Page 1056 of 1889

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:30 pm
by HUMP DIESEL
KWalker wrote:
ultyguy wrote:For all the crap that they get, are they really that bad of a bike? Surely the Speed Concept is a pretty quick TT bike as plenty of other teams use it under guise. And the Madone can't be so awful can it? I think the new brake system is crap, but then again, it just won MSR, can't be that bad.

disclaimer: I have never owned nor currently own anything Trek.


Every single person I know that has a 2010 or newer Trek seems to love it be it the new Madone, Speed Concept, etc. The brand gets a lot of shit in the US for being the go-to brand for newer riders and thus its not exclusive, but the top end models are still awesome bikes. The only reason I got a Super Six was because a Madone with a 7900 or better groupset was just too much cash- I would have rather tried a H1 7 series honestly.


I can put my two cents in, but only in the fact that I was racing a TREK for two seasons, same bike both seasons, and it was not the high end Madone, the 5 series. I hated it. I got wins, but I always felt like it was not stiff enough. Teammate had a 6 series top of the line and when we gave the bikes back, he went back to his GIANT from a previous team. He called and ask me if the GIANT was really supposed to be that much better of a bike?? I, like KWalker, went to Cannondale this season, but not carbon, I went to aluminum. One because I had raced on it before with great results, and two, for the price.

HUMP

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:30 pm
by Weenie

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:46 pm
by prendrefeu
Just gotta clarify something: the bike did not win MSR, a rider did.
That said, the bike did not hamper his performance.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:52 pm
by munk93
prendrefeu wrote:Just gotta clarify something: the bike did not win MSR, a rider did.
That said, the bike did not hamper his performance.


:thumbup:
Trek still have Cancellera on the front page of their website.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:10 pm
by pastronef
micky wrote:
Rodrego Hernandez wrote:They'll use what they like. Shimano don't have that much input!

Trek are the front runner as bike sponsor if Pinarello don't renew next season.


Trek? Really?



here's maybe why

Radioshack will stop the sponsorship at the end of 2013
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report- ... ponsorship

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:13 pm
by Pharmstrong
Since the talk of Pinarello's contract ending I've thought Sky on Trek made the most sense, especially now Cavendish is gone and outside of Cancellara RSNT's prospects don't look too good. There's also rumors that Radioshack will be ending their sponsorship. Trek have the money, and aside from Sky already winning so much they now have Boswell and Dombrowski which I'm sure the Trek marketing department would love.

If it does happen it would be interesting to see if they keep the Pro components and Shimano wheels or switch to Bontrager.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:34 pm
by pastronef
Pharmstrong wrote:Since the talk of Pinarello's contract ending I've thought Sky on Trek made the most sense, especially now Cavendish is gone and outside of Cancellara RSNT's prospects don't look too good. There's also rumors that Radioshack will be ending their sponsorship. Trek have the money, and aside from Sky already winning so much they now have Boswell and Dombrowski which I'm sure the Trek marketing department would love.

If it does happen it would be interesting to see if they keep the Pro components and Shimano wheels or switch to Bontrager.



very well said, useful thinking :thumbup:

surely they will not ditch the Shimano Di2

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:54 pm
by ultyguy
Absolutely nothing wrong with having Cancellara on the front page of the website, it's just that they could get a 2 for 1 with this shot :lol: Madone and Domane in one!
Image

I just find the Trek hate a bit OTT sometimes, I reckon their most recent 6.9 SSL's are probably pretty amazing bikes all things considered, they're more than just marketing money. As for the Speed Concept, I'd be willing to bet it's one of the 1-3 fastest TT bikes out there, and at any rate, at this point, they're all starting to look the same w/ all the UCI limitations.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:42 pm
by Ghost234
I've tried several different brands over the last few years and Trek was one of the big disapointments. I rode a 2012 6.2 for a few months and really didn't like it.

1) The paint was easily scuffed and the decals were ruined as a result. I wasn't the first person I know to see this happen.

2) The frames felt dead. There was no road feel to it. It felt like my tires were flat. I've experienced this with a few other brands, but Trek and Focus seemed to be some of the worst for it.

3) It wasn't all the stiff. The front end and BB felt like noodles compared to a Cervelo R3/5 or a Tarmac SL3/4.

They are decent bikes, but I won't be riding one of their road bikes unless they do something incredible. Their MTB's on the other hand are pretty well done - paint aside.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:49 pm
by pastronef
special fork for the R3 Cervelo for the cobbles

https://twitter.com/krederRaymond/statu ... 05/photo/1

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:53 pm
by carbon2329
prendrefeu wrote:Just gotta clarify something: the bike did not win MSR, a rider did.
That said, the bike did not hamper his performance.


Same could be said about Aero frames too. :mrgreen: :D (which ever side of the fence you sit on, in regards to aero benifits)

Not trying to go OT or start down that road.

Just thought is was funny.

prendrefeu, I totally agree with you.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:11 pm
by stella-azzurra
I've yet to hear of a pro rider complain that their equipment is sub par and hampers their performance.
Even when they are not on the team they work for.
It's either bad luck, a mechanical (which happens from time to time), bad decisions, bad timing, or no legs.
If the bike works without any mechanical it's never the bike.
Mind you they have trained on this bike since the beginning of the season and all the issues will be sorted out in training not during their target race.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 8:19 pm
by HUMP DIESEL
Ghost234 wrote:I've tried several different brands over the last few years and Trek was one of the big disapointments. I rode a 2012 6.2 for a few months and really didn't like it.

1) The paint was easily scuffed and the decals were ruined as a result. I wasn't the first person I know to see this happen.

2) The frames felt dead. There was no road feel to it. It felt like my tires were flat. I've experienced this with a few other brands, but Trek and Focus seemed to be some of the worst for it.

3) It wasn't all the stiff. The front end and BB felt like noodles compared to a Cervelo R3/5 or a Tarmac SL3/4.

They are decent bikes, but I won't be riding one of their road bikes unless they do something incredible. Their MTB's on the other hand are pretty well done - paint aside.


This pretty much sums up what I was feeling as well.

HUMP

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 8:20 pm
by HUMP DIESEL
stella-azzurra wrote:I've yet to hear of a pro rider complain that their equipment is sub par and hampers their performance.
Even when they are not on the team they work for.
It's either bad luck, a mechanical (which happens from time to time), bad decisions, bad timing, or no legs.
If the bike works without any mechanical it's never the bike.
Mind you they have trained on this bike since the beginning of the season and all the issues will be sorted out in training not during their target race.


We also all know that the bikes of the pros are sometimes made with a different carbon layup than what "We" can ride. That was stated about Specialized a long time ago.

HUMP

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 8:28 pm
by Ghost234
pastronef wrote:special fork for the R3 Cervelo for the cobbles

https://twitter.com/krederRaymond/statu ... 05/photo/1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Pretty sure that is the same as previous years. For cobbles, Cervelo goes to the R3 mud, a slightly modified R3. It has a fork with more clearance, a little longer wheelbase and a rear triangle with more clearance.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:39 pm
by Kjetil
Kjetil wrote:Was Ciolek on Veloflex Criterium or Roubaix?
Finally a proper picture. My vote goes to Roubaix:

Image

Pic via micky.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:39 pm
by Weenie