Trek 1000 vs. 1000C

Quoted message said:

Hopefully Mike is around and can answer this (or someone else). Otherwise we'll have to hit up our
LBS tonight. My wife is a budding triathlete. Pretty cool. I'd like to buy her an entry-level road
bike so she doesn't have to do these things on a hybrid. She wants a road bike too. We're not made
of money so we're looking low-end and we have a good relationship

with

Quoted message said:

our local Trek dealer (5 bikes purchased there in the last 3 years). We're looking at the 1000 and
the 1000C. I think for what she does she should probably go with the 1000C. Since she's not a
"competitive" triathlete

right

Quoted message said:

now it would seem to make more sense. More comfortable, not the harsh geometry of the 1000 (I say
harsh because I bought a 1000 and then after getting a fit done at the Bike Gallery they promptly
jacked my handlebars

up

Quoted message said:

about a half-foot. So a bike more like the 1000C would have been better). Any thoughts on these
bikes? Is the 1000C the same as the 1000 for the

most

Quoted message said:

part, otherwise? Same gearing? Same components, I mean? Will it ride like

a

Quoted message said:

road bike, just more comfortable?

Preston: The 1000C could be a very good alternative to a hybrid, although there really shouldn't be
an issue of "harshness" to define the difference between it and a standard 1000. Mostly it's a fit
difference, with the 1000C putting the bars considerably higher up and a shorter top tube. If she's
going to be doing mostly shorter rides (say, under 40 miles) it could work out quite nicely; if
she's going to be getting into longer stuff, you might check into the standard version, especially
if you live in a hilly area (climbing with bars higher than the saddle can be difficult, especially
while standing). If you're talking about the Bike Gallery in Portland, they probably do; don't think
you'll go too far wrong with their recommendations.

Does the shop have both (so she can take each for a ride)? In the end, the most important thing is
that it's something that makes her want to get out and ride!

As for differences between the specs, aside from the frame, you have wider tires on the "C" model,
along with a suspension seatpost and adjustable stem. Curiously, the specs also show a smaller rear
cassette on the "C" model than the standard one, but I don't have a "C" version in stock right now
to confirm that.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com

Preston Crawford said:

Hopefully Mike is around and can answer this (or someone else). Otherwise we'll have to hit up our
LBS tonight. My wife is a budding triathlete. Pretty cool. I'd like to buy her an entry-level road
bike so she doesn't have to do these things on a hybrid. She wants a road bike too. We're not made
of money so we're looking low-end and we have a good relationship

I recall when I was shopping for my bike, a Giant TCR2, I read that it's geometry is halfway between
a tri-bike and a more traditional road bike.

Just a suggestion from something I vaguely remember.

Quoted message said:

Preston

--
Rick Onanian

"Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Preston: The 1000C could be a very good alternative to a hybrid, although there really shouldn't
be an issue of "harshness" to define the difference between it and a standard 1000. Mostly it's a
fit difference, with the 1000C putting the bars considerably higher up and a shorter top tube. If

Well, that's what I mean. If you're fit to be more comfortable riding a little more upright (I trust
the BG when they fit me, they know what they're doing) then sloping downwards is definitely harsh on
your back. My wife is currently riding and fit to a hybrid, like the 7700. So she's used to a more
upright position as well.

Quoted message said:

she's going to be doing mostly shorter rides (say, under 40 miles) it

could

Quoted message said:

work out quite nicely; if she's going to be getting into longer stuff, you

Yes, she will be. Although she reeled off a 56-miler a few weeks ago, she mostly does her tri
distances (12-20, sometimes 30) while training.

Quoted message said:

while standing). If you're talking about the Bike Gallery in Portland,

they

Quoted message said:

probably do; don't think you'll go too far wrong with their

recommendations.

Oh no. I was mostly interested in component differences.

Quoted message said:

Does the shop have both (so she can take each for a ride)? In the end,

the

Quoted message said:

most important thing is that it's something that makes her want to get out and ride!

They do have both and we'll definitely check both out.

Quoted message said:

As for differences between the specs, aside from the frame, you have wider tires on the "C" model,
along with a suspension seatpost and adjustable stem. Curiously, the specs also show a smaller
rear cassette on the "C" model than the standard one, but I don't have a "C" version in stock
right now to confirm that.

What would the smaller rear cassette do? We'll probably swap out the tires for puncture-proof
armadillos, I imagine.

