|Trek 5200 VS Cannondale R2000||dariow|
May 9, 2003 1:21 PM
|I am purchasing a road bicycle, and I am undecided whether to get the Trek 5200 or the Cannondale R2000. Both of these bikes are 2003 models with triple chaining.
The known advantages and disadvantages and disadvantages of each model is the following:
1) Full Carbon Frame
2) More comfortable ride
3) Great Customer Service
1) This bike has the Race Lite wheels while the Cannondale has Mavic Ksyrium Wheels
2) The Trek is Ultegra and the Cannondale has a Dura Ace rear derailer.
3) The Trek frame is a little heavier than the Cannondale CAAD7
1) Better wheels
2) Better rear derailer
1) Company filed bankruptcy. Might affect customer service?
2) Warranty has more restrictions
3) Frame is not carbon
4) Ride is not as comfortable?
5) Trek has a better reputation?
I am in my 40s and am primarily interested in cycling long distances and being able to handle difficult climbing since there are many hills and mountains in the Bay Area (Woohoo) and I would like a bike that is best (easier) for climbing.
I would appreciate your input about these bikes as well as your recommendations of which I should buy.
Please either post your suggestions here or email me at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Please respond soon as I plan to buy the bike soon.
|re: Trek 5200 VS Cannondale R2000||TNSquared|
May 9, 2003 1:45 PM
|I own a Trek and love it. Having never ridden a Cannondale, I can't really offer a comparison. But as far as the disadvantages you list for the Trek:
1) I will eventually replace my Race Lites, but they are very good wheels and more than adequate if you are not racing.
2) I think most people will tell you that you will never notice the difference in the DA vs Ultegra rear dr.
3) Any weight difference is bound to be small, and again probably not noticeable.
With a triple chainring, you shouldn't have a problem climbing hills on either.
Having said that, I'm sure both are good bikes. What everyone will tell you, though, is that proper fit is way more important than any of the above. Assuming both these bikes are in a local store, get on them and have someone from the store see which one fits you better. That should be your determining factor.
|re: Trek 5200 VS Cannondale R2000||LC|
May 9, 2003 2:47 PM
|You can't go too wrong either way. I test rode both and liked the Canny better. I found the CAAD 7 frame to be very comfortable, did not seem to ride like the old aluminum canny of past generation at all.
Dura Ace rear deraileur is better. The spring is stronger so it shifts quicker and the upper pulley won't bind and squeek like the Ultegra.
|Neither, your limiting yourself too much||Damn|
May 9, 2003 5:30 PM
|I don't want to sound degrading towards your choices, but don't get either of them. How much are these bikes? Go to coloradocyclist.com and check out the Douglas Fusion. It's aluminum with carbon stays and fork and all Ultegra with velomax wheels. I have a cannondale and although I like it, you pay too much for a name. My neighbor has the fusion and that's the next bike I'm getting. The thing is $1600 and 17.5 lbs. For that kind of money you can buy any rear derailer and wheelset you need. I just think your limiting yourself to the big name brands. If you want a bike from a bike shop for customer service, get a Jamis Eclipse. It's got you K' wheels and all ultegra and 853 frame for a better ride than aluminum and is more durable than carbon. Just do yourself and favor, look at the web site and go look at the Jamis. I really doubt you'll get a cannondale or trek after you do. If you do, at least you know you checked out some of the not so huge brand name stuff.
Good luck and I hope your happy with what ever you get.
|Cannondale exited Ch. 11 last week||divve|
May 9, 2003 10:41 PM
For the remainder I think you should test ride both bikes first. The fit between the Cannondale CAAD7 and Trek 5200 OCLV frames are quite different.
|Cannondale exited Ch. 11 last week||Mantra|
May 10, 2003 2:35 AM
|While you are at it try a Klein, you won't be disapointet|
|Well what did you decide to get? NM.||Damn|
May 11, 2003 4:38 PM
|re: Trek 5200 VS Cannondale R2000||StuartHB|
May 11, 2003 5:33 PM
|I have a 2002 Trek 5200 and just completed another Century yesterday. I can definitely say that this bike is very comfortable doing 100 miles. The carbon frame absorbs so much, especially for long distances as you mentioned. I have test ridden the Cannondale also and it also is a very nice bike. Not sure how it would feel after a Century but I am sure you cannot go wrong either way.
My advice would be to test ride both bikes and others in their category before choosing. Everyone fits differently and until you ride the bikes, name do not matter. Good luck !!
|Go Trek...less road shock = you will ride it more||Maartin|
May 12, 2003 5:24 AM
|Really...The shock absorbing qualities of carbon are real. It does not beat you up like other materials. At your age and desire for a distance bike you will appreciate it.|| |