About Trek liquids

On 2004-08-14, Gamarús penned:

Quoted message said:

Any comment would be welcome.

Do you have any stores that will let you rent high-end bikes for a day? It's
expensive, but not as expensive as buying a bike that doesn't do what you need
it to do.

--
monique

"Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
-- Mark Twain

On 2004-08-14, Gamarús penned:

Quoted message said:

Any comment would be welcome.

Do you have any stores that will let you rent high-end bikes for a day? It's
expensive, but not as expensive as buying a bike that doesn't do what you need
it to do.

--
monique

"Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
-- Mark Twain

El Sat, 14 Aug 2004 08:58:28 -0600, Monique Y. Mudama
<[email hidden]> va escriure:

Quoted message said:

Do you have any stores that will let you rent high-end bikes for a day?
It's
expensive, but not as expensive as buying a bike that doesn't do what
you need
it to do.

In Barcelona, I don't think so. But, I'm thinking in a store that inside
it you can ride for a 100 meters or more track, any bike. That could
provide you some basic feelings about the bike (basically, comfortability,
that it's very important to me), but I'll manage to inform about this.

Thanks, Monique.
--

Gamarús

=?utf-8?Q?Gamar=C3=BAs?= said...

Quoted message said:

Is it reasonable to pay 1000 EUR more for 3 lbs less, and these better
components for my use? Taking in account that it’s a lot of money for me.

Another thing that worries me is the behavior of rear shock in climbs.

Any comment would be welcome.

TIA,

I don't think the 55 is worth all the extra money. LX works just fine.
Both bikes have SPV shocks in the rear which should make them very good
climbers, considering the type of bike they are. A Trek Fuel or other XC
bike would climb better, but won't be as good on the downhills. Giant,
Specialized, Kona and others sell bikes that compete head to head with
Trek. I would research all of them.

Gamarús said:

Hi all,

I would like to know the feedback of trek liquid 25/55 owners, and the
rest of people, of course 🙂.

I'm coming from a hardtail trek 6700 2003 and I would like to upgrade
it. 6700 is perfect to climb up, but it's obviously a little limited
when you go down 🙁. For my week exists around Barcelona (Catalonia,
Europe) through Collserola Park 6700 is fine. Tracks are good and you
can go down faster, jumping several times. Normally you have two
climbs up of about 30 minutes each one, in a typically exist of about
30 km. There are also tracks as in the Trondheim video posted some
days ago in the group, but then my first problem is pedals, not the
bike (well...) At the weekends I usually go to the Pyrenees,
mountains up to 3,000 meters, with climbings up to 4 hours (normally
2 hours), very steep sometimes, where 6700 is perfect, but the
problem is going down in terrain tracks with a lot of rocks.

I'm looking for a comfortable frame, and trek it's comfortable enough
for me. I need a full suspension bike for recreational, not
competition (maybe some one some day). Going down hard, jumping
several times, and some technical tracks. I'm thinking in trek Liquid
25 (2500 EUR) or 55 (3500 EUR); or Fuel 95 (3000 EUR).

Geometry in Liquids seems to be the same. Although I've not been
found any official numbers, I think 25 weights about 30 lbs (13.6
kg), and 55 27 lbs (12.25 kg). Am I right?

In 25 there are some LX components (I would like to improve them),
brakes are different, and front fork is a Manitou Black Elite (25),
and Manitou Minute 2 (55).

Is it reasonable to pay 1000 EUR more for 3 lbs less, and these better
components for my use? Taking in account that it's a lot of money for
me.

Another thing that worries me is the behavior of rear shock in climbs.

Any comment would be welcome.

TIA,

--

Gamarús

(sigh) Drum roll for Ja Dude!

--
- Zilla
Cary, NC
(Remove XSPAM)

Gamarús <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<opscp7l8ijyiboxa@ruc>...

Quoted message said:

Another thing that worries me is the behavior of rear shock in climbs.

Ride a hardtail then.

JD

"Gamarús" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:opscp7l8ijyiboxa@ruc...

