Saxon
friend
Reged: 12/23/03
Posts: 28
Loc: Sacramento, CA
|
|
Glad to see this Trek Forum on the new site! My 5500 has been one of my fav bikes for some time now and I need a place to rant about it!
Thanks Kahuna!
Sax
|
Dave_Thompson
prophet
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 717
Loc: Spokane, Washington
|
|
Sax: Have you ridden any other CF bikes? If you have, how do you compare them to your 5500?
--------------------
Steel lover, but then I like Ti with carbon too.
Licensed bike geek.
|
Saxon
friend
Reged: 12/23/03
Posts: 28
Loc: Sacramento, CA
|
|
Hey Dave,
Only other CF bike I've had a chance to ride has been the Specialized Epic, which feels a lot different than an OCLV. I'd love to have a chance to try a few others to see how they compare. Strangely enough, I've ridden four different OCLV's in the last few years and the ride is very consistent, even with different wheel sets. I've found the real magic in the OCLV's to be in the uphill sprints and steep descents (which they handle like butter). There's magic in that rear triangle... My comparisons have been against steel and aluminum frames, so don't know if it's the design or the frame material that I'm comparing. Probably both.
Happy Holidays!
Sax
|
Dave_Thompson
prophet
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 717
Loc: Spokane, Washington
|
|
I'm dying to try an OCLV. I'm selling my Calfee Luna Pro, maybe I'll see if I can pick up an Trek CF frameset. I had a Y-Foil a couple of years ago, sexiest bike on the planet. Didn't fit me which was a shame. A 5200 and 5500 are the same frames, correct?
Merry Christmas!
--------------------
Steel lover, but then I like Ti with carbon too.
Licensed bike geek.
|
1centaur
journeyman
Reged: 12/24/03
Posts: 126
Loc: Massachusetts
|
|
Yes the 5500 and 5200 are the same frame (OCLV 120). I love my Tetra Pro, but the 5200 I tested was the most immediately comfortable and predictable frame I have ridden. You can even have Joe Bell repaint it, if you don't like Trek color schemes.
|
Saxon
friend
Reged: 12/23/03
Posts: 28
Loc: Sacramento, CA
|
|
Yep, 1centaur is right. The only difference between the 5000 (except the 5900) series frame sets would depend on how old they are. The older ones used the 150 OCLV formula while the newer ones went to 120. The 5900 uses the 110. If you're looking for a bargain, Trek also sold the same frames under the Lemond name for a few years. These Lemond OCLVs seem to sell for a little less then the Trek labeled bikes.
Sax
Edited by Saxon (12/24/03 06:45 PM)
|
EPOJoe
new member
Reged: 12/23/03
Posts: 3
|
|
There were also a few changes to the forks through the years. Here's a link that discusses the different forks used, and a bit of other OCLV history courtesy of Chain Reaction Bikes. Also, despite the way the author "disses" the early Icon Classic forks, I have two OCLV's with these original forks, and I think they ride extremely well, even when compared to the more modern versions.
OCLV History Link
|
Kahuna
Forum Admin
Reged: 12/11/03
Posts: 162
Loc: Maui, Hawaii
|
|
Sax,
Ditto. I'm not ashamed to admit how much I love my OCLV - in my case the it's the 5900. To give you some idea just how much I love these bikes, I bought my second 5900 a couple of months ago. My first one is an `02 that I got on-sale from Chain Reaction. My new one is an `04 frameset from my LBS that I decked out with Campy Chorus, Topolinos, and FSA 110 BCD "Tyler" cranks. The bike is perfect for going up the really big hills around here.
With some careful adjustments, I'm able get these standard geometry bikes to fit me as good as any custom bike, and I find the handling and stability to be nothing short of superb. For some reason I feel as though I can push myself harder and ride more aggressively on my Trek than my other bikes. For racing situations this is the bike I go for.
