2000 Trek 8500 LT vs. 2004 Specialized Stumpjumper

[Rainier]

Both are allegedly new and never been ridden.

Here are the specs on the 2000 Trek 8500 LT:

http://tinyurl.com/95wld

And the 2004 Stumpjumper:

http://tinyurl.com/8r4fq

Both can be had for around $1,000. Have components progressed so much
in the last four years that a $1,300 retail 2004 bike would be a bettr
deal than a $2,000 retail 2000 bike?

And another question. The Trek owner contends their bike is a 2003
model yet based on my research 2000 is the last model year for the Trek
8500 LT. Who is correct?

rainier

 

[Bill Wheeler]

On 30 Apr 2005 10:42:23 -0700, "Rainier" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Both are allegedly new and never been ridden.
>
>Here are the specs on the 2000 Trek 8500 LT:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/95wld
>
>And the 2004 Stumpjumper:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/8r4fq
>
>Both can be had for around $1,000. Have components progressed so much
>in the last four years that a $1,300 retail 2004 bike would be a bettr
>deal than a $2,000 retail 2000 bike?
>
>And another question. The Trek owner contends their bike is a 2003
>model yet based on my research 2000 is the last model year for the Trek
>8500 LT. Who is correct?
>
>rainier

I've ridden as Stumpjumper and I loved it, don't worry too much about
the specs. I doubt you'll break your components unless you abuse
them.

Peace,
Bill


The First law, Inertia: Unless acted upon by an outside force,
a body at rest tends to stay at rest,
and a body in motion tends to stay in motion.
Sir Isaac Newton

 

[doki]

Rainier wrote:
> Both are allegedly new and never been ridden.
>
> Here are the specs on the 2000 Trek 8500 LT:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/95wld
>
> And the 2004 Stumpjumper:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/8r4fq
>
> Both can be had for around $1,000. Have components progressed so much
> in the last four years that a $1,300 retail 2004 bike would be a bettr
> deal than a $2,000 retail 2000 bike?
>
> And another question. The Trek owner contends their bike is a 2003
> model yet based on my research 2000 is the last model year for the
> Trek 8500 LT. Who is correct?

Whichever's lighter and has Marzocchi forks .

 

[doki]

Chris Phillipo wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>> Subject: 2000 Trek 8500 LT vs. 2004 Specialized Stumpjumper
>> From: "Rainier" <[email protected]>
>> Newsgroups: alt.mountain-bike
>>
>> Both are allegedly new and never been ridden.
>>
>> Here are the specs on the 2000 Trek 8500 LT:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/95wld
>>
>> And the 2004 Stumpjumper:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/8r4fq
>>
>> Both can be had for around $1,000. Have components progressed so much
>> in the last four years that a $1,300 retail 2004 bike would be a
>> bettr deal than a $2,000 retail 2000 bike?
>>
>> And another question. The Trek owner contends their bike is a 2003
>> model yet based on my research 2000 is the last model year for the
>> Trek 8500 LT. Who is correct?
>>
>> rainier
>>
>>
>>
>
> People still pay more than $1000 for a hard tail? Anyway I don't know
> if I would want anyone's used Rolf wheels.

Well, being as full suspension bikes aren't worth having much below £1000,
or $2000 USDollarRoubles...