Shout Box

Who's Online
0 registered (), 7 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#16502 - 09/30/05 07:19 PM Trek 2200...
JoeKayak Offline
old hand

Registered: 06/21/02
Posts: 970
Loc: Manhattan

I had a moment in the bike shop last week:

I saw a Trek 2200 with:
Carbon Ford, Seat and Chain Stays
Full Ultegra 9-speed
Bontrager racer wheel set.
$1600.

So bitter my bonus is a month late this year. I think that's my dream bike (except that it was red).

Raise your hand if you've ever done a half iron man. Which one? (place/time of year/your thoughts)...

jk

Top
#16503 - 10/01/05 12:32 AM Re: Trek 2200... [Re: JoeKayak]
Mike Rawdon Offline

Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 11/29/99
Posts: 4276
Loc: Poughkeepsie
Quote:


Raise your hand if you've ever done a half iron man. Which one? (place/time of year/your thoughts)...

jk




Tupper Lake (NY) Tinman, mid-July 1989. 4hr53min and change. I picked a northern race venue to escape So. NY humidity and was rewarded with a nice dry day. Traffic on the road is non-existent compared to So. NY/NJ so we fanned out across Rt 56 for the out and back bike leg and just flew. It was my first and only 1/2 Ironman tri and it was so nearly the race of my best dreams that I never wanted to do another one. I was more of a 2 hr race guy myself, training and interest-wise.

And I rode my bestest, RED bike.

Top
#16504 - 10/05/05 06:21 AM Re: Trek 2200... [Re: JoeKayak]
hartmann Offline
member

Registered: 11/20/99
Posts: 161
Loc: Northfield, VT
I did the Firmman 1/2 Ironman in Narragansett RI way back in 1999. The race is held in September. I was through T2 in 3 hours but my legs started to cramp with about 2 miles left in the bike ride. The run (mostly walk) ended up taking just under 3 hours for a total time of 5 h 58 m 42 s. It a very nice race with a flat course. You almost don't have to come out of the aerobars for the entire bike ride. The ocean swim is nice and fast compared to a lake swim if you have good weather.

Top
#16505 - 10/07/05 01:37 AM Re: Trek 2200... [Re: JoeKayak]
MurphysLaw Offline
gumby

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 2308
Loc: Hudson Valley, NY
SBR/Harriman Half, back in late May. I posted a report about it here someplace. Cold swim, hilly bike, hilly run. I'm doing it again next year. Small race, right in my back yard, and I won a $50 off coupon.

Timberman, in mid-August. By far the best race of any sort I've ever been a part of. Large race (1200 finishers this year), but good, very good. They get big name Pros there too, so it's cool to be racing w/ them on the same course.
Perfect lake for a swim, great bike course, great run course, BEST volunteers I've ever seen.
It's not just a race, it's an event.

PS - Tinman is notorious for a short bike and run course, (not that there's anything wrong with that ) that's why Mikey R was so "fast" there.

PPS - JK, get the bike!!! I finally broke down and got a tri bike, it is literally in the mail at this moment, I can't wait.
_________________________
"Flailing?" "Flail on!"

Top
#16506 - 10/07/05 02:59 PM Re: Trek 2200... [Re: MurphysLaw]
JoeKayak Offline
old hand

Registered: 06/21/02
Posts: 970
Loc: Manhattan


Mike-

I remember seeing your post on SBR-Harriman and looking up your very impressive time!!

on the timberman, I did see that one, but since I'm going for speed in 2006 NYC marathon, I want to get my half IM out of the way by the end of July, so I'm looking at the Musselman, the Mooseman and the Tinman: all are about 5.5 hours from NYC. But I think I'm going to do the Tinman after all (best timing for me and doesn't conflict with the NYC Olympic Tri-cf. Musselman or the Covered Bridges Half Marathon-cf.Mooseman).

But I don't know what you mean by short run course and short bike course for the Tinman. It's a half IM, so it should be the same.

Also, I may try the SBR-Harriman for fun depending on where I am in my training. Or I may volunteer to get an idea.

And I would LOVE to buy that bike....but I just can't do it until I know what my bonus is!!! And I will know hopefully within 5 weeks!

Which Tri bike did you get? And what did you ride last year at SBR/Harriman?

Top
#16507 - 10/07/05 03:34 PM Re: Trek 2200... [Re: JoeKayak]
MurphysLaw Offline
gumby

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 2308
Loc: Hudson Valley, NY
Joe,

It's a half IM, so it should be the same.

Should and is are 2 totally different things. Triathlons in general, of all distances, are notorious for having inaccurate distances. Usually on the short side. (However, Harriman was long on all 3.)
The Westchester Tri just a coupla weeks ago (Olympic distance), which always has had a "short" swim, outdid itself, and the swim was cut from 1.5k to just over 1k.
(not that *I* was complaining )

Mooseman is run by the same RD as Timberman, FWIW.
I've heard good things about Tinman, I'd consider it, but it's always on a weekend right around my wife'd b-day, so there's NO way I'd ever get the permission slip to go play for that one.

