|Does Size Matter? - (Trek OCLV 120)||Ynot19|
Mar 17, 2002 10:22 AM
|Heard comments that the Trek 5500 (OCLV 120) is better for smaller riders and can be "to flexy" for someone 6'3" 210-215? Not trying to win the tour but will be using it for VERY competitive group rides, hilly terrain. Is this something to even worry about? About to purchase so any insight would be greatly appreciated.|
|re: Does Size Matter? - (Trek OCLV 120)||Elefantino|
Mar 17, 2002 10:48 AM
|Sheesh. I hate uninformed gossip.
I am 6-5, 210. I have a 5200. It is not flexy. It doesn't flex. Period.
If if flexed, Postal wouldn't ride them. If it flexed, George Hincapie could not have won last year's Ghent-Wevelgem in a dead sprint over Leon Van Bon.
And if it flexed, Lance wouldn't climb with the 5900, which is OCLV 110, which has less grams per square meter of carbon than the 5500/5200.
There are many riding snobs who hate Trek, some on this board. But for a large rider, the combination of stiffness and an incredibly comfortable ride, not to mention that it's $1,000-$1,500 less than some other high-end or "boutique" bikes, makes it a great choice.
One thing to note: There are a lot of people on this board who have the "be like me" mentality when it comes to bike brands. But I can honestly say that if money was no object, I'd still buy a ...
uh, never mind. I'd buy a Serotta Ottrott. Trek sucks,
|re: Does Size Matter? - (Trek OCLV 120)||Jekyll|
Mar 17, 2002 1:16 PM
|Yes it matters, but it not only matters on the Trek frame but on any frame you ride. I weigh 40 lbs less than you and any frame I ride will feel stiffer to me than it will to you.
The only way you will ever know if the Trek (or any other bike) is "stiff" enough for you while providing the ride and comfort you desire is to ride it.
|How about a womans point of view? ; )||BianchiAmber|
Mar 17, 2002 2:54 PM
|Please - with details! :-)||Jekyll|
Mar 17, 2002 3:56 PM
|re: Does Size Matter? - (Trek OCLV 120)||bic|
Mar 17, 2002 4:47 PM
|Many years ago I was told to check the flex of a frame by tilting the frame to about 45% and put a good amount of pressure on the Bottom Bracket with your foot. I have since filed that advice with most I have gotten. Just like "as flexy as a noodle". Gee is that done "al dente" or right out of the box???|
|Size Does Matter;)||BianchiAmber|
Mar 17, 2002 5:49 PM
Mar 18, 2002 11:19 AM
|A little history lesson for you. The pre 1998 OCLV Treks did flex a little in the bottom bracket. In 1999 they stiffened the bottom bracket to help with warranty issues. Some of the frames were cracking at the bottom bracket. All frames are designed to flex somewhat when ridding them. If they did not flex they would kill you ridding them. Ride a older Cannondale with the monster big tubes and you will understand. If you want a really stiff bottom bracket go with a big down tube in Aluminum or Ti. The Trek OCLV are very stiff but not as stiff as the big down tubes bikes.|
|re: Does Size Matter? - (Trek OCLV 120)||JimP|
Mar 18, 2002 4:40 PM
|I think the previous responses are right on! The Trek carbon frames are stiff but since they are constructed of carbon fibre, they absorb some of the vibration which makes them feel like they are softer than the large tube aluminum bikes. I rode a C'dale made of used beer cans for a long time and finally got tired of the vibration. I looked at carbon and ti and after talking to a lot of riders, decided on a carbon frame. The Trek ended up second to Aegis and I haven't regretted that decision. I do have a Trek 7500 aluminum hybrid bike so I am not exactly an anti-Trek snob. I rode with a few riders that really liked the Aegis and I found that I could fit my 6'4" body on that 60cm frame so I ordered one 2 years ago. Don't be swayed by hearsay - try one at you LBS and make up your own mind.|| |