I have narrowed my choices for a new ride down to the 1500 and the 2100. The main difference being the carbon seat stays. I am looking to put in ~150 hilly miles a week between now November.
Just how important are those seat stays?
Thanks for the input.
Cycling Equipment · Public discussion
Which Trek: 1500 or 2100?
Thread details
What we know about this thread
- Original section
- Cycling Equipment
- Published
- 5 July 2004
- Last activity
- 6 July 2004
- Original author
- natewilkes
- Posts
- 4
- Discussion status
- Public discussion
- Total views
- 1,134
- Views / 30 days
- 0
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
-
-
1. A little more comfortable
2. Less weight (?). If so, not a lot of weight is shaved off= you probably won't notice a difference between the two.
3. Style.
-
Quoted post said:
Originally posted by keydates
1. A little more comfortable
2. Less weight (?). If so, not a lot of weight is shaved off= you probably won't notice a difference between the two.
3. Style.Stick with #3,and you won't be disapointed.
-
I don´t know about the 2100, but I recently purchased the 1500 (international version = full Ultegra, except cassette), and I can´t complain about weight or confort. I still have to test at climbing a good hill.
However, this is the first bike I bought and I still have a lot to learn. My budget was only able to buy a 1500 (import is expensive!!) and I don´t think I would take full advantage of 2100 frame.
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.