Please don't get overly technical on me with your reply. I certainly appreciate your input, but too much effort will be wasted as I really just want to cut to the chase. I've been an avid cyclist for the last year. I'm coming to cycling later than most, but have been involved in sports all of my life and took to it like a fish to water. I wanted to try cyclocross and that is what I ride now (Trek), but now want to concentrate on road cycling exclusively. I won't be racing but want to ride aggressively, not just for the TYpe A personality satisfaction, but to stay fit and be able to ride comfortably with the more advanced riders. I like fast and long rides. I want a top of the line bike and want to stick with Trek. I'm not technically savvy and wan't to know what the difference in those two bikes might mean to me.
Cycling Equipment · Public discussion
Trek Madone or 5900 ('04)? Any difference?
Thread details
What we know about this thread
- Original section
- Cycling Equipment
- Published
- 8 January 2004
- Last activity
- 8 January 2004
- Original author
- mas
- Posts
- 5
- Discussion status
- Public discussion
- Total views
- 1,439
- Views / 30 days
- 0
- Topics
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
-
-
Quoted post said:
Originally posted by mas
I'm not technically savvy and wan't to know what the difference in those two bikes might mean to me.That will depend on your riding style, and your personal physiological make-up. Do you ride in the mountains, rolling hills flats, what is your weight? Are you a pedal masher, or do you go out and ride LSD's? Technicallly the Madone is approx 1/10 of a pound heavier and stiffer than the '04 - 5900. It is also slightly more aerodynamically designed than the 5900. Trek claims it will "cut a full minute of time off a 200k stage". (I don't race anymore, so this is not particularly important to me).
This only scratches the surface of the differences between the two bikes, but if you are considering owning one or the other, go ride 'em.
-
I like to know why someone would spend $6K on the Madone, as suppose to get some Italian monocoque carbon bike.
Yes, the Madone is full of quality through out...but does the ride worth the $6K? can you get the same ride quality from a much lesser bike?
I'm very curious about this topic since I don't nor have ever ridden a $6K bike such as Colnago, Madone etc... -
Quoted post said:
Originally posted by Rudy
I like to know why someone would spend $6K on the Madone, as suppose to get some Italian monocoque carbon bike.
Yes, the Madone is full of quality through out...but does the ride worth the $6K? can you get the same ride quality from a much lesser bike?
I'm very curious about this topic since I don't nor have ever ridden a $6K bike such as Colnago, Madone etc...
I'm sure you could get 98% of the ride quality by spending quite a bit less. As with a lot of things, the last little bit always costs the most. I would say ride them both. When thinking about shelling out that much money, not riding as many bikes as possible is doing an injustice to yourself. -
Don't see how a 0.1 lb difference in weight, or a possible minute over 4 hours at 50 kph, would be a factor on club rides.
Believe I saw a recent magazine report that said the Madone was too stiff for them vs the 5900. Personally, I can't see paying a lot for an ultra-stiff ride with any frame. I test rode the 5200 a few months ago, and thought it had a nice, plush ride. IMO, you'll need to test ride both Trek bikes before deciding.
Of course, if you're in love with the style of the Madone, or just want the top Trek model as you said, then go for it. I'm sure you'll be happy with the bike.
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.