1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Trek 1.7 any good?

Discussion in 'Beginners' started by simon74, 23 Feb 2008.

  1. simon74

    simon74 New Member

    At the moment my road bike is a 2005 Claud Butler San Remo, I've now decided to get something better, my LBS has a 2008 Trek 1.7 54cm which to seems ok to me. Has anyone got one? What do people think of them?
     
  2. bonj2

    bonj2 Guest

    yep, fine. get it.
    haven't got one, mind, but looks alright.
    Test ride it, but if it feels ok get it. Should be about £800.
     
  3. Paul_Smith SRCC

    Paul_Smith SRCC Über Member

    Location:
    Surrey
    They are good value providing that is what you need. The Trek 1.7 is set up as a fast fair weather entry level sports bike; if that is what you are looking for then it is indeed a good choice.

    There are other bikes equal to that as well, the Specialized Allex sport for example. In all cases with any bike simply make sure you get the right size as well as the right type of bike for the style of riding you want to do.

    Paul_Smith
    www.bikeplus.co.uk


     
  4. simon74

    simon74 New Member

    The Specialized Allez Elite was another bike I was looking at on the net, haven't seen one in the flesh yet though, doesn't seem as well speced though.
     
  5. Paul_Smith SRCC

    Paul_Smith SRCC Über Member

    Location:
    Surrey
    Indeed Trek has mainly 105 where as Specialized is mostly Tiagra, in reality that will make more of a difference for polishing purposes than it will actually translate into how well the bike performs or how durable it will be, as the current 105 and Tiagra components are at the moment very close in every respect; price included.

    Mind you many enjoy polishing their pride and joy and for sure 105 is a better badge that Tiagra so the Trek 1.7 does have an advantage in that respect.

    Paul_Smith
    www.bikeplus.co.uk


     
  6. NorthernSky

    NorthernSky Über Member

    i've been looking at the Trek 1.7. i would be using this for all year round cycling. no racing. i'm looking a comfortable bike too

    i'm in Northern Ireland and you can only really get Trek and Giant here. is there a Giant that would be as good?

    i didnt really want to go to £950 (which seems to be the price of the trek 1.7 now) but it has the shifters i wanted (little black switch on the brake)

    i'm pretty new to this, any advice?

    ta
     
  7. ajb

    ajb Well-Known Member

    Location:
    North Devon
    Exactly the same as me,
    I had the Caud Butler San Remo, and changed to the 2008 Trek 1.7 and I absolutly love it.
    The Claud Butler now lives on the turbo.

    Alan.
     
  8. Wigsie

    Wigsie Nincompoop

    Location:
    Kent
    I was looking at those and did almost buy one as they are great. In the end I got the Allez Elite because it was more comfortable for me and I figured I could always upgrade components as and when.

    On paper though the 1.7 is a perfect balance with the 105 spec and the frame etc
     
  9. fudgedog

    fudgedog Active Member

    Location:
    Perth
    Freind of mine just bought one a few weeks ago as winter trainer thinks it's brilliant. Even though the weather has improved he's still on it, his other "good bike" is a spesh roubaix and it cost £2000+ . As everyone says though try them out
     
  10. just4fun

    just4fun New Member

    i hate to sound like a broken record BUT........ giants defy range are meant to be ok. in the price range your looking at £800 = carbon forks+seat post with tiagra set. £950 gets you carbon frame forks and seatpost and 105 set. both have the gear switch you refer too. saying that on this forum it seems every allez owner is a happy one. as for the defys in another thread i was saying im unsure after my test ride of one but thats mainly due to changing from a heavy mountain bike to a road bike, somehting that wouldnt apply to you. Good luck with your new bike and im sure what ever you go for will put as big smile on your face.
     
  11. jimboalee

    jimboalee New Member

    Location:
    Solihull
    "Stuck record" :sad:

    Here's another.

    When you go to look at it, take your Dad's fishing scale. Weigh the bike and add on 4lb for the pedals, computer, a couple of bottes ( half full ), cages and a PRK in a seat pack.

    Do my little sum. ( 1 / weight(lb) ) x 1000 = gear ( inches ).

    If the bike hasn't got a gear lower than what the sum prescribes, leave it alone, because though it may look like a thoroughbred, it will climb like a carthorse. :laugh:
     
  12. jimboalee

    jimboalee New Member

    Location:
    Solihull
    Another source has the Trek 1.7 at 18.5 lb without pedals.

    Load it up and it will be 22.5 lb ish.


    The Trek glossy says 50/34 Compact and an 11 - 25 cassette.

    Lowest will be an incredible 37".

    The 34 x 21 is the '10% gear', so it's truly an 'Entry level SPORTS bike' like Paul said. :laugh:

    I'd have it with a 39 x 25 ( 42" ). :sad: Because I detest 'Compact' sets.
     
  13. 4F

    4F Active member of Helmets Are Sh*t Lobby

    Location:
    Suffolk.
    Jimbo, what's a lb ? My dad's fishing scales only come in kgs.
     
  14. weepiglet

    weepiglet Well-Known Member

    2.2lbs = 1Kg; or
    1lb = 0.455 Kgs

    So weigh it on your dads scales and convert accordingly
     
  15. 4F

    4F Active member of Helmets Are Sh*t Lobby

    Location:
    Suffolk.
    pah, we have been metric since the 70's