How about Eagleman? It's down in DE, and is FLAT as a pancake for the bike and run. The swim can be dicey (they call it the Choptank) depending on conditions, or not.

There's also the Jersey Devilman, but I don't know much about that one.

I've ridden my trusty '99 Klein Quantum Race w/ clip-on aero bars for the last 3 seasons I've done tris.
My bike splits are solid, but I haven't run to my potential off this bike, so I'm hoping a tri bike will help w/ that.
Plus the "free speed" from a more aero riding position.

I got a great deal on a closeout of an '05 Felt B2.
I should have it sometime next week.
Looks like this
_________________________
"Flailing?" "Flail on!"

Top
#16508 - 10/11/05 01:40 PM Re: Trek 2200... [Re: MurphysLaw]
edk Offline
addict

Registered: 05/06/02
Posts: 441
Loc: allentown, NJ
Quote:



I got a great deal on a closeout of an '05 Felt B2.
I should have it sometime next week.
Looks like this




<drool> I have bike lust.... how good a deal?</drool>

Top
#16509 - 10/11/05 02:04 PM Re: Trek 2200... [Re: edk]
d-elvis Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 04/26/00
Posts: 3650
Loc: Central PA
Do they make a boys version of that bike or only the girls as shown?
_________________________
"Marriage Survivor"

Top
#16510 - 10/11/05 02:09 PM Re: Trek 2200... [Re: d-elvis]
MurphysLaw Offline
gumby

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 2308
Loc: Hudson Valley, NY
Why do you care? The girls version is *perfect* for you.

You can even put a nice pink and white wicker Barbie basket on the front, and a pink glitter banana seat, and some tassles, and it will look just like your current bike.
_________________________
"Flailing?" "Flail on!"

Top
#16511 - 10/11/05 09:15 PM All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: MurphysLaw]
JoeKayak Offline
old hand

Registered: 06/21/02
Posts: 970
Loc: Manhattan


Now that we've all realized Mike can clip Barbie to his aerobars and spank every one of us (okay, maybe not the super-commuter edk), let's more on to more important questions:

the bikes I'm now looking at (spurred by the lust for the trek) are all a high-end aluminum with carbon fork and carbon seat stays. I've been looking at a lot of the comparable frames from companies like Giant, Specialized, Jamis, Marin and so on, and they all have shimano 105 or 105/ultegra mixes, whereas the trek had mostly ultegra.

Much of what I've read says get the best frame you can and then upgrade the components when you want/can.

But I guess I'm wondering about which might be better: the Aluminum/Carbon Stays or an all Carbon frame. The key question, as I've read, is about wear and tear and how long Aluminum lasts (being stiffer and stressing sooner) versus Carbon (having more damping ability, but also being more fragile/difficult to fix, etc). I just don't know what to get. And I have yet to test ride any of these and that may well be what makes me choose, but I know there are gunkies here who know way more about this than I do and I'd love your opinion (Murphy, Crackers, Tai, Dana...)...

Basically, I'm looking at:

Giant TCR 1
Specialized Allez Comp
Trek 2200
and, to a lesser extent (not done researching yet):
Marin Verona
Jamis Ventura Comp
Maybe the Klein Reve V
Felt 60 or 65...

you get the idea....I want something I can race in serious triathlons with, but also something I can hammer out some long mountain rides (triple would be nice) and loops in the park....NOT commuting.


Top
#16512 - 10/11/05 11:47 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
MurphysLaw Offline
gumby

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 2308
Loc: Hudson Valley, NY
Triple would be nice? Only if you are D-Elvis or an old lady (pretty much one in the same )

If ya don't have the oomph to push a 53x39, then at least do the trendy thing and get a compact crankset instead. (That and the right doping and you too can climb like Tyler Hamilton. )

50x36 or 50x34 are the standard sizes. Then you can run an 11-23 or 12-25 on the back and be all stylie with the best of 'em. Gives you more useable gears, closer ratios in back, and lighter too.

Honestly, I don't think frame material matters a whit. Seriously.
Get the bike that fits you, and your budget.
CF is nice, and certainly all the rage these days, but it's not like Al is all of a sudden not worthy of being made into a bike.
(all that being said, the Felt F2C gives me a chubbie )

Go for at LEAST 105 for the grouppo, and obviously Ultegra is better. D/A is for posers and lawyers (aka, D-Elvis ), and sponsored pros.

Oh, and consider the Cervelo Soloist. You can flip the seatpost around and make it "steeper" for Tris, or normal for reg'lar road riding.

