Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

TREK 2300 : 2004 model

Started by Donald Gillies · · Last activity · 3 posts · 893 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
18 April 2004
Last activity
19 April 2004
Original author
Donald Gillies
Posts
3
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
893
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–3 of 3
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I am thinking about a TREK 2004 model 2300 frameset. I have a couple
    of questions about these frames, and wondered if someone knows the
    answer.

    1. These frame have an internal headset. Is this just marginally
    better than an integrated headset, with all the associated
    maintenance nightmares, and the possibility of a quickly ruined
    frame because these headsets are not robust?

    2. The frame lacks braze-ons for a rear rack, although it has eyelets
    on the dropouts. What are the drawbacks of a rack that attaches
    to the seatpost, or the mono-stay (if such mounts exist) ??

    3. The frame lacks a pump peg. Is this really a disadvantage? My
    old trek had a pump peg so you could carry a frame-fit pump below
    the top tube.

    4. Does anybody know how much these frames weigh ?? I read that the
    2003 full ZR9000 frame was 2.72 lbs, however, I have also heard
    that frames with carbon seatstays are usualy _heavier_ than pure
    aluminum frames. So did trek downgrade the frame this year
    (e.g. is it heavier than it was back in 2003) ??

    Thanx in advance,

    - Don Gillies
    San Diego, CA

  2. Donald Gillies said:

    I am thinking about a TREK 2004 model 2300 frameset. I have a couple
    of questions about these frames, and wondered if someone knows the
    answer.

    1. These frame have an internal headset. Is this just marginally
    better than an integrated headset, with all the associated
    maintenance nightmares, and the possibility of a quickly ruined
    frame because these headsets are not robust?

    It's quite a lot better really. See
    http://www.chrisking.com/pdfs/Int%20Headsets%20Explained.pdf for a
    slightly opinionated explanation!

    Quoted message said:

    2. The frame lacks braze-ons for a rear rack, although it has eyelets
    on the dropouts. What are the drawbacks of a rack that attaches
    to the seatpost, or the mono-stay (if such mounts exist) ??

    Lower carrying capacity and stability, but it's not as bad as it seems
    because most of the weight is carried by the struts leading to the
    dropouts. Some people get away with P-clips for the top rack mountings.

    Quoted message said:

    3. The frame lacks a pump peg. Is this really a disadvantage? My
    old trek had a pump peg so you could carry a frame-fit pump below
    the top tube.

    Not if the head angle is steeper than the seat angle, because in that
    case the pump can't slip anyway. Looking at the specs for the 2300,
    this will depend on what size frame you ride. The smaller frames have a
    rather steep seat angle and a slack head angle, presumably to avoid toe
    overlap with the front wheel, but the bigger frames are OK.

  3. Zog The Undeniable said:

    Donald Gillies wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    3. The frame lacks a pump peg. Is this really a disadvantage? My
    old trek had a pump peg so you could carry a frame-fit pump below
    the top tube.

    Quoted message said:

    Not if the head angle is steeper than the seat angle, because in that
    case the pump can't slip anyway.

    Sure it can. It only has to pivot at the ST-TT junction.
    Options include a Zefal strap-on pump peg, or putting the pump
    along the left seatstay. OTOH, if pump pegs, rack mounts etc
    are very important to the OP, perhaps this frame is not the
    ideal choice. Of course it can be bodged, but at heart it's
    still a modern lightweight aluminum racing frame with a goofy
    carbon butt-end.

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.