Quoted message said:

Hi all,

I would like to know the feedback of trek liquid 25/55 owners, and the
rest of people, of course 🙂.

Quoted message said:

I'm looking for a comfortable frame, and trek it's comfortable enough for
me. I need a full suspension bike for recreational, not competition (maybe
some one some day). Going down hard, jumping several times, and some
technical tracks. I'm thinking in trek Liquid 25 (2500 EUR) or 55 (3500
EUR); or Fuel 95 (3000 EUR).

Quoted message said:

Is it reasonable to pay 1000 EUR more for 3 lbs less, and these better
components for my use? Taking in account that it's a lot of money for me.

Another thing that worries me is the behavior of rear shock in climbs.

Any comment would be welcome.

TIA,

--

Gamarús

Gamarus,
I bought 2 Trek Liquid 25's back around last Christmas, one for myself and
one for my girlfriend. When I bought my Liquid, I was weighing 237 pounds,
and needed the 5 inch full suspension to make very rooty trails more
comfortable to ride---I believe a rider over 200 pounds "needs" more travel
than a 145 pound rider, due to the greater inertial mass. In any event, the
Trek Liquid worked perfectly for me, and handled plenty of abuse. I'm now
at 203 pounds, and its still a hot ticket for me. I use Panaracer FR 2.4
tires on front and rear, and the bike rips turns better than most of the
people that I ride with, can do with typical X-country bikes or Hard tails.
Clearly I'm at a small disadvantage when having to rapidly accelerate from a
near stop to 10 miles per hour in a few feet, but better technique is
preventing most near stops, and when I can "carry" the speed, I don't feel
any liability from the extra weight. Even when my body fat hits 8% and I
weigh 185 pounds, I will still have an issue with constant re-acceleration
if riding terrain that causes this, if the people I am riding with are 150
pound racer types. Since my weight is more of an issue than a few pounds for
my bike, picking a bike and tires that can "carry" speed better though turns
and technical sections, seems a better way to go.

For my girlfriend, the Liquid has been awesome. She a Cat 3 Women's road
racer, with few mountain bike skills. She loves mountain biking, but when
she comes to a log or big rock, rather than clearing it by lifting the front
end, her motus operandi is to ram it at high speed, rarely lightening the
front end very much. The Liquid gets her over almost everything, whereas
previous mountain bikes she rode ( Cannondale hardtail with Monoshock, and
Trek hardtail) would send her over the bars in the same scenarios. The
Liquid has made her really like mountain biking, so once her road season is
over in the fall, she may actually ride the Liquid enough to learn some
techniques :-)

As to high speed descending, I have been riding this bike in Florida so far,
with the largest vertical descents at Razorback. Others on this list can
rate the downhills at Razorback for you, but my description of them is very
steep, about 30 to 60 foot lengths, allowing speeds on these downhills over
35 miles per hour. They are littered with rocks and boulder type debris, and
most would consider fast descents on these as technical. My Liquid seemed to
handle the downhills much better than my friend's Santa Cruz, though this
may be partly because I run light Downhill tires, and he rides X-country
tires. In any event I rode the downhills much faster than the people I was
with, because my bike was far more stable and responsive going very fast
over lots of good sized rock and debris. Sudden turns thrown in to the mix,
were easy for the liquid, and it tracked like it was made for exactly this
type of environment.

I'll have it in the North Carolina area soon, where I can ride on some real
mountain sized downhills, but for now I feel confident in saying the Liquid
is a good bike.

Regards,
Dan Volker

El Sat, 14 Aug 2004 19:51:23 GMT, SuperSlinky <[email hidden]> va
escriure:

Quoted message said:

I don't think the 55 is worth all the extra money. LX works just fine.
Both bikes have SPV shocks in the rear which should make them very good
climbers, considering the type of bike they are. A Trek Fuel or other XC
bike would climb better, but won't be as good on the downhills. Giant,
Specialized, Kona and others sell bikes that compete head to head with
Trek. I would research all of them.