PS - I'd pretty much spank EdK like a naughty schoolgirl too.
_________________________
"Flailing?" "Flail on!"

Top
#16513 - 10/12/05 11:23 AM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
hartmann Offline
member

Registered: 11/20/99
Posts: 161
Loc: Northfield, VT
I had a Specialized Allez Comp for a long time. I put some Aero bars on it for triathlon. It was a great bike for the price and served me well. It had the Shimono 105 components. Unfortunatly I broke the frame in a bad crash. I replaced it with a Trek 5200 carbon frame bike that came with Ultegra components. Great bike for riding in the mountains. The only down side to the bike is I constantly have problems with the Ultegra crank set. I may take my old 105 bottom bracket from the specialized to see if that fixes the problem. I don't know what the geometry of the Trek 2200 is, but the Trek 5200 (2003 frame) has lower seat post angle than the Specialized Allez Comp (1995 frame). Overall, I would give the specialized a very good recomendation.

Edited to add: A triple on a racing bike really isn't needed.


Edited by hartmann (10/12/05 11:30 AM)

Top
#16514 - 10/12/05 02:10 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
crackers Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 03/21/01
Posts: 3424
Loc: pdx
First off, the bikes are probably all made by Giant in taiwan, so don't spend money on the branding. One tell tail is a mono seatstay, but Giant makes both the mono and traditional dual seatstays from carbon now.

Second, the "issues" of durability are total crap. If you race an aluminum frame, wreck, get run over, and bend the seatstay, you can't bend it back effectively. Same deal with carbon. After 30,000 hard (racing) miles many carbon or aluminum frames will be getting soft, but are you going to be doing that? A lot of the carbon bikes seem to be carbon over a very thin aluminum tube. Besides which, they come with warranties.

At your height, i think it'll be a bit of a moot point which material is better. You are the size they design bikes around, so, you'll get the optimum feel from aluminum. I'd stay away from super rigid aluminum frames like cannondale crit frames because they are among the only frames designed around tall folks. You could ride a vitus and never notice the flex...whereas i broke one at the bottom bracket sprinting.

Finally, its all about the angles. Find out what fits you and what works for you, and go buy the best frameset you can find with that geometry. For example, I liked 63cm from the tip of my saddle to the midpoint of the stem, and that is a huge constraint.

You don't need a triple, and many to most of the real race frames won't fit it. You could get it on, but you'll break lots of chains because of the length of the chainstays. (unless chains are way, way, way better than they were in 1996.)

Its much much cheaper to buy parts with a frameset than without it. Get the frameset you want and hope it comes with the good money parts. I have no idea what parts are good these days, but if you don't get it for free, there is no point to dura-ace, or whatever its called.

Top
#16515 - 10/12/05 02:20 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: hartmann]
JoeKayak Offline
old hand

Registered: 06/21/02
Posts: 970
Loc: Manhattan

okay, so I'm a sissy with the whole triple thing. The truth of it is this: I used my triple on barley road in highmount, new york in the catskills because I met hill that for the first time in the 8 years of owning my GT Rave I couldn't get up without using the granny gear. Then this summer in Colorado after nailing Long's Peak (on foot) Monday, Mount Evans (by bike) on Wednesday, I again used a granny gear on Fremont Pass that Friday morning because--and I know this is shocking--I am not a Tour rider who can hammer out massive efforts each day at elevation. So I want a Granny on my racing bike!!!

But let me step back a bit further: I am coming from a ten year old, single-butted chomoly frame/form on 7-speed gearing no one ever has heard of except for treasure hunters. ANYTHING I get now is going to be mind-blowingly amazing to me. Hell, I rented a Trek 1000 and and a Trek 1200 for the Mount Evans and Quadruple bypass rides I did and I thought they were amazing...I went mid-50s mph, carved turns with confidence and a stability I've never seen on my bike. And those bikes had Sora on the 1000 and Tiagra on the 1200. 105 will blow my mind and Ulterga will send me running to change my bike shorts. Not to mention that anything I pick up will be lighter! So I don't know if I need a triple because my bike is a mack truck now or if compact cranks will get me up my most dreaded climbs. As is most often said, I need to get fitted and test these out, but I won't know what it will be like to hit a crazy hill 90 miles into a ride until I'm there (with dana and murph? and...) with the bike I bought.

But thanks for the Allez Comp nod and thanks to Murphy for the great detail. Murhpy- my triple now is a lame 26/36/46....whenever I wanted to scream past folks on flats, I never could because I didn't have the gears. So I'm shy about going with a 50/36 instead of 53/39...and then I'd really want that 30 for the big hills...and I agree on the 105 as the bare minimum. But I don't feel like I need Ultegra (and certainly not D/A). While I could go overboard, I think of this bike as my entry into a new level of cycling for me where I want to test my competitiveness on something build to go nimbly fast.

