at everything but great at nothing? e.g. if you were spending $2k (I'm not, just for example's sake), would it make any sense to spend that $2k on a higher end hybrid over a lower/middle end road or a mountain bike?
     

Share This Page