Trek 5200 - 5900 - Madone 5.9 - Page 2

D.P.G. wrote:
> I have been riding a Trek 5200 Stock from the factory for about 1 1/2 years 5000 miles. I average
> about 19 MPH riding alone on a good mix of flats and hills. Rides range between 20 and 50 miles.
> My average speed on group rides is 20.5 MPH. Do you think I will gain anything with the purchase
> of either the 5900 or the Madone 5.9. I have heard many different opinions from the members of the
> bike club. I don't mind spending the money for either of the bike's but would hate to do so and
> find no improvement. I tried the 5900 but it's hard to tell from one short test ride.

I have a 5200 and have absolutely no plans of upgrading whatsoever, since I am so happy with it.
However the Madone is such a beautiful bike that I would like to have it for that reason only. Maybe
I'll buy a Madone frame and sell my 5200 frame, maybe. I've got a lot of DA stuff on already so the
main thing would be the wheels, Ok I only have 9 speed. Well I just built my first couple of wheels
a week ago and.....

I think you're already a sucker for a new bike, so go for the Madone since it looks so damn hot.
Everything else is about as equal as it can get if you're not doing le Tour.

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.

> Yeah, right. Don't believe everything you read on TV. A google search of this group suggests that
> a Trek 5200 weighs 18-19 lbs without pedals (or cages presumably). A 22 lb bike is already fairly
> light. To get to 16-17 with pedals you probably need very light components and/or very light
> wheels with tubulars, at least.

The "googled" weights listed of the 5200 are accurate, just as the 15 lbs, 10 ounces w/o pedals is
an accurate, verified weight for a 58cm Madone about 30 feet away from where I sit. Toss in pedals
at a pound or less, and you're in the 16-17 pound range on the stock bike with no extraordinary
effort (aside from losing a bit of pocket change!).

Who reads TV anyway?

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com

In article <3fbabb1c$1@darkstar>, Benjamin Weiner <bjw@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote:

> Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote:
>
> > > But shouldn't you be spending the money on coaching, Ryan?

> Yeah, right. Don't believe everything you read on TV. A google search of this group suggests that
> a Trek 5200 weighs 18-19 lbs without pedals (or cages presumably). A 22 lb bike is already fairly
> light. To get to 16-17 with pedals you probably need very light components and/or very light
> wheels with tubulars, at least.

Touche. But you know, my bike is lugged. That can't be aerodynamic . Seriously. I love the bike.
The most fun part is beating expensive bikes.

> Last year I was loitering with one of the local D3 pros at a race. His new bike was sick light. He
> also estimated it would cost over $5000 retail.
>
> > Yeah, the coaching would probably still help more, but I may be the only guy in this ng who can
> > honestly claim that the weight difference between these two bikes would make a performance
> > difference for the racing I do.
>
> What kind of racing is that? Bike toss? BTW, I have a 28 lb touring-bike cyclocross conversion,
> and I actually have to carry the monster :-P I still get beat by ripped older guys on full-squish
> mountain bikes, because as always, it is about the rider.

Okay, yes.

> > But then, that's not really the point, is it?
> > --
> > Ryan Cousineau, rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni
> > Fan Club
>
> Well, it is if you want Fabrizio to respect you, and that is a major part of racing, after all.

Are you kidding? Fabrizio wants me to get on a decent Cannondale Saeco replica, and then work on the
training .

> I am the last person who should be giving out coaching advice on Usenet, but here goes. Based on
> what you've said elsewhere, start doing longer rides as base or preparation training. If you have
> comfort or fit issues that keep you from doing a five hour ride, spend money to resolve that
> (saddle, professional fitting, etc). Do long rides with people that are faster than you and you'll
> get faster, or die trying, IME.

Oh, I know. My weekend rides should be nice serious multi-hour tours. Right now they're nonexistent.
Maybe I'll try joining the 80 km "easy spin" ride that runs on Sundays... (easy spin = 3 hours!)

