if lance didn't ride a trek?



ONE MORE TIME FOR THOSE THAT CAN READ. TREK WAS THE LARGEST SELLING BIKE IN THE US IN 1984. LANCE WAS STILL CRAPPING YELLOW POTTY THEN. I WAS THERE AND OWNED A 460.I RODE THE HELL OUT OF IT.
MOST HERE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS. IT IS A CHROMOLY FRAME AND WAS A VERY GOOD BIKE.
By the way Lance's wife left him no the other way around.
 
Jesus Malone said:
StartTday, you are an idiot too, just like Frenchcycling.


"nobody care about cycling.." before Lance?

Uh, hello? How long have people been racing bikes? For at least the past 150 years or so.....so somebody must have cared.

What about Lemond? What about all those makers (in the US) that were around before Lance? Raleigh, Schwinn, Paramount, Cannondale, Trek (yes Trek existed before Lance), Calfee, Sachs, Waterford, Litespeed, Spectrum, etc etc etc etc etc. Surely......SOMEBODY must have cared about what they were riding before Lance came along.

There is no doubt that Trek DEFINITELY has benefited from Lance. RD has taken a big step up. However, OCLV was around before Lance, and was popular before......to say that nobody cared is absurd.

Pull you head out of your....


10-4

I agree. I've had in order: Huffy, Fuji, Cannondale, Trek, Giant, Calfee over a 40 year span (I'm missing some that I can't remember offhand) . Only those people who are prejudiced knock the major manufacturers. Trek bikes are as high a quality as any of the other big manufacturers. Bike makers are basically frame makers after all, you get somebody else's wheels, handlbars, saddle, pedals, groupo, etc. Bikes are pretty darn simple machines when compared to other manufactured goods.

Getting down to brass tacks, Trek sales were very good before Lance came along, and now they are fantastic. Lance definately made a difference but Trek was a solvent, growing, quality bicycle maker before and now.
 
IronDonut said:
If there was no Lance I don't think there would be great Trek bikes.
I'm sorry, but this is a very narrowminded view. I have owned my Trek since 1993, before Lance really had an impact on the building process, and I must say that it is a solid steel framed bike. Lance does not define the Trek line per se, he is a major contributor to be sure, but he is only one cog in the wheel. And you will continue to see that Trek will produce solid, quality bikes now that Lance is retired.
 
Jesus Malone said:
FrenchCycling, you are a tool.
Jesus Malone said:
StartTday, you are an idiot too, just like Frenchcycling.
rofl. Don't sugar coat it man! Tell us how you really feel. :p


Insight Driver said:
I agree. I've had in order: Huffy, Fuji, Cannondale, Trek, Giant, Calfee
We have similar tastes. My list (not counting mtn bikes) goes:
Huffy, Fuji, Nishiki, Cannondale, Trek

This is also not counting the "spare" Taiwan Supergo bike I just picked up.
 
Um yea, I was riding my Trek 8000 well before LA entered the pictured. When I decided to take up cycling, I wanted to stick with Trek because of the solidness of my Trek 8000.

Trek has been around for a solid amount of time and makes great bikes.

Thus, I'm 'DEDICATED' lol.

Basically, LA thrived off of Trek and Trek thrived even more off of LA!
 
Saying Trek wasn't good before Lance is like saying Nike was **** before Jordan. Sure they both weren't the companies they are today but as others have stated Lance doesn't use junk and Jordan won't play in raggy shoes.

Good products, but also smart marketing people to find that perfect person to use the product which have helped R&D which in turn have put them ahead of their competition.
 
frenchcycling said:
if lance and the discovery team didn't ride trek bikes, would anyone buy their road bikes simply on quality?
I see nothing wrong with the quality of Trek bikes. C'mon, does a bike have to be some exotic Italian carbon fiber primadonna to be high quality. Treks may not be the most interesting of bikes, but there is certainly nothing wrong with them.

I don't ride one but my next bike, which will be my commuter just may be a Trek (or another LeMond).
 
Ok ok, I was a little harsh on Frenchcycling and StartToday......but guys, come on.....you are knocking Trek cause they made a great decision to support US Postal. Trek sponsored the team way back in 1996, and sponsored Saturn before that (if my memory is correct?).

What brands would you like to compare Trek to? Seven? Calfee? etc etc? No small "only high-end" maker has the budget to support a major cycling team. You may think Colnago, Pinarello etc are only high end, but in Europe there are plenty of low-end ($1000 USD or so) Colnago`s/Pinarello`s that are made in China/Taiwan wherever.
 
I'm not knocking Trek or Lance, the question asked was, "if lance didn't ride a trek?"

Trek sales in '99 were $55 million and jumped to over $550 million last year. They make nice products, I'm not arguing that. We are all cyclists but I'm talking about the average consumer, in which the last time they ever even thought about riding a bike was when they were ten on their 20" bmx.