Yes, LX really works fine enough. I have LX at my Trek 6700 🙂. But,
Liquid 25 has a mix of LX/XT components and other brands in brakes, and as
I'll upgrade to a better bike, I would like a complete XT. No worried
about, I think I'll be able to change in the shop.

The question is if the frameset is exactly the same in liquid 25 than in
Liquid 55. I think is the same material and the same geometry, but I don't
know if weights the same or not (any structural change). Anybody knows
about it? If the answer is Yes, then there is any complaint, the front
fork is the only difference important to me if I change into XT
components. If not, well...

On the other hand I tested some Kona. Geometry is agressive, and I'm
looking for a comfortable enough 🙂. Maybe is the age...

Last week, I tested a Specialized Epic in a rocky forest track, and worked
really fine compared to my hardtail. But, although geometry is also a
little agressive, I read in some magazine that the suspension system is
something between Hardtail and All-mountain, beeing in the last not good
as a typical all-mountain.

However, I'll test inside the shop, before purchasing a Trek, some Kona,
Cannondale, Gt, Specialized and some local brand (that are cheaper).

I also read, that 2005 Liquids would change slighty the rear suspension
system, improving perfomance and travel, and the higher bar would have
more sloop, having a more agressive look (I don't know is overall geometry
will change). A true redesign of the Liquid's series. In Fuel series also
would increase travel's suspension into 100 mm.

Regards,

--

Gamarús

"Dan Vo2lker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I bought 2 Trek Liquid 25's back around last Christmas, one for myself and
one for my girlfriend. When I bought my Liquid, I was weighing 237 pounds,
and needed the 5 inch full suspension to make very rooty trails more
comfortable to ride---

HAHAHAHA

Quoted message said:

I believe a rider over 200 pounds "needs" more travel
than a 145 pound rider, due to the greater inertial mass.

Can you say "fallacy"? Nobody *needs* travel, except goobers who are
conned by the marketing creeps.

Quoted message said:

In any event, the
Trek Liquid worked perfectly for me, and handled plenty of abuse.

Yeah, we've seen how "abusive" your trails are. What a laugh...again.

<snip more non-expert opinion>

Quoted message said:

As to high speed descending, I have been riding this bike in Florida

<snip laughable claims/terrain>

Tell us all, Vo2lker, how does one descend a molehill? What's the
high point in Fla?

Quoted message said:

I'll have it in the North Carolina area soon, where I can ride on some real
mountain sized downhills, but for now I feel confident in saying the Liquid
is a good bike.

A glowing review from someone who doesn't know jack shiite, except the
sad little world of Fla "mountain biking". What a joke.

JD

El Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:10:26 -0400, Dan Volker <[email hidden]> va
escriure:

(...)

Thanks Dan for providing such generous information 🙂.

And, what say you about uphills with a Liquid 25? Rear shox moves, bounce?
I'm more worried about uphills behaviour, than downhills, as I think you
always have to suffer in uphills, and have fun in downhills. I'd prefer
less suffer than more fun 🙂. But obviously, I need more fun than a
downhill with a hardtail.

Best regards,

--

Gamarús

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

Quoted message said:

"Dan Vo2lker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I bought 2 Trek Liquid 25's back around last Christmas, one for myself

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

one for my girlfriend. When I bought my Liquid, I was weighing 237

pounds,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and needed the 5 inch full suspension to make very rooty trails more
comfortable to ride---

HAHAHAHA

Quoted message said:

I believe a rider over 200 pounds "needs" more travel
than a 145 pound rider, due to the greater inertial mass.

Can you say "fallacy"? Nobody *needs* travel, except goobers who are
conned by the marketing creeps.

Quoted message said:

In any event, the
Trek Liquid worked perfectly for me, and handled plenty of abuse.

Yeah, we've seen how "abusive" your trails are. What a laugh...again.

<snip more non-expert opinion>

Quoted message said:

As to high speed descending, I have been riding this bike in Florida

<snip laughable claims/terrain>

Tell us all, Vo2lker, how does one descend a molehill? What's the
high point in Fla?

