I am considering buying either a Scott USA Comp or a Trek 1200. Can anybody give advice on the best choice?
Cycling Equipment · Public discussion
scott or trek?
This thread is locked and is currently read-only.
Thread navigation
Jump through the discussion
Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.
Thread details
What we know about this thread
- Original section
- Cycling Equipment
- Published
- 15 January 2004
- Last activity
- 25 February 2004
- Original author
- noel russell
- Posts
- 7
- Discussion status
- Public discussion
- Total views
- 1,902
- Views / 30 days
- 0
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
-
-
Quoted post said:
Originally posted by noel russell
I am considering buying either a Scott USA Comp or a Trek 1200. Can anybody give advice on the best choice?I'm in the same dilemma. What may influence is me the fact that the Scott only comes in a triple chainset and originally I was thinking of a double. I'm new to road bikes and I don't know if theere are major disadvantages to a triple chainset other than weight. Sory I don't have any answers
-
A triple is benefical if you live in a hilly/mountainous area and a double will usually serve you better if you live in a flat area. The scott seems to have better components, but I've never ridden one. I've ridden a trek 1000 and the frame is wicked nice.
-
Quoted post said:
Originally posted by rutled
I'm in the same dilemma. What may influence is me the fact that the Scott only comes in a triple chainset and originally I was thinking of a double. I'm new to road bikes and I don't know if theere are major disadvantages to a triple chainset other than weight. Sory I don't have any answersAfter some research, I have learned that the Scott Comp. has a spec. equivalent to the Trek 1400, but the Scott at £899 is about £100 cheaper. The advantage of the triple is that it is probably more useful for climbing tough hills than the dcoublea. I think I will go for the Scott.
-
Quoted post said:
Originally posted by noel russell
After some research, I have learned that the Scott Comp. has a spec. equivalent to the Trek 1400, but the Scott at £899 is about £100 cheaper. The advantage of the triple is that it is probably more useful for climbing tough hills than the dcoublea. I think I will go for the Scott.
I've decided to go for the trek 1400 as i'v e seen one on the web for £950 and its got Bontrager select wheels, and double crank which i prefer. Theres certainly not much to choose between them. Enjoy your SCOTT -
What kind of warr does the scott have? Double or triple can be changed.
-
Quoted post said:
Originally posted by shokhead1
What kind of warr does the scott have? Double or triple can be changed.
Sorry, I don't know what a warr is. I'm very new to this game. I did enquire of a more knowledgeable friend how easy it is to change a triple to a double. He said its possible but required the shifters to be adjusted. in view of where I cycle he didn't think it was worth it. Many thanks for your interest
Active in the last 60 minutes
Active in this thread
0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total
No signed-in users are active right now.
No known search crawlers active right now.