When Trek signed Lance, it was a huge gamble, they even said so themselves, look it up. They knew that his story of beating cancer, being an American, and hopefully winning Tours would do great for their business.

And of course everyone in this forum will say that "Ive been riding bikes since 1923, so how can you say it wasn't popular?" So I guess that means if you like it, everyone else must like it. But before Lance won his first tour, does anyone even remember Le Tour being mentioned during the evening news, no. No one cared about the sport of cycling, until Lance won, it was a sport for the rest of the world.

As far as the quality of their bikes go... well my view is a bit scewed since I part-time at a shop in DC that is one of the top ten trek dealers in the country. We've worked on Lance's bikes for the Tour of Hope, we've put together Trek bikes for the entire Bush family... we've received so many broken OCLV frames from crashes, poor shipping, crappy hangers, etc... and all this also happens with every company out there. Basically what I'm saying is, their quality is no better than the next.
 
I have worked at shops and I work in the industry now....big deal.

you said "quality no better than the rest".....maybe thats true, but their guarantee may be better than the rest.
 
StartTday said:
I'm not knocking Trek or Lance, the question asked was, "if lance didn't ride a trek?"

Trek sales in '99 were $55 million and jumped to over $550 million last year. They make nice products, I'm not arguing that. We are all cyclists but I'm talking about the average consumer, in which the last time they ever even thought about riding a bike was when they were ten on their 20" bmx.

When Trek signed Lance, it was a huge gamble, they even said so themselves, look it up. They knew that his story of beating cancer, being an American, and hopefully winning Tours would do great for their business.

And of course everyone in this forum will say that "Ive been riding bikes since 1923, so how can you say it wasn't popular?" So I guess that means if you like it, everyone else must like it. But before Lance won his first tour, does anyone even remember Le Tour being mentioned during the evening news, no. No one cared about the sport of cycling, until Lance won, it was a sport for the rest of the world.

As far as the quality of their bikes go... well my view is a bit scewed since I part-time at a shop in DC that is one of the top ten trek dealers in the country. We've worked on Lance's bikes for the Tour of Hope, we've put together Trek bikes for the entire Bush family... we've received so many broken OCLV frames from crashes, poor shipping, crappy hangers, etc... and all this also happens with every company out there. Basically what I'm saying is, their quality is no better than the next.
Well as you should know, that is marketing doing its job. You however, have a penchant for making general statements. I would venture to guess that the vast majority of us followed cyclig before Lance. I am 44 yrs old and have been a cycling fan since the early 70s, and riding since then. I have ridden many brands of bikes. The reason I don't ride a Trek has nothing to do with their quality. I just preferred the look and ride of my LeMond, heck, with the component package I may as well have gotten a Trek. I am sure that Lance/US Postal have had alot to do with Trek's sales, ala Nike and Jordan. Marketing does, indeed drive sales. You said yourself that their quality is no better than other brands, but no worse. I guess people who buy the other brands buy on quality alone?.....I say "poppycock!"
 
[
When .

And of course everyone in this forum will say that "Ive been riding bikes since 1923, so how can you say it wasn't popular?" So I guess that means if you like it, everyone else must like it. But before Lance won his first tour, does anyone even remember Le Tour being mentioned during the evening news, no. No one cared about the sport of cycling, until Lance won, it was a sport for the rest of the world.


Yes, Greg Lemond got great press during the 80's I remember him making the cover of major magazines.I can recall him wearing a nice suit and holding up a bike on one cover. Can't remember which cover,maybe People Magazine. He was the first American to win a tour,a sport dominated by the French and Belgians.
Granted Lance has taken it much further as far a US awareness and wins.
I am not basing this on opinion or a history google. I lived through this period and was very much into cycling. I was addicted to it.
I guess I am just older than most here or my memory is just better than some.
I even knew who Eddie Mercks was way back when.
As far as a sport for the rest of the world,cycling's popularity as in relation to racing was mostly relegated to Europe specifically and still is today. I hope that changes,but I doubt it.
 
I've had Treks all though the 80s and early 90s and they weren't then what they are today. As Wilber pointed out Trek didn't even have a decent TT bike until 2000. The Postal team was riding Litespeeds painted like Treks.

All this aero stuff, the Madone, the fantastic Bontrager wheelsets are all a direct result of the R&D feedback they get from their top end racing programs.


PMThor said:
I'm sorry, but this is a very narrowminded view. I have owned my Trek since 1993, before Lance really had an impact on the building process, and I must say that it is a solid steel framed bike. Lance does not define the Trek line per se, he is a major contributor to be sure, but he is only one cog in the wheel. And you will continue to see that Trek will produce solid, quality bikes now that Lance is retired.
 