At some point, my racing goals will start conflicting with my ability to put in riding time. When
that happens, the goals will give way. Racing is a fun way for me to gain fitness (horses for
courses; I know some people who enjoy riding 600 km in 40 hours...who knows why...), and I do want
to win a race or two and Cat up this year. We'll see.

--
Ryan Cousineau, rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

A bit against the grain:

it is possible to get a small gain from your material esp at the higher speeds.

Aero dynamic wheels can really help you a few %.

The supposed time difference with the madone is quite silly tough

And yes, yes, yes Training+ a good fitting bike are way more important. But if you have those bases covered and you still use standard wheels (and have the moolah): it is a relatively decent upgrade to get some custom wheels.

-Personal and unwanted advice: I think a well made steel or Aluminium frame with your own custom painting beats a run of the mill (lmao!) Trek Madone any day. It's probably cheaper (you can go as crazy as you want) and it is unique, it is truly yours.

In article <zrAub.33920$eH5.17443@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>, "Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction
Bicycles" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com> wrote:

> > Yeah, right. Don't believe everything you read on TV. A google search of this group suggests
> > that a Trek 5200 weighs 18-19 lbs without pedals (or cages presumably). A 22 lb bike is already
> > fairly light. To get to 16-17 with pedals you probably need very light components and/or very
> > light wheels with tubulars, at least.
>
> The "googled" weights listed of the 5200 are accurate, just as the 15 lbs, 10 ounces w/o pedals is
> an accurate, verified weight for a 58cm Madone about 30 feet away from where I sit. Toss in pedals
> at a pound or less, and you're in the 16-17 pound range on the stock bike with no extraordinary
> effort (aside from losing a bit of pocket change!).
>
> Who reads TV anyway?
>
> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com
>
>

POCKET CHANGE????

You call $5800 bucks pocket change???

I am going into the bicycle business! I will make a million dollars in no time.

Of course, I will have to start with 2 million...)

HAND

--
³Freedom Is a Light for Which Many Have Died in Darkness³

- Tomb of the unknown - American Revolution

> POCKET CHANGE????
>
> You call $5800 bucks pocket change???
>
No, I call $4499 pocket change. Where'd you get the $5800 figure?

Besides, I did say a *lot* of pocket change! Including tax, it would come to 19,484 quarters plus a
couple other odd coins. Brings new meaning to the phrase "deep pockets."

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"H. M. Leary" <mikie357@forgedabit.net> wrote in message
news:mikie357-4CE905.09580419112003@news.verizon.net...
> In article <zrAub.33920$eH5.17443@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>, "Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction
> Bicycles" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com>
wrote:
>
> > > Yeah, right. Don't believe everything you read on TV. A google
search
> > > of this group suggests that a Trek 5200 weighs 18-19 lbs without
pedals
> > > (or cages presumably). A 22 lb bike is already fairly light. To get to 16-17 with pedals you
> > > probably need very light components and/or very light wheels with tubulars, at least.
> >
> > The "googled" weights listed of the 5200 are accurate, just as the 15
lbs,
> > 10 ounces w/o pedals is an accurate, verified weight for a 58cm Madone
about
> > 30 feet away from where I sit. Toss in pedals at a pound or less, and you're in the 16-17 pound
> > range on the stock bike with no extraordinary effort (aside from losing a bit of pocket
> > change!).
> >
> > Who reads TV anyway?
> >
> > --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com
> >
> >
>
> POCKET CHANGE????
>
> You call $5800 bucks pocket change???
>
> I am going into the bicycle business! I will make a million dollars in no
time.
>
> Of course, I will have to start with 2 million...)
>
>
> HAND
>
> --
> ³Freedom Is a Light for Which Many Have Died in Darkness³
>
> - Tomb of the unknown - American Revolution

In article <7RMub.11415$Cu6.2082@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com>, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
<mikej1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> > POCKET CHANGE????
> >
> > You call $5800 bucks pocket change???
> >
> No, I call $4499 pocket change. Where'd you get the $5800 figure?
>
> Besides, I did say a *lot* of pocket change! Including tax, it would come to 19,484 quarters plus
> a couple other odd coins. Brings new meaning to the phrase "deep pockets."
>
> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>
>
snip

Sorry about that. The one at my LBs was a Project One with Campy triple 10s. with Flambe paint.(
$5880 according to Treks website )

Who¹s counting a couple of quarters anyway??

