New Trek 1500, Pilot 2.1, 2100

I'd get the 2100 myself. Same components as the 1500 for the most part, but the headset is internal instead of integrated. I've got a 1500 and the headset creaks and ticks whenever I climb. As far as the extra carbon goes, I doubt it makes a whole lot of difference--I'd rather have the aluminum frame, but that's just me.

The Pilot is a whole different animal for a different style of riding (more relaxed geometry) so your riding style will dictate that versus the 2100.

I was looking in that range myself. I rode the Trek 1500 and the Pilot 2.1. I ended up buying a 2004 Jamis Quest. It had better equipment, Ultegra vs 105. Check out the Fuji's as well.

hangulmalmotayo said:

I'm looking into getting a road bike, and I was just wondering out of the Trek 1500, Pilot 2.1, and the 2100, which bike is best for its value? Is the carbon fiber really worth the extra money? Also, does anyone have any other bike suggestions in the 1000-1500 dollar range?

I'd go for the most comfortable of the three.

hangulmalmotayo said:

I'm looking into getting a road bike, and I was just wondering out of the Trek 1500, Pilot 2.1, and the 2100, which bike is best for its value? Is the carbon fiber really worth the extra money? Also, does anyone have any other bike suggestions in the 1000-1500 dollar range?

I bought a Trek 1500 in 2002 and after a year and half, had the frame replace after the head tube warped. Trek promptly provided with a replacement 2300 frame (which I think is the same as the 2100). It has been a much smoother ride. It depends on what you are going to use the bike for (eg recreational or racing) but if you have the spare cash I'd go for the better frame. Once you buy the frame that's it, you can't upgrade. I'd spend more on a frame first up and perhaps get cheaper components that you can upgrade easily at a later date.