Folks can poo-poo Trek because they're a dime a dozen. For a carbon bike, the build quality is good but their finish and aesthetics are barely acceptable - not even close when compared to the fine hand-made craftsmanship of a Calfee or Parlee, but that's not why one chooses a Trek. At least I didn't. The truth is, I ride an OCLV because I wanna look just like Lance!!! Of course I'm just kidding. However ya gotta admit the company does have a pretty capable bunch of riders doing their "field testing". I mean, who can argue with success?
Aloha!
K.
|
EPOJoe
new member
Reged: 12/23/03
Posts: 3
|
|
Hey Kahuna,
Have you had the chance to put a Calfee or Parlee through its paces and compare the performance to the 5900? Saxon originally turned me on to OCLV which resulted in the dumping of my custom steel ride, but alas, I lost all snob appeal in the process. I've been wondering if a custom carbon bike would give me the performance of the OCLV along with some now lacking individuality, or is the juiced ride I'm getting out of the Treks more a result of geometry and design rather than simply the fact that they're carbon bikes? Then again, that Madone looks interesting 
|
Saxon
friend
Reged: 12/23/03
Posts: 28
Loc: Sacramento, CA
|
|
Yes, it's true, I brought EPOJoe over to the dark side... But I keep telling him, "How many TdF's does a bike have to win for it to rate a pedigree?" (He actually has two, a 5020 and a 5500). You're right, Kahuna, you do have to squint a bit when admiring the beauty and workmanship, but it's the only bike I jump on when I really have to boogie! Your set up on your new 5900 sounds sweet! Tyler would be proud  I'll also admit here (for the first time anywhere) that I strap on my Lone Star limited edition Lance Giro and play Postal more often than not. I ride my Serotta when I want to look pretty and have all the girls chase me down the street to "look in my wallet". When I want to sweat it's OCLV BABY!
|
Kahuna
Forum Admin
Reged: 12/11/03
Posts: 162
Loc: Maui, Hawaii
|
|
EPOJoe,
Owned two Calfee's in the past - one stock, one custom and loved `em. Nearly everything I describe about my OCLV could be said about these bikes with a couple of exceptions. The finish on the Calfee was what you would expect for a hand made frameset. My custom of course was built to spec and beyond comfortable. Handling was on the more sensitive side when compared to the OCLV, and that was mainly due to the fork. The finish on the custom was nothing short of jewel-like. Only reason for selling was because I had a convenient opportunity and wanted to continue experimenting, otherwise I might very well still be riding it. If you want to go with custom carbon fiber and the extra "cachet", then Calfee is tough to beat. Both are great bikes.
-K
|
TheGate
new member
Reged: 12/31/03
Posts: 1
|
|
Woo Hoo!
There is nothing sexier (on two wheels) than a Carbon bike....ok maybe there is but I'm not talking about women here; just bikes.
I have had my 5200 (black clear coat) for two years and it is the bomb. I love the feel and look of it. Oh and as I sit here at my desk, I am surrounded by pictures of Lance (including some very rare collectables). Go Postal! Hummm, I mean go Postal team.:)
--------------------
Oh to be a bit faster....
|
Allan
journeyman
Reged: 05/04/04
Posts: 198
Loc: Bds,W I
|
|
Hello Everyone,
Sorry to put a damper on this topic but i'm not a fan of the present OCLV frames at all,so by now that i've said this, the flak is flying and you all want to jump on me for saying so.
However before you do please hear me out,after setting up a 5500 for a friend of mine, one of the first things i noticed was the cheap way the rear drop outs were fitted to the frame, no butted lugs with a continous flow of carbon to the alloy, just a simple ugly glued push in looking fit,not a good quality item for a carbon frame of this money.
Then there are the cable holders on the top tube that corrode very easily from the slightest bit of sweat dropping on them, and while my friend wipes his bike very often and pledges it regularly,the scaling gloss finish is peeling ever more on to the top tubes, what an ugly sight this is now,and he is pissed off about it.
They could definately do a much better job here too with some composite cable holders that wont corrode.