Preston

Preston Crawford said:

My wife is a budding triathlete. Pretty cool. I'd like to buy her an entry-level road bike so she
doesn't have to do these things on a hybrid. She wants a road bike too. We're not made of money so
we're looking low-end and we have a good relationship with our local Trek dealer (5 bikes
purchased there in the last 3 years). We're looking at the 1000 and the 1000C. I think for what
she does she should probably go with the 1000C. Since she's not a "competitive" triathlete right
now it would seem to make more sense. More comfortable, not the harsh geometry of the 1000

Preston,

If you're not already sold on a Trek, you should take a look at the Rivendell Romulus:

rivendellbicycles.combikes romulusframes.htmlOpen ↗

It's a really nice all-around road bike that doesn't follow the latest "racer boy wannabe" fashion
trend. I suspect your wife would like it, and it's reasonably priced. It has a relaxed geometry, can
fit larger tires, and it's easy to get the bars and the saddle at the sam eheight. IIRC, you're in
(near) Portland. There's a Romulus dealer there:

Coventry Cycles Sherman Coventry 2025 SE Hawthorne Portland OR 97215 ph 503 230 7723 fx 503 231 2882
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA terrymorse.combikeOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

If you're not already sold on a Trek, you should take a look at the Rivendell Romulus:

rivendellbicycles.combikes romulusframes.htmlOpen ↗

It's a really nice all-around road bike that doesn't follow the latest "racer boy wannabe" fashion
trend. I suspect your wife would like it, and it's reasonably priced. It has a relaxed geometry,
can fit larger tires, and it's easy to get the bars and the saddle at the sam eheight.

Terry: You need to take another look at the TREK 1000C-

trekbikes.com1000c.jspOpen ↗

and you'll find it comes stock with the bars *higher* than the saddle, 28c tires, dual brake levers
(cyclo-cross style plus STI), all for about $600. For $850, upgrade to the 1200C and get a carbon
fork, lighter frame and Tiagra components. The Romulus isn't even remotely in their price range,
*and* you don't have to read the absolute worst of Grant's ramblings about lugs. Sorry, Grant's
pretty good on a lot of things, but his arguments for why a lugged frame is better are, for the most
part, way-wrong. They *are*

Tig-welding. But facts are facts; tig-welded frames simply do not have problems at their joints, nor
do they suffer from buckled down tubes nearly as much as their lugged predecessors.

But wait, there's more- "A steel Romulus is built to last 20 years, easy. Could be 30, maybe 40.
Aluminum's fatigue life is much less. Carbon fiber doesn't suffer dings, nicks, scratches, and
exposure well. Not at all." (From Rivendell's website)

Excuse me??? You can build an exceptionally-durable frame out of steel, aluminum, ti or carbon. It's
all in how you use the material. Steel frames have historically failed as often as aluminum, yet
nobody talks about it. Even Grant's *steel* Bridgestones suffered from broken derailleur-side
dropouts (not from crashing, just from normal use) (and it's noteworthy that, in the situations I'm
aware of, instead of repairing them, they replaced them with new frames, which heavily discounts the
"steel is repairable thus it's better" argument). Using aluminum, you can so dramatically overbuild
a frame that fatigue life simply isn't relevant. *Or* you can build on the edge of what's possible
and have something that won't last more than a season or two. But that's not what you're going to
find on a moderately-priced bike.

There's nothing at all wrong with a nice steel frame, there's nothing at all wrong (and a lot of
things aesthetically pleasing) with lugs. But you also don't have to spend nearly that much money
for a bike with similar ride qualities to the Romulus. From an aesthetic standpoint, it's a
beautiful bike, but the original poster sounds like he's looking for something a bit more
cost-effective.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com

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

Quoted message said:

Preston Crawford said:

My wife is a budding triathlete. Pretty cool. I'd like to buy her an entry-level road bike so
she doesn't have to do these things on a hybrid. She wants a road bike too. We're

not

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

made of money so we're looking low-end and we have a good relationship

with

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

our local Trek dealer (5 bikes purchased there in the last 3 years).

We're

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

looking at the 1000 and the 1000C. I think for what she does she should probably go with the
1000C. Since she's not a "competitive" triathlete

right

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

now it would seem to make more sense. More comfortable, not the harsh geometry of the 1000

Preston,

If you're not already sold on a Trek, you should take a look at the Rivendell Romulus:

rivendellbicycles.combikes romulusframes.htmlOpen ↗

It's a really nice all-around road bike that doesn't follow the latest "racer boy wannabe" fashion
trend. I suspect your wife would like it, and it's reasonably priced. It has a relaxed geometry,
can fit larger tires, and it's easy to get the bars and the saddle at the sam eheight. IIRC,
you're in (near) Portland. There's a Romulus dealer there:

Coventry Cycles Sherman Coventry 2025 SE Hawthorne Portland OR 97215 ph 503 230 7723 fx 503
231 2882
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA terrymorse.combikeOpen ↗

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Terry: You need to take another look at the TREK 1000C-

trekbikes.com1000c.jspOpen ↗

and you'll find it comes stock with the bars *higher* than the saddle, 28c tires, dual brake
levers (cyclo-cross style plus STI), all for about $600.