Quoted message said:

I'll have it in the North Carolina area soon, where I can ride on some

real

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

mountain sized downhills, but for now I feel confident in saying the

Liquid

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

is a good bike.

A glowing review from someone who doesn't know jack shiite, except the
sad little world of Fla "mountain biking". What a joke.

JD

JD,
The joke is that a wimpy stick man like you can have such a big mouth on
Usenet, and get away with it--even gain fame from it. In real life you'd be
toothless and in the hospital all the time if you talked the same way.
Count your blessings that your "circle jerk" friends on AMB will support
your nonsense, and that the Internet allows people like you to act like a
bad ass ( while on the Internet).

Dan V

engamarus says:

Quoted message said:

I'm more worried about uphills behaviour, than downhills, as I think you
always have to suffer in uphills, and have fun in downhills. I'd prefer
less suffer than more fun 🙂. But obviously, I need more fun than a
downhill with a hardtail.

If you have to buy a full sus to have more "fun" than a hardtail or even
(gasp!) a rigid bike, then you must be confusing speed with skill.

Steve

On 17 Aug 2004 02:14:19 GMT, Stephen Baker <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

engamarus says:

Quoted message said:

I'm more worried about uphills behaviour, than downhills, as I think you
always have to suffer in uphills, and have fun in downhills. I'd prefer
less suffer than more fun 🙂. But obviously, I need more fun than a
downhill with a hardtail.

If you have to buy a full sus to have more "fun" than a hardtail or even
(gasp!) a rigid bike, then you must be confusing speed with skill.

Steve

What do you know... you're just a working stiff!!
--
Slacker

Dan Vo2lker said:

The joke is that a wimpy stick man like you can have such a big mouth on
Usenet, and get away with it--even gain fame from it.

You just don't get it, do you? Where were you on July 15th? I was in
Lake City, waiting to get my ass kicked by some flatlander. As for
your childlike namecalling, I am rubber and you are glue. It bounces
off of me and sticks to you. Third grade terms like that *must* be
more understandable to you.

Quoted message said:

In real life you'd be toothless and in the hospital all the time if you
talked the same way.

There's a certain amount of irony there, on many different levels. I
speak my mind whenever and wherever I please. Those who know me, know
this to be true and no amount of posturing accusation you could ever
muster will ever change that. Also, rest assured that I have not ever
been hospitalized as an assault victim.

Quoted message said:

Count your blessings that your "circle jerk" friends on AMB will support
your nonsense, and that the Internet allows people like you to act like a
bad ass ( while on the Internet).

You are really lost, do you know that? What's funny is that my real
(do you even know the meaning of real?) friends on am-b know they
don't need to "suppport" anything I may write. They may get a
chuckle, or even think I went overboard, but know that I can take care
of my own business. BTW, Uncle Sam does make real badasses, but those
of your ilk wouldn't know anything about that.

JD

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

Quoted message said:

"Dan Vo2lker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:

<snip rant>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

BTW, Uncle Sam does make real badasses, but those of your ilk wouldn't

know anything about that.

JD, you are truly ridiculous, as is this comment.

cc

Slacker says:

Quoted message said:

What do you know... you're just a working stiff!!

Heh heh! I know how to have fun... ;-)

Steve

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

Quoted message said:

Dan Vo2lker said:

The joke is that a wimpy stick man like you can have such a big mouth on
Usenet, and get away with it--even gain fame from it.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In real life you'd be toothless and in the hospital all the time if you
talked the same way.

There's a certain amount of irony there, on many different levels. I
speak my mind whenever and wherever I please. Those who know me, know
this to be true and no amount of posturing accusation you could ever
muster will ever change that. Also, rest assured that I have not ever
been hospitalized as an assault victim.

Which just goes to prove you've always been a "big fish" in a small pond. I
can see you as the tough guy in the chess club while in high school, a kid
who carefully planned to stay away from the football team or other more
physical types. Or maybe you were the "big dog" in the AV club.