The last thing that isnt obvious here is the overall slow handling of these bikes,you literally have to turn these bikes around a corner, no leaning into the bend works here, however its good for touring though, maybe thats why they have eyelet holes on the frame still.
And finally, whats it with the slack rear end angles, you can almost pass your whole hand between the area where the tire passes seat tube.This equates to an extremely long wheelbase and makes the rear of the bike have a slack dead feel when you try to jump in a sprint.
When i compared a 60cm Trek which is really a 58cm, it was on average 1 cm to 1.5 cms longer in the wheelbase than most other bikes out there, and all of this figure is in the rear triangle geometry.
Pure racing bikes are supposed to have tight angles and sharp handling with a quick response, these OCLV bikes look and ride like good touring machines nothing more. 
--------------------
Its time to ride.
|
Nev
captain
Reged: 05/03/04
Posts: 373
Loc: Never where I want to be
|
|
On Tuesday I test rode two Treks. '04 5500 and the 5900.
The 5500 I couldn't even feel the road at all. Didn't like it. I learned the what the term "dead" refers to on carbon bikes. Blah. No energy at all contained in the bike did I sense.
I rode five feet on the 5900 and stopped. I wondered where the bike was. It was so freaking light -- or felt so -- that it took a bit for me to sense my efforts working the thing. It was amazing. So far apart from the 5500 I couldn't believe it. Felt like if I knew what I was doing, I'd be a bullet on the thing.
5900 has the ugliest paint I've ever seen.
I'll probably be buying a titanium something very soon. If I can get me back to Arizona (stupid career) or another mountainy area, I will buy me a 5900 to go along with my titanium something.
|
midnightmoses
new member
Reged: 05/11/04
Posts: 2
Loc: Vallejo, CA
|
|
I'm considering buying a 5900 frame but want to be sure I'm getting what is being advertised. The frame does not have the same paint scheme or decal treatment as a stock 5xxx frame.
Does anyone know if there are any visual indications other than a decal that can be used to differentiate a OCLV 110 vs. 120 frame?
What about difference in weight between the two frames in the same size?
Thanks,
moses
|
vaxn8r
contributor
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 222
|
|
Allan, are you serious or is this a joke? Your post was filled with so many inaccuracies I wondered what you were trying to start?
Just a few things, my OCLV is late 90's but I've never lost any paint off the cable guides. Nor have I seen this before on other's. Maybe it's a new problem. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I do agree that workmanship is not the strength or purpose of the OCLV. It really is more of a tool for the job, not unlike a Cannondale in that respect.
What eyelets are you talking about? Mine doesn't have any. I ought to know because I put fenders on mine this winter and there were no eyelets, though it might have been nice. In addition I can tell you it was a bear getting the fenders installed. There is certainly no hand-width between the rear tire and the frame. It's tight.
Wheelbase...I don't get your beef. a 58 Trek has a 57cm TT and a 99.6cm WB. A 58 cm Calfee Tetra Pro has a 57cm TT and a 99.4cm WB. A 57 Cannondale CAAD7 has a 56.7cm TT and a 99.3cm WB. It's not the bike slowing you down...
|
Allan
journeyman
Reged: 05/04/04
Posts: 198
Loc: Bds,W I
|
|
First off im not trying to start anything, its just what i see as my observations,and as far as i'm concerned these frames just dont impress me, and sorry to say the quality and finish is poorly lacking for the money you are paying.
There are two 5500s that close friends of mine own, and both of the bikes are having the same problem with the clear coat peeling off,this is because it all started at the aluminum cable holders that are under the top tube, incidentally these bikes are both in the US postal colours.
On both of these bikes there are also eyelet holes on the rear dropouts and threaded as well so you can attach (fenders)???,if you think i'm joking here, i'll gladly send photos to support my claims.
As for the width of the tyre to seat tube clearance you might be well advised to look again, all Treks have a larger amount of clearance than whats considered normal here, when compared to most other bikes.
Just for comparison, an Orbea frameset i own thats a 60cm (c to c) with a 58.5cm TT, has a wheelbase of 99.5cms.That means according to information you wrote, its shorter than a 58 c to t(really a 56cm c to c) Trek.