I origninally posted this question. Most people here seem to have cognative issues with their responses. THe rhetorical question was asked in several posts, "would Lance ride a bike that wasn;t the best?" that is upsurd. when you have an entire company behind you (ie you are their posterboy), u will have a bike that works with your body to perfection (or near perfection) such as the ttx, sl and the madone, which i remind you ARE ALL THE HIGHEST END BIKES. When you go over $5000 bikes threshold, its more or less six eggs in one basket a half dozen in another, or in other words the differences between bikes gets smaller and smaller. Second, it is easier to comprehend my argument when you use extreams. Lets say that Armstrong was riding a K-mart bike. I believe that many americans would go and buy k-mart bikes. Now don;t jump in my face. I know that trek bikes are very far from k-mark bikes. However, the price/benefit or the cost/quality ratios for trek are far too steep. A comparibly priced giant model would be noticably less expensive.

I think that it is time for the empty congectures to end. Lets see a little evidence to back up your "oh-so-reliable" personal experiances. Lets take $4000. you can get a full composite bike with carbon fsa cranks that is, the trc composite 1 ( http://www.giant-bicycle.com/us/030.000.000/030.000.000.asp?model=11161) for $2,900. With trek 3,000 can get you a pilot 5.2 with an ultegra TRIPLE (http://www2.trekbikes.com/Bikes/Road/Performance_Road/Pilot/Pilot_5.2/index.php). don;t worry you can 3 racers, this bike promises a "more upright riding position" so that when your go for a leasurly 5 miler around the block ur back won;t start to hurt from an unconfortable (normal) riding position.

And lastly, don;t use a straw man argument, insulting me personally by calling me a "tool" or what not, it simply makes you look silly and more importantly, it takes away from ur already lacking arguments.
 
I'm guessing Lance rides Trek bikes because that is who USPS signed on with in the beginning. Trek made a wise choice in catering to the needs of Lance and as a result has produced some of the best bikes ever built, and they kept their relationship with Lance and the Postal team and now the Discovery team. Yes, they carry a steep price tag, but so do many things. I own a Martin Guitar, which carries a hefty price tag, but also in my opinion is the best guitar built. Notice I said "My opinion". Afterall, that is the only opinion that counts regarding whay I play or ride. I also ride a Trek road bike and a Trek MTB. I was riding Trek bikes well before Lance was a household name.


Now, if he were'nt riding Trek bikes, he would be riding something else. Would I as a consumer go out a buy what ever bike he was riding. Not me, as I was a Trek fan before lance, but many people would be shopping for whatever Lance was riding.

Trek is a smart company.
 
The performance difference between any of the bikes used in the Tour are basically zero. Trek, Giant, Specialized, Eddy M, Wiler, Colnogo, etc. They are all state of the art. Take you're pick of any of them and they'll all perform as well as the other.

The exception might be the time trial bike where aerodynamics comes into play more.

And really any bike over $2000 is going to be so good that unless the riders are with in a fraction of a percent of each other the bike won't come into play in the performance.


frenchcycling said:
which i remind you ARE ALL THE HIGHEST END BIKES. When you go over $5000 bikes threshold, its more or less six eggs in one basket a half dozen in another, or in other words the differences between bikes gets smaller and smaller. Second, it is easier to comprehend my argument when you use extreams.
 
frenchcycling said:
I think that it is time for the empty congectures to end. Lets see a little evidence to back up your "oh-so-reliable" personal experiances. Lets take $4000. you can get a full composite bike with carbon fsa cranks that is, the trc composite 1 ( http://www.giant-bicycle.com/us/030.000.000/030.000.000.asp?model=11161) for $2,900. With trek 3,000 can get you a pilot 5.2 with an ultegra TRIPLE (http://www2.trekbikes.com/Bikes/Road/Performance_Road/Pilot/Pilot_5.2/index.php). don;t worry you can 3 racers, this bike promises a "more upright riding position" so that when your go for a leasurly 5 miler around the block ur back won;t start to hurt from an unconfortable (normal) riding position.
If you're going to lecture us with big words, learn how to spell them. What exactly is your point in comparing the TCR1 and the Pilot 5.2? They're two different types of bikes.
 
IronDonut said:
And really any bike over $2000 is going to be so good that unless the riders are with in a fraction of a percent of each other the bike won't come into play in the performance.
Finally someone who admits it. No one will not win a race or do worse than their buddies on a decent frame (steel, carbon, alu, unobtainium) with a mid-level groupset (generic japanese stuff :p or Campagnolo Veloce or Centaur).

All the rest comes down to our egos. :rolleyes: And I ride Chorus.
 
Trek is no better than Giant or specialized the exact same its just since Lance they have to spend more on Marketing and that mean higher sticker price. All of this OCLV b*llsh*t is a load of ****. I personally owned a Trek Madone and hated it the day everyone in my peleton was riding one. I distinctly remember even a lower al model carrying the same paint scheme as my 5200, how dumb is that. I have since bought a Ti bike and then a Pinarello and Trek's quality cannot is grotesque in comparison. Treks are for loosers, they are ugly as hell and just that name TREK is enough for me to barf.

IMO after Lance leaves Trek will go bankrupt.
 

Similar threads