Good price, indeed, but it still appears to be a comfort/hybrid bike with drop bars. Suspension
seatpost? What customer are they marketing this frankenbike to, any way?
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA terrymorse.combikeOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Good price, indeed, but it still appears to be a comfort/hybrid bike with drop bars. Suspension
seatpost? What customer are they marketing this frankenbike to, any way?

The suspension seatpost can obviously be swapped out; aside from that, I'm not sure why you find the
idea of a "comfort/hybrid" bike with drop bars to be objectionable. Some "hybrids" are basically
touring frames with drop bars; the distinctions can become quite blurred. Looking at the geometry
for each bike, the main thing that stands out is that TREK has steepened the seat tube angle a bit,
in order to shorten the reach to the bars. The effective top tube length, given a similar knee
position over the pedal, is probably similar for each bike. Overall the geometry charts for the
Romulus are very confusing though, and tend to reinforce the notion that a bike needs to be fit
in-person.

Regarding the "frankenbike" concept in general, the concept of a softer-riding bike with suspension
seatpost, larger tires and taller (drop) bars is definitely catching on. I think we're seeing an
evolution of the hybrid customer moving closer to a conventional road bike, but still concerned
about comfort issues. I don't see this as a bad thing, but rather a way to get more people traveling
more miles by bicycle rather than car (or simply choosing cycling as their preferred recreational
activity over any number of other things).

Curiously, you have me defending a product I really haven't sold. My preference is to set people up
on a conventional road bike, believing that most people's fears of discomfort are a result of
somebody's goofy idea of fit (flat back, riding on the drops, seats that "you'll get used to" etc).
However, I'm looking to stock more of these in the coming months, as I believe they're more
appropriate than the hybrids (with upright bars) they might otherwise buy.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Good price, indeed, but it still appears to be a comfort/hybrid bike with drop bars. Suspension
seatpost? What customer are they marketing this frankenbike to, any way?

The suspension seatpost can obviously be swapped out; aside from that, I'm not sure why you find
the idea of a "comfort/hybrid" bike with drop bars to be objectionable. Some "hybrids" are
basically touring frames with drop bars; the distinctions can become quite blurred. Looking at the
geometry for each bike, the main thing that stands out is that TREK has steepened the seat tube
angle a bit, in order to shorten the reach to the bars. The effective top tube length, given a
similar knee position over the pedal, is probably similar for each bike. Overall the geometry
charts for the Romulus are very confusing though, and tend to reinforce the notion that a bike
needs to be fit in-person.

Regarding the "frankenbike" concept in general, the concept of a softer-riding bike with
suspension seatpost, larger tires and taller (drop) bars is definitely catching on. I think we're
seeing an evolution of the

You've essentially described a Specialized Sequoiah.

...

Quoted message said:

Curiously, you have me defending a product I really haven't sold. My preference is to set people
up on a conventional road bike, believing that most people's fears of discomfort are a result of
somebody's goofy idea of fit (flat back, riding on the drops, seats that "you'll get used to"
etc). However, I'm looking to stock more of these in the coming months, as I believe they're more
appropriate than the hybrids (with upright bars) they might otherwise buy.

...

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

"Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Regarding the "frankenbike" concept in general, the concept of a softer-riding bike with
suspension seatpost, larger tires and taller

(drop)

Quoted message said:

bars is definitely catching on. I think we're seeing an evolution of the hybrid customer moving
closer to a conventional road bike, but still concerned about comfort issues. I don't see this as
a bad thing, but

rather

Quoted message said:

a way to get more people traveling more miles by bicycle rather than car

(or

Quoted message said:

simply choosing cycling as their preferred recreational activity over any number of other things).

Curiously, you have me defending a product I really haven't sold. My preference is to set people
up on a conventional road bike, believing that most people's fears of discomfort are a result of
somebody's goofy idea of fit (flat back, riding on the drops, seats that "you'll get used to"
etc). However, I'm looking to stock more of these in the coming months, as I believe they're more
appropriate than the hybrids (with upright bars) they might otherwise buy.

I bought two bicycles last year. A Raleigh SC40 comfort bike and a Trek 1200 with a horizontal bar
instead of drop bars. I prefer the SC40 by a very wide margin because of the upright position.

If I had purchased a road bike with drop bars, it probably wouldn't be ridden much at all. I gave
away my old Schwinn LeTour because I did not like to ride it with the drop bars and there was no
reason for me to spend any money on it.

How does the Trek 1000 compare to the Cannondale R400 Triple and an entry level road bike?