If you compare the Trek 5500 chain stay length, you will see that most of this added wheelbase is in this area, since the same 60cm Orbea chainstay is only 40.2 cms, while the 60 cm Trek is 41.2,thats an additional cm in this region, according to Treks 2004 geometry chart for a 60 cm 5500
I had a 2003 2300 frameset and i gladly sold it, the two main problems with it was slow handling and the dead acceleration when you try to sprint out of the saddle in a hill. Like the 5500s, when you get up, the bike literally stalls before it tries to gain momentum.
If you are riding along side and watch the rear of the Trek, it starts trembling and hopping from side to side as the rider attempts to gain speed.
The funny thing here is that all the Trek owners i have spoken to are aware that this is a concern for them and they agree that they dont experience it with other brands of framesets they own.
These comments are not my opinions alone,they reflect what other Trek owners i've spoken to agree on as well.
--------------------
Its time to ride.
|
Kahuna
Forum Admin
Reged: 12/11/03
Posts: 162
Loc: Maui, Hawaii
|
|
Allan,
I totally agree with you about the paint finish on these bikes. They're mass produced and the finish is cheap and has an assembly line appearance. I tell people to get past it. That's not what these bikes are about.
Many people complain that Treks are a dime a dozen and say they don't like them because they don't want to look like "one of the herd". There's nothing wrong with that as long as you keep in mind the same philosophy can be used to your advantage. In particular, when your goal is to blend in with the crowd, what better way to do that than to ride a Trek? That way you can let your legs do all the talking and guess what, they'll never see you coming!
As for chainstays, I'm pretty sure lengths of 41.0 - 41.5cm are common on 58cm bikes with so-called stage racing geometry (60cm in the case of Trek). Your point about wheelbase is pretty pointless because this represents only one out of several determining factors that affect the bike's overall handling. In fact I'd argue that wheelbase probably contributes less to handling than you might think. Far more imporant is front end geometry and torsional stifness of the frame. For example, even a bike with a relatively long wheelbase can be designed to steer quickly by altering the trail.
The Trek 5500 was refined over the years for use on long flat races. This was the bike of choice for the US Postal team for riding the Classics (i.e. long races over terrible road conditions) and the long opening stages of the grand tours. You may describe these bikes as being sluggish and slow steering, but to a professional stage racer, those same charateristics translate to rock-solid stability and all day comfort. Regarding the latter, when it comes to races over 100 miles in length, more comfort translates to less rider fatique, which means better racing performance over the long haul. If you want a bike designed for criteriums, the 5500 might not be your first choice, but I see plenty of racers using 5500s in crits. After all, these bikes have high bottom brackets, and are well suited for that purpose as well.
Quote:
Allan wrote:
If you are riding along side and watch the rear of the Trek, it starts trembling and hopping from side to side as the rider attempts to gain speed.
I could be wrong but I don't recall George Hincapie complaining about his 5500 "trembling and hopping" after winning the S.F. Grand Prix a couple of years ago, or after his Gent Wevelgem win. I'd imagine if anyone is capable of torquing a bike to this extent, it would be a big guy like George.
Quote:
Allan wrote:
The funny thing here is that all the Trek owners i have spoken to are aware that this is a concern for them and they agree that they dont experience it with other brands of framesets they own.
Here's one Trek owner who's never felt what you're talking about. In fact, one of the reasons why I like my Trek is because it accellerates quickly during hard efforts and in general, it feels very responsive and stable at the same time.
Go figure?
-K
|
Allan
journeyman
Reged: 05/04/04
Posts: 198
Loc: Bds,W I
|
|
Thanks for your comments about your Trek and i'm sure you have your opinions about how you perceive it to be, but we all have our OWN opinions as well, and at least you did see one of my points about the lack of proper finsh and detail.
