RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Components


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


Trek 5200 Upgrades - Easton bar and DA BB......(11 posts)

Trek 5200 Upgrades - Easton bar and DA BB......berni
Oct 22, 2002 6:46 AM
Just received my latest upgrades for my Trek 5200 - an Easton handlebar, 189g, and a DA BB, 174g.

Just wondering if anyone has any tips for fitting the BB, or even the bar.

All my bike specs are below - I have gradually been replacing anything I consider heavy or not as good as it could be.

Any tips to get it lighter? New fork perhaps? Lighter wheels?

Model : Trek 5200 Weight
Bar Ends None 0
Bottle Cage None
Bottom Bracket Shimano DA 174 verified
Brake Levers Shimano Ultegra 210
Brakes Ultegra 335
Cables Shimano standard 175
Cassette Dura Ace 27-12 175 verified
Chain PC89R 280 verified
Crankset Dura Ace 53-39 575 verified
Crank Bolts 25 verified
Derlr (Front) Ultegra 81
Derlr (Rear) DA 194 verified
Fork Trek 500
Frame Medium 1150
Grips Bar Tape 10
Handlebar Easton 189 verified
Headset Cane Creek 125
Hub (Front) Rolf Sestriere 701 verified
Hub (Rear) Rolf Sestriere 868 verified
Pedals Dura Ace 298 verified
QR's Ti Bolt on 42 verified
Seat Clamp Bontrager with Al bolt 24 verified
Seat AX 74 verified
Seatpost Thomson (cut down) 160 verified
Shifters Ultegra 210
Spacers 20
Spokes Rolf Sestriere
Stem ITM Millenium 140 verified
Tire (Front) Hutchinson USPS 190 verified
Tire (Rear) Hutchinson USPS 190 verified
Tubes Michelin Light 140 verified
Total Grams 7255 0 0
lbs 15.96 0
Lighter rider perhaps?filtersweep
Oct 22, 2002 7:17 AM
Bolt on QRs?

No bottle cages?

No bar plugs?

Might as well remove one of the brakes ;)
Lighter rider perhaps?berni
Oct 22, 2002 7:28 AM
Bolt on QRs? I already have these - they are excellent

No bottle cages? I use a Camelbak

No bar plugs? Forgot to add those - 5g?

Might as well remove one of the brakes ;) No thanks, this bike is primarily for hill climbing (I live in Geneva so very near the Alps) so I want it as light as possible. But I also enjoy flying down the hills, so 2 good brakes are a must.

As for the rider well at 60kg, I haven't got much more to lose.......
re: D/A BBEric_H
Oct 22, 2002 8:11 AM
Some would consider the D/A BB to be a downgrade from Ultegra. It certainly is more fussy to work with and requires more frequent maintenance, as it is not the most water-resistant design. If it was my bike, I would use the Ultegra BB and upgrade the fork to something like a Columbus Muscle or Alpha-Q sub-300.

In terms of BB installation, the first order of business is to make sure your BB shell is properly faced. The D/A BB is not tolerant of poorly faced BB shells. Also, I suggest you have the right tools for the job, specifically a lock-ring tool that grips the ring in 3 or 4 splines and has a shoulder for stability. I believe Tacx makes a nice version. Finally, assemble with lots of grease and stay dry on your rides!
re: Trek 5200 Upgrades - Easton bar and DA BB......str8dum1
Oct 22, 2002 12:10 PM
some of your weights are kinda optimistic but anyhow..

to get lighter it easy
cranks- cat or storck 280g for the arms (~420 with rings)
seatpost- USE or storck 100- 140g
pedals Speedplay x1s- 150g
handlebar- schmolke 128g
brake- Cat Usa - 80g
BB to match cranks- 140g
fork- 2003 easton carbo 285g
stem- extralight ultrastem 100g
wheels: AC/Zipp 1110g
tubulars: tufo s3 light 190g each
headset: extralite 80g

those upgrades alone will save you well over 3 pounds. So stop skimping and cheating yourself and really save some weight!!
drooltremblay
Oct 22, 2002 7:25 PM
I'd be lucky if my bike was below 20lbs.
I've got a hot tip ...pmf1
Oct 23, 2002 4:57 AM
fart before you get on it.

And the DA BB ... have fun installing it and constantly fiddling with it. For that big 30 gram savings, you'll now have something to do in your spare time.

You actually weighed your crank arm bolts? Get a life dude.
don't forget to clip your finger nails (.05 grams) nmbludoggy
Oct 23, 2002 7:02 AM
Forkgrzy
Oct 23, 2002 11:12 AM
Dump that boat anchor front end setup. Reynolds Ouzo Pro will run around 360 g. Install a Chris King headset at around 100 g. consider a Ritchey WCS stem at 125 g. (not much savings vs. cost here). Should cost you about $500 and save maybe 5 oz. Go to Speedplay pedals for some real weight savings. No doubt you could cut a lot of weight with some lighter wheels - that'll set you back some cake. Not sure how you have seperate weights for Ultegra shifters and brake levers if you're using STI and if you're not then down tube shifters are way lighter, especially if you stick to the DA realm. You can get a lighter seatpost if you go carbon. Personally I wouldn't trust the ti skewers - you're just asking for trouble and flex at the very least.

Ultimately if your objective is to build the lightest bike then maybe you'd be better off with a lighter frame? You're into the area where it's going to start costing you about $100 per ounce to cut weight from your bike - only you can decide if it's worth it. If it were me I'd just go ride.
Forkberni
Oct 24, 2002 6:38 AM
It would be nice to know how much the original Trek 5200 weighs, to see if it's worth shelling out for a new fork. I estimate 500g, but I guess I just have to get round to weighing it myself. I have Ultegra STI's but I separated the weights because the spreadsheet came from my MTB, where shifters and brakes (XTR) can be separate.

I love my Ti bolt-on skewers - no flex that I can feel, and very light. I think it is tough to get a much lighter seatpost than 160g, even going carbon. I think the WCS stem is ugly, and not worth it for 15g.

It always amuses me that people think examining the weight of your bike is stupid. For those people above, I DO ride my bike a hell of alot - mostly up mountains in the Alps. When you ride several Col's of 10km a piece with 1km of vertical rise a piece, PER DAY, then believe me, every gram counts. Training, technique, etc. is very important too, but you cannot ignore the weight.
Yeah, Sogrzy
Oct 24, 2002 2:09 PM
Original 5200 spec is something like 17.8 lbs - you can get the latest info from the Trek website. My '96 OCLV was advertised at 18.2 lbs. witha frame wieght of 2.2 lbs (56 cm).

Sure weight is important, but lack of it doesn't make up for a lack of fitness. We also climb many thousands of feet of veritcal in the mountains in California - many events have 10'K to 20'K of climbing - an while iI'm conscious of my bike weight I'm also very aware of the fact that there are many people who routinely trounce me up the hills on heavier bikes. I don't beleive that knocking another pound off my bike is going to suddenly allow me to beat them up the hill. It's an order of magnitude/scale thing - yes, F=ma, but if you're really hurting in the "F" dept. then shaving a few ounces in the "m" dpeartment isn't going to do enough.

I think we're saying essentially the same thing, but the message that other people are trying to pitch is that you're way to obsessed with gram counting. Over here you'd be called a "weight wennie."