Light hardtail
Discussion
About to buy another bike. It will replace a 2007 Trek 4300 which I like a lot. All the £500-£700 stuff I'm looking at feel quite lardy compared to the £400 2007 bike. Is it worth going to a Trek 6000 range bike? I will pay more for something that is worth it. I'm not a component or brand hore (but I do like the Trek 'feel'). I'm not a fan of the styling on the latest Specialised models (this is important to me, sorry). Any suggestions for a lighter hardtail which suits the taller bloke (21.5 Frame on the 4300 works well for me at 6ft 4).
Targarama said:
Canyon - not heard of them, will take a look.
German I think - they sell direct over the internet and hence you get excellent spec's for the money vs competitors at a given prioe point. They seem to be getting great write-ups in all the mags at the moment. Not sure how you're meant to try one out though.Session said:
Trek 6000 series is a lot lighter and a longer fit due to being perfoemance series frame. The Trek frames are a million times better quality and lughter weight than anything form cube or canyon and as for Planet X plastic frames....
Why are they better than those three exactly? I'm not denying that Treks are good bikes, but one of my riding mates has a cube and it is excellent, another has a Canyon and that is astonishing value for money, and a very good ride. No experience of On One / Planet X though I must admit. Would an aveerage rider actually notice the diffrence between a Trek Al frame and a Cube Al frame at the same price point in terms of quality of manufacturing / however else Treks are better?Edited by Flippin' Kipper on Saturday 2nd April 10:29
I have a 21.5" trek 6000 series from 2008, it's not designed to be a truly light bike, it's meant to be a good entry level to serious xc with reasonable components that I'm upgrading as they wear out.
So if your looking for truly light, look elsewhere and seriously up your budget. If you want a better bike than a trek 4300, yes the 6000 is a lot better, but not night & day better.
Oh yes just to add the 21.5" frame is a big 21.5" if you know what I mean, even with a 60mm stem it's still to big for me and I'm 6'2". I'd try and get 19" to fit if you go with a 6000.
So if your looking for truly light, look elsewhere and seriously up your budget. If you want a better bike than a trek 4300, yes the 6000 is a lot better, but not night & day better.
Oh yes just to add the 21.5" frame is a big 21.5" if you know what I mean, even with a 60mm stem it's still to big for me and I'm 6'2". I'd try and get 19" to fit if you go with a 6000.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 4th April 10:25
OneDs said:
I have a 21.5" trek 6000 series from 2008, it's not designed to be a truly light bike, it's meant to be a good entry level to serious xc with reasonable components that I'm upgrading as they wear out.
So if your looking for truly light, look elsewhere and seriously up your budget. If you want a better bike than a trek 4300, yes the 6000 is a lot better, but not night & day better.
Oh yes just to add the 21.5" frame is a big 21.5" if you know what I mean, even with a 60mm stem it's still to big for me and I'm 6'2". I'd try and get 19" to fit if you go with a 6000.
Well I bought a Trek 4500 in the end. It just felt right. I'm 6ft 4" and the 19" in the shop felt OK, but not quite there. Ordered a red one to go with my 3 red cars (OK, red wasn't compulsory, but its the only non-matt paint option on that model).So if your looking for truly light, look elsewhere and seriously up your budget. If you want a better bike than a trek 4300, yes the 6000 is a lot better, but not night & day better.
Oh yes just to add the 21.5" frame is a big 21.5" if you know what I mean, even with a 60mm stem it's still to big for me and I'm 6'2". I'd try and get 19" to fit if you go with a 6000.
Edited by OneDs on Monday 4th April 10:25
Thanks for the suggestions.
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff