Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Trek confusion....

Started by Honest989 · · Last activity · 11 posts · 1,618 views

← Back to Cycling Equipment

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.

01 / Original postTrek confusion....Honest989 · 5 Nov 2004 02 / This pagePosts 1–11Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #11serenaslu · 6 Nov 2004

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
5 November 2004
Last activity
6 November 2004
Original author
Honest989
Posts
11
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,618
Views / 30 days
0

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

Showing posts 1–11 of 11
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Original post
    Honest989
    Archived post
    #1

    I've had a trek 1000 (2004) for about a year now and in that time i've improved and can now definately say im more of a climber than a sprinter. (to prove the point, in my first proper event, we had a manchestour recently up through the pennines going up holme moss and holme firth and i came in 8th out of 150 on a 67mile route) I love the hilly stuff and I love cycling. Having said that, I've come to recognise the trek 1000 as little more than a trainer, and while it's performed admirably so far, I do notice minor niggly things, like grating when exerting a lot of effort, and since i was a newbie when i bought the bike, triple chainsets are not brilliant, the gears work a lot sloppier than if it were a double and i've never used the granny gear, so i thought I'll go for a mid range bike, say trek 1500 and that'll do me.

    I love treks and stand by them, but i've just taken a look at the trek uk webby. it has listed :

    1500 DT
    1500 D 10 spd
    1500 T 10 speed.

    I compared all three, and perhaps the only difference between them was that there was a lack of colour options above 1500DT. So, on to the crux of the matter. What the hell does D/T/DT mean?

    Report
  2. fixit
    Archived post
    #2
    Honest989 said:

    I compared all three, and perhaps the only difference between them was that there was a lack of colour options above 1500DT. So, on to the crux of the matter. What the hell does D/T/DT mean?

    Not sure, but maybe Double and Triple?

    Report
  3. Eric007bike
    Archived post
    #3

    Usually The "D" and "T" denotes double or triple chainring.

    Report
  4. TKOS
    Archived post
    #4

    The 1500 is a great bike but it is still just the upper end of the 1000 series. Look into the 2100 or 2300. A little more carbon fibre, less weight, better components, double or triple chain rings.

    Report
  5. Eric007bike
    Archived post
    #5

    Maybe the 1500 DT is a nine speed cassette available with either a double or a triple chain ring. Maybe the 1500 D is a 10 speed cassette with a double and the 1500 T is a 10 speed cassette with a triple.

    Report
  6. boudreaux
    Archived post
    #6
    Eric007bike said:

    Maybe the 1500 DT is a nine speed cassette available with either a double or a triple chain ring. Maybe the 1500 D is a 10 speed cassette with a double and the 1500 T is a 10 speed cassette with a triple.

    Give the dude a cupie doll.

    Report
  7. boudreaux
    Archived post
    #7
    TKOS said:

    The 1500 is a great bike but it is still just the upper end of the 1000 series.

    Well, it isn't part of the '1000 series'. Frame and geometry is different. The 1000 series are all 1000s.

    Report
  8. peterm5365
    Archived post
    #8
    boudreaux said:

    Well, it isn't part of the '1000 series'. Frame and geometry is different. The 1000 series are all 1000s.

    Just the frame material is different. They use thinner walled aluminum for the 1500, but the geometry is the same.

    Report
  9. boudreaux
    Archived post
    #9
    peterm5365 said:

    .... but the geometry is the same.

    Beginning in 04.

    Report
  10. TKOS
    Archived post
    #10

    The 1000, 1200 and 1500 all have the same geometery, all use the same aluminum (alpha) and have the same carbon fibre forks. They have different groups (sora, tiagra, 105) and a few other different components and colour choices. That is according to the US/Canada Trek website. Maybe in other parts of the world things are different, I don't know.

    Report
  11. serenaslu
    Archived post
    #11
    TKOS said:

    The 1000, 1200 and 1500 all have the same geometery, all use the same aluminum (alpha) and have the same carbon fibre forks. They have different groups (sora, tiagra, 105) and a few other different components and colour choices. That is according to the US/Canada Trek website. Maybe in other parts of the world things are different, I don't know.

    FWIW, I believe that the stock US version 1500 uses Alpha SLR tubing and Bontrager Race fork, and the 1000/1200 use Alpha SL tubing and a different design Bontrager brand carbon fork. The UK 1500 has Ultegra drivetrain components in either 9 or 10-speed, as opposed to the US's 105 components.

    Report

Keep exploring

Browse the sectionCycling Equipment Return to CyclingForumsStart at the home page Search discussionsFind another thread

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.