Raleigh vs. Trek

SpeakRed

Alright.
New situation has come up. My budget just got a bit better, and now I'm stuck between the Raleigh Grand Sport or the Trek 1.2.
The bikes seem to be identical (to a beginner like me anyway) so I really don't know what to do!

I'll be using the bike for rec. riding, maybe to and from class, and hopefully a race at some point in the future.

What do you all think?!

ride4him

From a component view the bikes are pretty close. But the big difference is the frame which IS the bike. The Trek uses their lowest grade aluminum on the 1.2 called " white ", this is basic aluminum tubing with no forming which is strategically changing or shaping the tubes for strength and ride quality. The Raleigh uses quality hydro-formed super light aluminum. The frames tubes are shaped and formed, you will notice a better ride quality with this.
But Raleigh is not taken as a "serious" bike by snobby elite roadies. Don't let that spoil your decision on which bike to buy.

SpeakRed

Well. I don't think I'll be good enough to hang with any elitists anytime soon, so the Raleigh seems to be winning so far. I've heard on the Trek that reaching the shifters from the drop bars is a bit hard (in a competitive drop position). Would this be true then for the Raleigh since they're pretty much identical component wise?

So much info, man my head is spinning! Thanks so much for the help...
PS- I lived in Lexington, MO for about 4 years. Beautiful place.

gemship

Hello, about 15 months ago I bought a Raliegh Cadent 1 road bike. It's about 23 pounds with Tektro brakes and triple crank along with Shimano's sora groupo except a Tiagra r. derailleur. The frame is aluminum made by Kinesis. This bike is a bit sporty but just not a racer mostly due to the components. It's what Raliegh considers as a comfort bike. Anyway after comparing it to the Trek 1000 which by most is considered to be a cheap way to get into road cycling/competition I decided to get the Raliegh as most of the components were similiar and I could'nt see much wieght savings. The best part of the Raliegh is the frame which in my belief is just as good as the Trek, at least in my scenario.Initially I liked the Raliegh better and this I would attribute to possibly its biggest drawback which is the stock stem. On the Cadent 1 Raliegh mates a carbon fork with a 70mm stem that I want to say is pitched upward at a 45 degree angle.This creates a short reach to the bars with a more upright riding position when your hands are perched at the top of the bars or drops. I'm a newbie to road bikes too and I just bought a new carbon racing bike which I recently had a half hour fitting session with. The biggest thing I notice and too repeat myself is the stem and its hieght off the top tube as well as angle. A longer stem with no little or no angle is a relatively cheap upgrade that will certainly make the bike more racy when it's time. I realise I know little about the two bikes your comparing but my vote goes to the Raliegh.

gemship

By the way ride4him is right Raliegh's get very little recognition as a competitive bike. Not sure why, perhaps they don't have a great team or cater to folks like myself making too many affordable models with parts lacking prestige.Nonetheless Kinesis makes frames for them, even mine. I know because there's a Kinesis sticker on the down tube and Kinesis also makes aluminum frames for a number of companies, Trek I suspect being one of them.

ride4him

Don't worry about the reach to the shifters/brakes on any bike as long as the bike fits you. Everyone is different on what is comfortable and what they prefer. You can easily change the position of your handlebars by rotating them up or down, you can get a longer or shorter stem, and you can also move the brake/shifters on the handlebars up-down-in-out anyway you like it.


I've rode through Lexington before and it was very pretty.

oldbobcat

Since both bikes use Shimano control levers, the reach is more a function of handlebar shape and the positioning of the levers on the bar. This can be changed.