I have a sinking feeling we'll be eyeing each other at a starting line somewhere this year....

Keep it coming...thanks!

Top
#16516 - 10/12/05 02:27 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: crackers]
JoeKayak Offline
old hand

Registered: 06/21/02
Posts: 970
Loc: Manhattan
Second, the "issues" of durability are total crap. If you race an aluminum frame, wreck, get run over, and bend the seatstay, you can't bend it back effectively. Same deal with carbon. After 30,000 hard (racing) miles many carbon or aluminum frames will be getting soft, but are you going to be doing that? A lot of the carbon bikes seem to be carbon over a very thin aluminum tube. Besides which, they come with warranties.

At your height, i think it'll be a bit of a moot point which material is better. You are the size they design bikes around, so, you'll get the optimum feel from aluminum. I'd stay away from super rigid aluminum frames like cannondale crit frames because they are among the only frames designed around tall folks. .

graham- great advice I was looking for. Thanks. And no, not 30,000 miles, but I'm not getting this to sit in the closet either. I think I've been doing about 1800 miles/year and that's with me marathon training too. Taking the spring running season off (sorta) will see me biking a hell of a lot more (probably double that in 2/3s the time)....but I appreciate your perspective very much.

Top
#16517 - 10/12/05 02:42 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
crackers Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 03/21/01
Posts: 3424
Loc: pdx
Do you have a pitch ten gruppo? if so, i want it.

Murhpy- my triple now is a lame 26/36/46....whenever I wanted to scream past folks on flats, I never could because I didn't have the gears. So I'm shy about going with a 50/36 instead of 53/39...and then I'd really want that 30 for the big hills...and I agree on the 105 as the bare minimum.

Learn to spin rather than push big wood. Whats your max cadence? Also think of getting an ultegra drivetrain and everything else 105. It used to be that all the shifters worked with all the derailleurs, which would save money etcetera etcetera...

Out of curiosity, *can* you spin when you're running a lot?

Top
#16518 - 10/12/05 05:34 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: crackers]
JoeKayak Offline
old hand

Registered: 06/21/02
Posts: 970
Loc: Manhattan

no, I think I have an old Suntour something or a Shimano so-old-and-low-end-you've-never-heard-of-it.

But to the spinning/cadence question. Interestingly, when my chain broke in the spring, I got a new cassette and chain and for the first time in owning this bike, increased my cadence substantially. The result was a much faster Montaul Century for me and a better cruising gear that saved the big ring for more useful applications.

But the short answer is that when I'm running it's tough to really be able to spin. It's the high cadence that the muscles are not used to firing on (or it seems so to me). But the problem with big rings/powering while running is that the knees are much more stressed by the more forceful rotation. Either way it's a bit tougher. But net-net, I'm stronger, have better breating and go overall faster. I'm sure when I scale back on running and increase cycling, I'll see a dramatic increase in my endurance, stamina and strength on the bike. And I'm sure that, in turn, will strengthen my running as I return to both in the spring to train for the half ironman.

right now though, I am staving off injury after injury from running just to get through Richmond (VA, nov 12).

Top
#16519 - 10/12/05 06:04 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
MurphysLaw Offline
gumby

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 2308
Loc: Hudson Valley, NY
Murhpy- my triple now is a lame 26/36/46....whenever I wanted to scream past folks on flats, I never could because I didn't have the gears. So I'm shy about going with a 50/36 instead of 53/39...and then I'd really want that 30 for the big hills...and I agree on the 105 as the bare minimum. But I don't feel like I need Ultegra (and certainly not D/A).

Of course you were getting spun out on a 46 big ring. That's MTB gearing, not road bike.

FWIW, a 50x11 is pretty much the same top-end as 53x12.
See here to play around w/ the top-end speeds, or whatever of any gear combo you could imagine.

And, 50x12 is almost identical to 53x13, meaning, you only give up the absolute top-end gear, which frankly you probably don't even need, as once you are going over 30 mph, it's better to coast. Pedaling at 30mph+ is wasting watts in the wind.

If you wanted a ridiculously wide gearbox, you could run 50x34 and a 12-27 in back. I can't imagine needing that gearing for anything short of Mt. Washington, but whatever works for ya.

If it were me, I'd get a compact 50x36, and 11-23.
For you, I'd suggest 50x34 and 12-25. That'll get ya up and down almost anything w/in reason.

Based on what you are telling us here, I would strongly advise you to NOT get a 53x39. You don't have the legs for it. Probably only 5-10% of the bike riding public does. It is WAY overgeared for anybody who is not either a Pro, or a very avid and strong amateur.

Please please please don't get a nice new bike and then debase it w/ a triple.
_________________________
"Flailing?" "Flail on!"

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored