Thoughts on Current Trek 2300?

Shoot. I meant to send that to rbt.

Sorry for the off-topic post.

Jim

Quoted message said:

So I need a new bike. I'm a one-time decent racer (stop laughing), I'm
6'1", 180, run regularly and do 1-2 rides per week. Those rides are
40-80 miles at a pretty high pace (hilly group rides with current and
former racers...mostly masters these days).

I have a family so I'm considering saving a few bucks and not get a
carbon bike. And considering the light miles I'm doing, I'm guessing I
can live with ultegra/chorus-level components.

So the Trek 2300 look pretty similar to a 5200 OCLV (and I guess a 5.2
Madrone), except for an aluminum main triangle. 9-speed ultegra,
bontrager wheels, all that. But what do I know? Here's the bike:

<http://www2.trekbikes.com/Bikes/Road/Performance_Road/OCLV_Carbon-ZR_9000/2
300/index.php>

Quoted message said:

Who here owns or has ridden the 2004 or 2005 model 2300? What do you
think of it?

Alternatives to check out at the $2000ish price point?

Thanks,

Jim

Now that you did slip. I have the 5200 and testrode the 2300 before I
bought. The geometries are supposedly identical. The ride on the 2300 was
much harsher and I just fell in love with the 5200. The choice was easy for
me.
--
Perre
I gave up on SPAM and redirected it to hotmail instead.

I've tried Trek 2300. Great bike. The truth? It doesn't matter what brand do
you pick, they are mostly the same. Lots of bike brands came from the same
manufacturers in Taiwan, China, Mexico, etc. If you want to save bucks,
don't bother picking a specific brand. Just look for the best deal on ebay.
I also suggest www.bikesdirect.com or www.supergo.com. How about
www.performancebike.com. You can save hundreds for buying a "generic" brand
bike the same quality as Trek 2300. They perform the same way. Ultegra is
great. But you are a weekend warrior. Shimano 105 groupos would be more than
sufficient for you🙂

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

So I need a new bike. I'm a one-time decent racer (stop laughing), I'm
6'1", 180, run regularly and do 1-2 rides per week. Those rides are
40-80 miles at a pretty high pace (hilly group rides with current and
former racers...mostly masters these days).

I have a family so I'm considering saving a few bucks and not get a
carbon bike. And considering the light miles I'm doing, I'm guessing I
can live with ultegra/chorus-level components.

So the Trek 2300 look pretty similar to a 5200 OCLV (and I guess a 5.2
Madrone), except for an aluminum main triangle. 9-speed ultegra,
bontrager wheels, all that. But what do I know? Here's the bike:

<http://www2.trekbikes.com/Bikes/Road/Performance_Road/OCLV_Carbon-ZR_9000/2300/index.php>

Who here owns or has ridden the 2004 or 2005 model 2300? What do you
think of it?

Alternatives to check out at the $2000ish price point?

Thanks,

Jim

RBR is about the dunce sitting on the machine, not the machine.

Like the others of said, it isn't the bike. Lance could destroy all of us,
riding a Trek 1000.

Now if you wish to talk about dunces.......

"Per Elmsäter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

Now that you did slip. I have the 5200 and testrode the 2300 before I
bought. The geometries are supposedly identical. The ride on the 2300 was
much harsher and I just fell in love with the 5200. The choice was easy
for
me.

Perre, with the carbon fork and carbon rear triangle I can't see why it
would be any harsher considering the a lot more shock absorption occurs in
the tires.

Tom Kunich said:

"Per Elmsäter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

Now that you did slip. I have the 5200 and testrode the 2300 before I
bought. The geometries are supposedly identical. The ride on the
2300 was much harsher and I just fell in love with the 5200. The
choice was easy for
me.

Perre, with the carbon fork and carbon rear triangle I can't see why
it would be any harsher considering the a lot more shock absorption
occurs in the tires.

I don't think this one had a carbon rear triangle, possibly a carbon fork.
Year model was maybe 2002.

--
Perre
I gave up on SPAM and redirected it to hotmail instead.

"Per Elmsäter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

"Per Elmsäter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

Now that you did slip. I have the 5200 and testrode the 2300 before I
bought. The geometries are supposedly identical. The ride on the
2300 was much harsher and I just fell in love with the 5200. The
choice was easy for
me.

Perre, with the carbon fork and carbon rear triangle I can't see why
it would be any harsher considering the a lot more shock absorption
occurs in the tires.

I don't think this one had a carbon rear triangle, possibly a carbon fork.
Year model was maybe 2002.

The difference between a steel fork and a carbon one is almost too
surprising. Changing to a carbon fork will often competely transform a bike.