Its always a topic that makes me smile when i hear people talk about how this pro or that pro uses a product so its got to be good. Lets face it, the pros are paid to endorse a product, this however does not mean its really all that good, or that they truely believe in it.
A good example of this is Lances personal use of his old 7401 pedals despite Shimanos attempts to make improved pedals.
Only recently have Shimano gone back to a 'revised' version of the old 7401 that Lance himself is reputed to have helped design, so can it be that all the pedals after the 7401 series and up to the new 'lance' pedal be considered not worthy to ride.
Again this debate could go on, but in reality it would all come down to opinions,opinions,opinions.
--------------------
Its time to ride.
|
vaxn8r
contributor
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 222
|
|
Allan,
As for the pro's riding them, one thing that impresses me is that Postal rides stock road OCLV's. Not custom made or rebadged something else. If what you say about the bikes(OCLV) is true I suppose these guys are better athletes than anyone suspected. It's hard to fathom their success with all the stalling, hopping, slow acceleration these frames are supposedly so well known for. You may take this as sarcasm but think about it in terms of the claims you made.
Honestly, other than finish I truly don't get your beef. I've got about 28K miles on mine including a little bit of racing and a lot of hill climbing. I do push my bikes pretty hard and I think it's a pretty sweet ride. Though it is not the absolute quickest handling "crit" bike, it still is plenty responsive, light and stiff. It is a great all-around race bike. I love how mine accelerates and climbs. Put it this way, I've certainly ridden and raced on worse.
I doubt I'll convince you of anything as you seem to have a chip on your shoulder about Trek. I hope you have better luck with your new ride. Peace.
|
Allan
journeyman
Reged: 05/04/04
Posts: 198
Loc: Bds,W I
|
|
Vaxn8r
It seems that most replies to my messages here have missed my original point about these Trek OCLV frames, it really has nothing to do with my personal preference, i couldnt care less about the bike in question or who rides it. All i was originally stating is that you can get a lot more QUALITY and PERFORMANCE in a bike frame for the same if not LESS money.
Oh and by the way, the bikes US Postal ride are not the same that you can buy in the store, if you did look closly at the photos as posted in a leading european cycle magazine, they clearly show that the so called Trek CARBON bikes as used in the mountain stages of the TdF are really ALUMINUM framsets of some sort, disguised to look as carbon.
Do you honestly think that the teams would use anything made for regular folk, dont be so gullible, they too are looking for top performance, but they have also got to remember to keep it looking 'stock' so the public will rush out and buy it.
Remember Lances so called Trek TT bike, really a Litespeed Blade painted in blue,i wonder how many people called Trek dealers hoping to buy one.
--------------------
Its time to ride.
|
1centaur
journeyman
Reged: 12/24/03
Posts: 126
Loc: Massachusetts
|
|
Well now you've really blown a hole in your credibility.
First, I don't know how closely one has to look at a bike to tell it's made of aluminum, but I suspect it's closer than you or we will get by looking at published pictures.
Second, there's a host of competing companies and bike journalists actually on the ground at pro events who would absolutely love to say that Trek OCLVs are really made of aluminum, and who have possibly even rapped their knuckles on a few, yet magically that "big reveal" has not happend.
Third, Lance would be completely compicit in such a cover-up, which would greatly tarnish his reputation, which many would love to do, yet it continues not to be exposed.
Fourth, and very importantly, Trek would be committing consumer fraud on a massive scale - false advertising with massive class action damages given how many OCLVs the tort bar could show are sold on the perception of the OCLV being the same in the TdF as in your LBS. Buy a 5200, sign up as head plaintiff in a class action and you will be rich.
We all know the Lightspeed story and the many examples of bikes being substituted and covered up (Indurain's Fina Estampa?), the difference here being Trek's frequent loud proclamation on the topic when it would be easy to prove otherwise as so many sharp eyed bike geeks have done before.
BTW, I do think many of the bikes in the pro peloton are available to regular folk in terms of quality and technology - geometry can be a key differentiator but in many if not most cases is not.
