|2003 Ultegra/TREK5200 - any improvements?||chazman|
Sep 2, 2002 5:27 PM
|Anyone know if there are any differences between 2002 and 2003. I am trying to determine if I should by a used 56" TREK 5200 or go with the 2003 model. I think TREK might have compacted the geometry some, but I have not seen any press releases on the 2003 Ultegra group and think there is no change. Thanks.|
Sep 2, 2002 5:58 PM
|actually...i think its the opposite of compacted...(at least for the 58cm)
58cm 2002 model- 57.1 top tube
58cm 2003 model- 57.2 top tube (72.8 seat angle, probably not as steep as 2002)
i know the 58cm cause i was looking at one. dunno bout the 56cm. maybe its the same?
|re: 2003 Ultegra/TREK5200 - any improvements?||bugleboy|
Sep 3, 2002 6:47 AM
|working for a trek dealer I can tell you that there isn't any geometry changes. The change is the fork. The 2002 had the air rail OD out of carbon 120. The 2003 has the new bontrager race lite fork(it doesn't say bontrager on as far as I know) and it is made of carbon 110 and it is a straight bladed fork.|
|geometry IS different...||briko51|
Sep 3, 2002 2:18 PM
|geometry is different...unless its a typo on their site...
last years 58 cm had a 57.1 top tube. this year it has a 57.2 top tube.
or did trek change how they measure bikes...