In college, I can see you avoiding contact with the "contact sports"
personalities like football players, wrestlers, and other big guys, and
hanging out with the drama club or some other group of "posers" where you
could safely say what ever came in to your head, without fear of any of
them pinning you up against the wall, or dipping your head in the toilet.
From seeing your pictures, a guy like you would have been "toilet dipping"
on a regular basis, if you weren't careful to avoid contact with the bigger
athletes ( none of which talked as aggressively, as you do now on usenet).

Its clear to see this behavior is still carefully planned by you, as your
outlets for big talking and chest puffing are Internet Chat rooms and Usenet
equivalents. Maybe when you fearlessly venture out of your home, and have
food or drinks in the local Dunkin Doughnuts, Starbucks, or TGI Fridays ,
you can get away with big talk amongst dougnut eaters, yuppie wimps,
attorneys and other posers, but your survival depends on your careful
avoidance of the bigger, more physical types who "could talk like you, but
would not". People who actually are physical, instead of just acting it,
don't say things that would obviously provoke physical confrontation, unless
they really wanted a physical confrontation, and wanted to kick someone's
ass. And since doing this often, would get this kind of person in trouble
with the law on a regular basis, they end up learning NOT to talk like this,
except on rare occaisions when it is really called for. You don't resemble
this in any way. You resemble the poser in the Internet Chat room. How you
ride your mountain bike is irrelavant. There are plenty of wimps and chess
club types who ride bikes well--hell, back in highschool, the guys who made
cycling their primary sport, were the guys to wimpy to go out for football
or any other contact sport. Now that we are out of college and in the real
world, contact sports are largely unavailable, and impractical, so sports
like cycling will prevail , even in the realm of the larger, physical
athletes who would have dipped your head in the toilet in high school or
college.

Reading the [censored] posts and boasts that keep coming out of your mouth,
about how you would be talking tough regardless of where you are , just
makes me wish you had attended USF back when I did---there would have been
multiple toilets with your name on them :-)

Dan V

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Count your blessings that your "circle jerk" friends on AMB will support
your nonsense, and that the Internet allows people like you to act like

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

bad ass ( while on the Internet).

You are really lost, do you know that? What's funny is that my real
(do you even know the meaning of real?) friends on am-b know they
don't need to "suppport" anything I may write. They may get a
chuckle, or even think I went overboard, but know that I can take care
of my own business. BTW, Uncle Sam does make real badasses, but those
of your ilk wouldn't know anything about that.

JD

JD said:

"Dan Vo2lker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I believe a rider over 200 pounds "needs" more travel
than a 145 pound rider, due to the greater inertial mass.

Can you say "fallacy"? Nobody *needs* travel, except goobers who are
conned by the marketing creeps.

No, no, it makes sense. It's obvious that the need for travel goes to
zero when the rider is <125 lbs. 😉

gabrielle, "team HT/team rigid"

On 2004-08-17, Dan Volker penned:

Quoted message said:

Reading the [censored] posts and boasts that keep coming out of your mouth,
about how you would be talking tough regardless of where you are , just
makes me wish you had attended USF back when I did---there would have been
multiple toilets with your name on them :-)

Cool it, Dan. Yes, JD picks on you, but you're sounding mighty immature there
yourself. No one respects the dude who tries to drag an online conflict into
a real life fight, or worse yet, crows about the outcome of a fight that
hasn't a chance of every actually transpiring. You're making an awful lot of
assumptions, apparently based on a picture, and looks can be deceiving. I had
friends in high school who made a point of looking harmless so that when they
took their would-be tormentors out, the bullies had no idea what hit 'em.

You, on the other hand, are losing points in the "sympathy" category by
bragging about swirlies you gave in college. Jesus, that's pathetic enough in
high school, let alone college.

Do us all a favor and killfile JD if he's so objectionable. You're not
winning any friends with your current angle.

--
monique

"Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live."
-- Mark Twain