Subject: Re: TREK advice wanted
Date: 3 Mar 92 02:12:09 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

>Looking for opinions on a 1991 TREK 2300 (Ultegra) for $849
>versus a 1992 TREK 2100 (105 SC) for $698.  This would be my
>first "real" road bike and I plan on doing around 100 miles
>a week of recreational riding.  Are the '91 Ultegra components
>discontinued with the introduction of STI this year?
>How much more realiable and maintainable are they than the 105
>groupe?  What are the warranties like on these frames and have
>they given people much trouble?  I heard a rumor of trouble with
>bonded composite frames comming un-glued, especially in salty
>sea-shore air, any facts on this?
>Thanks.
>John Young

You're getting a good price on both machines.  I would go for the Ultegra
components because they are significantly lighter and a little more durable
than 105.  The regular Ultegra is not discontinued because of STI, I'm not
too sure about STI anyway.  Its heavier, more complicated, and much more 
expensive than regular shifters.  Those are three characteristics that should
be avoided on any bike.  Does the 2300 come in that horrible yellow and green
color?  I don't think I could stand to ride it if so but thats just my
opinion.  These frames have a lifetime warranty and Trek is very good about
replacing them or so I hear.  I had not heard of any problems with salty 
sea-shore air.  During the 3 years I lived in hawaii I had one of these
bikes and had no such problem.  Nor did anyone I know and these bikes were
VERY popular in Hawaii.  So are Cannondales for that matter, you rarely see
steel frames though.  Anyway hope this helped.
-Terry
.

=====================================================================

>From att!rtsg.mot.com!bobb%isdgsm Wed Aug 12 08:32:07 CDT 1992 remote from mtsol
>From: bobb%isdgsm\@rtsg.mot.com (Bob Brand)
Subject:  re: MORE OPINIONS WANTED

>  
>   Thanx for your notes.  Many folks seem to disagree and think that
>   the 2100/2300 wouldn't be good for racing.  They cite repairs as an
>   issue, and one guy is adamant that they don't handle well.  (Hard to
>   believe that the reviewers in Bike Guide were off on this latter 
>   comment).  Do either of you race?  How's the bike handle.  

I race, but I do so in time trials, so its not really applicable.  
I don't know if I would take it in a cat4 or cat5 crit myself, but
then that goes for any bike that looks that good and costs that much, 
no matter what the construction.  Its geometry is road racing also, so 
a 73 degree head tube might not be quick enough for crits.  I don't know
for sure, since I haven't raced in one personally.  If I were looking for 
a bike to start that kind of racing in, personally, I would probably look for 
something used with decent components, so I wouldn't feel so bad if the 
frame got turned into a pretzel.  A friend who did race a few crits said
that every race he was in had a crash, and he had barely escaped in one
instance.

Repairs is an interesting point though.  If the top tube were crushed,
for instance, would Trek be able to unbond the joint and put in a new 
one.  I'm not sure -- calling Trek might be a good research idea. If 
arbon fiber and the road 
angles really pays off -- ask Greg Lemond, and even Bugno who is going
to be riding carbon soon I believe. There are plenty of traditionalists who 
would rather die than ride carbon, despite its strength, light weight, lack 
of flex, and shock absorbing properties.  They'll often drag every half-truth
into a discussion about the bikes to prevent someone from buying one, 
so beware of that game.  However, if its crits you're after, then I would think
that the best people to ask for advice is the crit racers, so don't
value my opinion too much.  I've found that riders at a race love to talk
about bikes and racing, so you may consider going to some local races
and looking around at what they're riding (especially the winners :) and 
talking to the riders about what they would buy if they could do it all 
over again.

                         Best of luck,

                         Bob
P.S.
Crashes only seem to be an issue in crits, so if you're talking about
road races, or time trials, or even stock bike track racing, then I
wouldn't be as concerned about it.
=====================================================================

From att-mt!coombs.anu.edu.au!yogi Thu Aug 13 07:09:33 1992
From: yogi\@coombs.anu.edu.au (Michael Hanslip)
Subject: Re: MORE OPINIONS WANTED: Trek 2100/2300 & C'Dale 2.8
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University

I ride a Trek 2300 (about 6 weeks old), about 175-200 km per week, and love
it. The STI is great, but that is not really Trek's doing is it. The frame
is a good size, the top tube being longer than my previous frame's. I ride
a 60 cm, am 193 cm (about 6'4"?) and 93 kg (~200lbs?), and was amazed
that at 500 km the wheels hadn't moved more than a couple mm from perfectly
true, I've never had that happen before! Nothing creaks or groans, everything
was assembled almost perfectly and: it corners well at speeds over 80 kmh, 
seems good on bumpy roads, is good for pedalling through corners.
The only thing I'd change would maybe be to leave the aluminum tubes in their 
NTED:  Trek 2100/2300 & C'Dale 2.8
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

If you are, or aspire to be, a Cat 5 racer consider this when buying a
bike: will you be financially and emotionally devestated if you crash
and total it? I don't know what the Trek and Cannondale cost, but I'd
think very hard about spending more than $750 on my first racing bike.

As you get more in to racing, this becomes less of a factor because 
you will spend whatever is necessary to replace a totalled bike :-)

--
Tim Moore                    moore\@cs.utah.edu {bellcore,hplabs}!utah-cs!moore
========================================================================
>From att!linac!uwm.edu!wupost!uunet!infoserv!gcarter Thu Aug  6 23:18:05 1992