My $5800 would include rountrip airfare anyway.

More power to you!

--
³Freedom Is a Light for Which Many Have Died in Darkness³

- Tomb of the unknown - American Revolution

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <mikej1@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:7RMub.11415$Cu6.2082@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...

> > POCKET CHANGE????
> >
> > You call $5800 bucks pocket change???
> >
> No, I call $4499 pocket change. Where'd you get the $5800 figure?
>
> Besides, I did say a *lot* of pocket change! Including tax, it would come to 19,484 quarters plus
> a couple other odd coins. Brings new meaning to the phrase "deep pockets."

Ahh, Mike is in northern CA, which makes London and Tokyo look like low-rent districts. When your
home equity automatically increases hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, $5800 for a bicycle (to
celebrate, perhaps?) *is* pocket change!

Matt O.

"Arthur Clune" <ajc22@york.ac.uk> wrote in message news:<bpkml7$95c$1@pump1.york.ac.uk>...
> Carl Fogel <carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> : Regional variations always fascinate me. A $6424 bike here in Pueblo, Colorado
>
> There's one I'd forgetten here. UK prices are always quoted inc all taxes. So for a bike marked
> $6424 I'd pay $6424 (wish I had that much spare money mind.....).
>
> We pay VAT at 17.5%.
>
> Arthur

Dear Arthur,

Ah, much like the cunning ruse that we have here of including the roughly 40% gasoline tax in the
pump price. Almost makes you forget it.

So your price is about 3,403 U.K. pounds, plus a 17.5% VAT of 597 U.K. pounds, about U.S. $5470 and
U.S. $954, give or take a shilling. My 7.4% tax on U.S. $5470 would be about U.S. $405, still almost
twice what I paid for my two-wheeled contraption.

So far, Perre is winning the high-cost, high-tax sweepstakes.

Carl Fogel

Carl Fogel wrote:
> "Arthur Clune" <ajc22@york.ac.uk> wrote in message news:<bpkml7$95c$1@pump1.york.ac.uk>...
>> Carl Fogel <carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Regional variations always fascinate me. A $6424 bike here in Pueblo, Colorado
>>
>> There's one I'd forgetten here. UK prices are always quoted inc all taxes. So for a bike marked
>> $6424 I'd pay $6424 (wish I had that much spare money mind.....).
>>
>> We pay VAT at 17.5%.
>>
>> Arthur
>
> Dear Arthur,
>
> Ah, much like the cunning ruse that we have here of including the roughly 40% gasoline tax in the
> pump price. Almost makes you forget it.

Wow. You only pay 40% tax on gas. We pay several hundred %. I've forgotten how much, but a liter is
just over a Euro.

>
> So your price is about 3,403 U.K. pounds, plus a 17.5% VAT of 597 U.K. pounds, about U.S. $5470
> and U.S. $954, give or take a shilling. My 7.4% tax on U.S. $5470 would be about U.S. $405, still
> almost twice what I paid for my two-wheeled contraption.
>
> So far, Perre is winning the high-cost, high-tax sweepstakes.
>
> Carl Fogel

Don't applaud. Just send me some of your pocketchange please.

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.

"Per Elmsäter" <perDOTelmsater@telia.com> wrote in message
news:KTtvb.38724$dP1.142966@newsc.telia.net...

> Wow. You only pay 40% tax on gas. We pay several hundred %. I've forgotten how much, but a liter
> is just over a Euro.

So that's probably about $5/gal. Makes those American-style 50 mile commutes seem kinda silly,
doesn't it?

In my neighborhood right now, we're paying about $1.30/gal for regular.

Matt O.

