RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Components


Archive Home >> Components(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 )


Trek 5900 vs. Columbus XLR8R frame - which to get ?(5 posts)

Trek 5900 vs. Columbus XLR8R frame - which to get ?BenH
Jan 9, 2002 5:18 PM
I'm tyring to decide between these two. XLR8R is a new columbus aluminum tubing meant to be close to starlight in weight but designed for minimum road vibrations. I haven't read any reviews of it, or of starlight for that matter but this bike won't be raced and I do care about comfort. My other alternative is a used Trek 5900 frame. Anyone out there tried either of these ?

I'm 160lbs and currently ride a 5200 frame.

Thanks,

Sorry about the duplicate post.
re: Trek 5900 vs. Columbus XLR8R frame - which to get ?key
Jan 9, 2002 6:56 PM
I honestly don't even know what XLR8R is, but have the 5900 frame. It's ride really isn't that much different then your 5200. Little lighter, and a different folk which personally I like. Quicker steering. But comparing any carbon frame to any aluminum is a big difference is ride and road vibrations

good luck
re: Trek 5900 vs. Columbus XLR8R frame - which to get ?JimBo
Jan 10, 2002 3:59 AM
Here is a description of XLR8R from the Orbea-USA website:

"XLR8R is the first aluminum tubeset specifically designed to reduce vibration. This new technology is called Multishape Damping Effect. This is accomplished by specially shaping the tubes to lower vibrations and by adding three different diameter punches on both sides of the top and down tubes, near the headtube. These punches are positioned in the zone where vibrations from the fork enter the frame and create a physical obstacle to the free movement of the vibration waves throughout the length of the tube. Basically, an 1140 gram aluminum frame that rides like a dream."

Now having said that, you can get a frame that adds a carbon seatstay to the XLR8R frame and you have a sweet riding bike with great stiffness in the chainstays.

The 5900 on the other hand, will ride like your present bike. The frame is a little lighter (1017 grams) and I'm sure, WAY more expensive than any XCLR8R frame you'll find. Don't get me wrong, the 5900 is a fine bike but it's a lemmings bike IMO.

BTW, it's "Starship" not "Starlight." Starship tubing is ridden in the pro peloton. You can find more info on Columbus tubing at their website. http://www.columbustubi.com/english/alluminio/index.htm

You should check out the Orbea-USA website for info on a very cool frameset that uses XCLR8R/Carbon to make a very cool, very euro frame. http://www.orbea-usa.com

Jim
5900 Considerationgrzy
Jan 10, 2002 5:31 PM
Realize that they use an oversized and bonded headset design for the lower race. It has been discussed on this forum that the problems include leaking water in wet conditions, no alternative parts, crappy quality on supplied part (gotta love Cane Creek). If you get a 5900 you will be stuck with these problems.

You will find the OCLV ride way more comfortable to just about any aluminum bike. Look for a 5200 or 5500 that uses standard headsets. I sold my entire 5200 for around $1,000 - you should be able to find a killer deal on a new or used frame.
re: Trek 5900 vs. Columbus XLR8R frame - which to get ?Ray
Jan 10, 2002 7:44 PM
I just bought a 5900 at the first of the year. I have only rode it 100 miles but love it so far. I had a 1995 trek 5000 that has the same frame as the 5200. I can tell a big difference in the bike as a whole with carbon fork, Durace, and lighter frame. You can't go wrong with the 5900, it is going to be as fast and good ride to.