I'm fairly new to cycling, and I'm riding an old Univega that suits for the time being. However, I am going to get a new bike soon, and had for various reasons settled on a Giant OCR2 (I just want to get into Tiagra for now, and a carbon fork would be nice). Price on the OCR2 is $780, and that shop offers 1 year tuneups free. I've ridden the bike and I like it. It has Tiagra with a 105 rear.
However, I was at a different LBS today and the guy was pitching an '02 Trek 1200 with a couple of minor scratches on the frame. Tiagra components, toe clips, aluminum fork. Would sell it for $600, and would put on a carbon fork for a extra $100 (did not say which fork, and I don't think that I would know the difference). Two month tuneup here, as with all other LBS except the one above. This bike will be headed to a swap meet at the Lehigh Valley velodrome this Saturday. I rode the bike and it felt good, except the rear derailleur seemed like it needed adjusting. Didn't have time to ask them to adjust and ride again.
I am not sure how the wheelset on the '02 Trek 1200 compares to that on the '04 OCR2. And I would like to start using clipless sometime soon, so with the second bike I'd eventually need to buy pedals.
My gut here is that I should stick to the OCR2, and it probably shows in this post. If I decide that I want a carbon fork, I would be saving only $80 and getting a much shorter tuneup period. But if the carbon fork is not something I should hang on to, then the Trek would save a lot of cash.
That's why I'm posting. For a inexperienced rider like me putting in only 50/60 or so miles a week right now, is the 105/pedals/carbon fork/year tuneup worth the extra $180? Or should I just save $, hop on the cheaper bike, and figure out what I'm doing?
Thanks for any info you can provide. I know different renditions of this post appear all the time.