|Look KG281 vs. Trek 5900 vs. Kestrel 500SCI||heat010|
Sep 10, 2001 10:27 AM
|I've narrowed my decision between these 3 carbon fibre frames. I'd like to know what you guys would pick between the 3. It's a hard decision and a big investment. Thanks|
|That's really weird.....||Allen az|
Sep 10, 2001 11:20 AM
|Those are the three bikes that I'm considering too. I have no idea which one either. I'm also checking out the 2002 LOOK KG381i, and that might take the KG281's place. I guess I'll have to test ride them.
Aluminum is too harsh for me, & I don't like the look of Ti. So it's carbon for me too.
Help us please!
|That's really weird.....||Dave Hickey|
Sep 10, 2001 11:29 AM
|The difference between the KG381i and The KG281(381 in 2002) is the 381i has an integrated headset. I own a 281 and it's a great riding frame, I cannot speak for the other two.|
|what about the KG386?||jaybird|
Sep 10, 2001 11:56 AM
|did you guys consider the KG386? It is similar in construction to the 5900... and from what I have heard a bit stiffer.|
|re: Look KG281 vs. Trek 5900 vs. Kestrel 500SCI||Marc in Montréal|
Sep 10, 2001 11:44 AM
|Go for the dark side of the Force, my friend and enjoy the pleasure of riding the 5900!!! What a rocket!!! Even an average rider gets much better on this marvelous riding machine!!! MARC|
|My .02.......||Len J|
Sep 10, 2001 11:57 AM
|is worth what you pay for it.
If I were you I would test ride the 5900 vs the 5500, I didn't think the slight weight reduction and slight additional stiffness was worth the additional $'s. In addition, during 15 mile test rides, I noticed that the 5900 was a little harsher. Don't know how it would feel after 50+ miles.
As far as the other two, Have you test ridden them on hilly courses? If not, I would and pay attention to the one that feels the best.
Of course, all of this assumes a good fit.
|re: Look KG281 vs. Trek 5900 vs. Kestrel 500SCI||Ian|
Sep 10, 2001 12:13 PM
|I can't speak for the Kestrel, never cared for them, no particular reason, but here is Trek / Look comparison.
I had a Trek 5200, ride a KG281.
The Trek had a muted, nice ride. Some people would describe it as dead or wooden, but I liked the way it rode. The KG281 has the supple feel of carbon but a slightly livelier ride.
The rear end of both bike seems equally stiff. The KG281 has adjustable dropouts so you can change the wheelbase.
The fork on the Trek was stiffer. But, that was an Icon Air Rail steel steerer fork that weighed 550 grams. The Look was an HSC 3 with all carbon steerer that weighed 350 grams. The 5900 comes with an aluminum steerer and weighs about 350 grams. I can't speak for its stiffness.
Trek, you see them everywhere. Look, not to many of them around.
After I sold the 5200, I also had to decide between the Look KG281 and Trek 5900. The items above were considered, but what it ultimately came down to was the color. I liked the black of the Look and although I really liked the grey tint of the 5900, I couldn't get past all the postal stickers.
Either way you decide, I think you will be very happy with your purchase.
|re: Look KG281 vs. Trek 5900 vs. Kestrel 500SCI||CT1|
Sep 10, 2001 7:22 PM
|I test rode the 5500 and thought it was just OK. VERY "flat" ride quality that didn't work for me.
I bought the KG281 without riding it and I'm SUPER IMPRESSED with it. VERY nice and lively ride quality. Muy bueno!!! :)
Oh, the KG381 is replacing it. It will be available in a "standard" and integrated HS version.
Sorry Trek.... don't bag on me, my steel Trek served me very well for close to 20 years.
|re: Look KG281 vs. Trek 5900 vs. Kestrel 500SCI||Nessism|
Sep 11, 2001 5:05 AM
|I don't have a lot of experience with the Trek however I helped a friend build up his Look KG281 a while back. IMO the Look is a great ride: light, nice ride quality, stiff through the bottom bracket, quality construction, and fairly unique. Treks are everywhere these days.|| |