Please post the name and month of the European cycling mag to which you refer, and whether the mag makes the same aluminum claim as you (and if it's not evident from that data, whether you refer to 2003 TdF or earlier and if you are only focused on the Trek 5900).
--------------------
"You never make a gift of Ventoux"
Eddie Merckx to Lance Armstrong
|
Allan
journeyman
Reged: 05/04/04
Posts: 198
Loc: Bds,W I
|
|
1Centaur,
Does this debate have to come down to the same situation as the one that took place with Joseba Belokis supposed carbon frame Giant that he used in the mountain stages of the 02' TdF, and was finally agreed on by all concerned to actually be an aluminum bike.
Also consider this, no matter how you look at it, lightness is the all important factor for the teams when these TdF stages start to go uphill. As far as i'm aware of,theres no manufacturer that can presently make a true all carbon frame with the stiffness, reliability and LIGHTNESS of present aluminum frame technology.
--------------------
Its time to ride.
|
1centaur
journeyman
Reged: 12/24/03
Posts: 126
Loc: Massachusetts
|
|
My points are what they are, but given that CF makers are coming out with 890 gram frames and durability does not matter if we are talking about a single mountain stage (though I'd give the nod on that score to CF over U2), I see no reason to believe aluminum is the inevitable result of a pro's desire to win. Reliability should be about even for the five hours at hand.
--------------------
"You never make a gift of Ventoux"
Eddie Merckx to Lance Armstrong
|
vaxn8r
contributor
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 222
|
|
Allan, now you are just being obnoxious. You've changed the intent of your posts every time you've been proved wrong. First it was all about wheelbases and mysterious fender eyelets. Then it changed to chainstay length on your next post. Then you next went on about hip-hopping, poor acceleration and handling. You really never stated it was all about "QUALITY and PERFORMANCE" for "LESS money" until your last post. It's well known that Postal rides stock OCLV. They have to because the lugs come in limited sizes. Do you think for a minute if Trek could produce 1 cm sizes or for that matter custom options for the Pros, they wouldn't offer it to the public in a heart beat? Like they don't want to make more money?
I can see one pro in one race maybe getting by with a sneak bike. But everyone in the cycling world knows exactly what a TREK OCLV frame looks like. So you would have us believe that the entire US Postal squad over the last 6 years and countless races is riding counterfeit aluminum bikes with Trek logos. Hah! Like no one would notice. I have to laugh that you would even think this. Again, I wonder if this is all about chain yanking....
I think you're pretty much the only guy who hip-hops and stalls his OCLV. I mean, I haven't heard anyone else complaining they can't get it going. What I don't get is why you're over here trying to sell something which doesn't ring true to 10's of thousands of OCLV owners.
Time to move on...
|
dave_donielson
friend
Reged: 02/03/04
Posts: 32
|
|
Allan- If you go to the cycling news web site you can see that they have already posted photos of Eric Zabels' non-carbon Giant. All aluminum, as they said, there may be some carbon in the tires. They (cycling news)and LOTS of others would love to show US Postal on aluminum bikes.
|
Allan
journeyman
Reged: 05/04/04
Posts: 198
Loc: Bds,W I
|
|
Oh i love my OCLV, oh i love it, oops did i just see a six/13 go past.
--------------------
Its time to ride.
|
Saxon
friend
Reged: 12/23/03
Posts: 28
Loc: Sacramento, CA
|
|
I've never experienced or seen any of the problems Allan is talking about (or heard mention of it from any of the 100's of happy Trek OCLV owners I've met over the years). My best guess is either somebody's dosed his coffee or he's a Cannondale rep.
Sax
|
Allan
journeyman
Reged: 05/04/04
Posts: 198
Loc: Bds,W I
|
|
Oops sorry to dissapoint you here Saxon but i dont drink coffee or work for Cannondale either.
--------------------
Its time to ride.
|
Xd_Out
new member
Reged: 06/05/04
Posts: 6
|
|
I ride with Alan and can confirm most of what he says about the Trek 5500 , including the significant corrosion on the cable holders and the scaling gloss finish.