"Per Elmsäter" <perDOTelmsater@telia.com> wrote in message
news:<KTtvb.38724$dP1.142966@newsc.telia.net>...
> Carl Fogel wrote:
> > "Arthur Clune" <ajc22@york.ac.uk> wrote in message news:<bpkml7$95c$1@pump1.york.ac.uk>...
> >> Carl Fogel <carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Regional variations always fascinate me. A $6424 bike here in Pueblo, Colorado
> >>
> >> There's one I'd forgetten here. UK prices are always quoted inc all taxes. So for a bike marked
> >> $6424 I'd pay $6424 (wish I had that much spare money mind.....).
> >>
> >> We pay VAT at 17.5%.
> >>
> >> Arthur
> >
> > Dear Arthur,
> >
> > Ah, much like the cunning ruse that we have here of including the roughly 40% gasoline tax in
> > the pump price. Almost makes you forget it.
>
> Wow. You only pay 40% tax on gas. We pay several hundred %. I've forgotten how much, but a liter
> is just over a Euro.
>
> >
> > So your price is about 3,403 U.K. pounds, plus a 17.5% VAT of 597 U.K. pounds, about U.S. $5470
> > and U.S. $954, give or take a shilling. My 7.4% tax on U.S. $5470 would be about U.S. $405,
> > still almost twice what I paid for my two-wheeled contraption.
> >
> > So far, Perre is winning the high-cost, high-tax sweepstakes.
> >
> > Carl Fogel
>
> Don't applaud. Just send me some of your pocketchange please.

Dear Per,

Sorry, but around here we use our pocket change to fill the tank.

If the tax on gas were any higher, our moonshiners would probably give up distilling white lightning
and take up cat-cracking.

Actually, in the late seventies in the four corners area, down where Colorado touches Arizona, some
oil well workers were known to stretch out a twenty-gallon tank of gas with a few gallons of the
lightest stuff siphoned off the top of the holding tanks, a practice that made my eyebrows rise like
caterpillars on a frying pan.

It's all rather amusing, given that even with the tax gasoline is still cheaper than the bottled
water that the little people drink in these parts.

Sincerely,

Leona Helmsley

Carl Fogel wrote:
> "Per Elmsäter" <perDOTelmsater@telia.com> wrote in message
>>
>> Don't applaud. Just send me some of your pocketchange please.
>
> Dear Per,
>
> Sorry, but around here we use our pocket change to fill the tank.
>

I thought you used it to buy Madones with

> It's all rather amusing, given that even with the tax gasoline is still cheaper than the bottled
> water that the little people drink in these parts.
>

Yep and just wait 'till you're paying what we do. People'll still use cars as much because gas cost
is still such a small percentage of keeping a car anyways. Now as for us bikeys that's a whole
differnt story. Investing a couple of grand in a nice new bike, like the Madone for instance, is
really an investment. Both economical and healthwise. I just noticed the other day that my mileage
on my car was way under what it's ever been. I'm talking thousands of kilometers per year here where
I'm *not* using that beast. BTW around here everybody can use use tapwater for drinking and you
wouldn't know the difference to bottled water. You win some you lose some

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.

"Per Elmsäter" <perDOTelmsater@telia.com> wrote in news:mZwvb.38756$dP1.143133@newsc.telia.net:

> BTW around here everybody can use use tapwater for drinking and you wouldn't know the difference
> to bottled water. You win some you lose some
>
I would suggest that is the same in most of NA that I have traveled as well, It is only in (lower)
Europe that I see a significant amount of bottled water used.

Mike Latondresse wrote:
> "Per Elmsäter" <perDOTelmsater@telia.com> wrote in news:mZwvb.38756$dP1.143133@newsc.telia.net:
>
>
>> BTW around here everybody can use use tapwater for drinking and you wouldn't know the difference
>> to bottled water. You win some you lose some
>>
> I would suggest that is the same in most of NA that I have traveled as well, It is only in (lower)
> Europe that I see a significant amount of bottled water used.

I've seen people drink tap water in the states, yes. However I would never do it myself. Not from
fear of stomach disease but due to all the chemicals added to it to make it drinkable. Last time I
was in the states I was wondering why the Cokes in hamburger restaurants where tasting so bad untl I
realized it was on tap and had a side taste of chlorine. When I started buying cans it was OK again.

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.