Also the eyelet holes he is taking about.
As far as the performance of the bikesgoes , I have not ridden with the guys who own these bikes enough to guage that, and anyhow when I do they "spank" me with their speed and superior riding skills so I would not be a good judge.
I however must admit that I ride a Trek 5200 and really do love the bike and it's ride and would definately encourage anyone to buy one.
X'd Out
|
Lon
sage
Reged: 12/20/03
Posts: 595
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
|
Well you Trek folks might be interested to know that Allan left here to pontificate in the Shimano forum. It appears he went there to "expert" on Shimano even though it appears he rides Campy.
Allan a few points that were not mentioned. First the Litespeed in the first Tour was not a big secret or was it ever meant to be. The facts was that Trek did not have a time trial frame at that point. Their production techniques are such and the expense is so high they moved slowly in its development. They now make the time trial bikes. That wasn't a very good example of a disguised paint job as it was well known and not something that Trek ever attempted to hide.
Next where did Beloki come from in this thread? One person replied how you jumped all over the place. The jump to Beloki's 02 Giant was bizarre.
You claim that no carbon bike can climb like an aluminum bike. I suggest you ride a 5900 or a Madone as my friends who truly know frames have and find out for yourself. Or ride a Calfee which is my ride and magnificent.
Your problem seems to be that you speak from conjecture and not first hand knowledge. That is not good in a forum where the vast majority of us refrain from conjecture and stay with what we know from experience. Gary is the perfect example. His endorsement of a Trek knowing how many bikes he has ridden and owned is one of the most impressive statements I have heard of their frames.
Take care.
|
Lon
sage
Reged: 12/20/03
Posts: 595
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
|
Quote:
Just for comparison, an Orbea frameset i own thats a 60cm (c to c) with a 58.5cm TT, has a wheelbase of 99.5cms.
In this forum you state you own an Orbea. However in the Pinarello forum you stated: Quote:
I was going to buy a Prince or an Opera frame some while ago, but the delivery cost to me in the end was really pretty close to that of a Moots Vamoots Ti frame, so i went with that instead.
It seems whatever forum you go into you don't own whatever is being discussed and you think you own something better. However you really need to get your story straight.
|
SAVAGEP
new member
Reged: 11/13/04
Posts: 7
|
|
Can't let that post go without some comment.
The fit and finish remarks are true - but you don't buy a Trek for its beauty. Maybe if the frame cost another $1,000 it would look like a Calfee.
The Treks are set up as Stage Race bikes rather than Crit bikes. Why do you need hair trigger handling? To some extent this is a personal preference issue but the great stage racing bikes have always been slacker than most US made bikes so heavily influenced by the needs in Criteriums.
I own two CF bikes - a 5900 and a Calfee Dragonfly. There is indeed no comparison in the quality of the finish but the 5900 gets the long rides, the Calfee is my climbing race bike. On a 45 mph descent I know which one I prefer - the 5900 is like a great pair of GS skis - on rails. The Calfee requires constant attention while riding.
The 5900 was built up from the bare frame, DA 9, Velomax wheels with Veloflex tires, FSA 50-34 crank, Cinelli bar/stem, Selle Italia SLR on a Campy Ti post.
Not jumping on you - I guess I actually agree on the objective issues (fit n' finish) and disagree on the subjective issues (handling). But, for me, the bottom line is that the 5900 is a GREAT road bike.
|
Xd_Out
new member
Reged: 06/05/04
Posts: 6
|
|
Actually Allan owns 3 bikes a Vitus, a Moots and an Obea. If you look in the photo gallery you will see pics of all 3. He used to own a Trek before he bought the Orbea.
Post Extras:
| |
Previous
Thread Index
Next
Threaded
I love my Trek OCLV
Edit
Reply
Quote
Re: I love my Trek OCLV
Re: I love my Trek OCLV
Re: I love my Trek OCLV
A Little Bit of Allan
Re: I (REALLY DO) love my Trek OCLV