Trek FX4 Sport 2023 - Heavy for a carbon bike? (so why pay the extra?)

[Sloth]

Amongst others, I have been looking at the new 2023 Trek FX 4 Sport.
It looks a great bike, and although over £700 more (RRP) than others I've been looking at it does tick a lot of boxes.
However, is it worth it?
For example, it apparantly weighs in at 10.5kg. That's only 0.4kg less than the Whyte Stirling v3, and nearly half a kilo heavier than the Giant Fastroad SL1 and over half a kilo heavier than the Merida Speeder 400, and they are both around £700 cheaper!
Why is a carbon frame bike so heavy?
Why would I pay the extra for no weight advantage over a decent allu frame bike?
Am I missing something, or have I misread the Trek weight for this bike?

Genuine question, I like the look of the bike but I am questioning why I'd pay £hundreds more for a bike that (other than looking great) offers no weight advantage, which is the main reason for carbon isn't it?
I know some say that carbon is more forgiving and therefore more comfortable but is that on it's own worth the extra £££?

 

[vickster]

Weight isn’t the only benefit of carbon, some people prefer the ride quality (and aesthetic).
Have you compared the weights of the framesets and components. The Trek could have heavier wheels for example

 

[T4tomo]

Am I missing something,

yes lots.

Do a bit of googling on comparing manufacturers stated bike weights etc and report back on your findings

 

[cougie uk]

Trek is an expensive brand.

 

[Sloth]

Weight isn’t the only benefit of carbon, sone people prefer the ride quality (and aesthetic).

Hi Vickster, I agree, and the aethetics are certainly compelling, but are they enough on their own? Perhaps, perhaps not?
As for ride quality, it would have to be a very noticable improvement over Allu, to make it worth so much more money...wouldn't it?
I'm not sure to be honest, thus my questions.
Even at 10% off for the Trek, it will push my budget to the limit, leaving little to nothing for other bits and bobs, so I just want to be sure I'm not being silly and overkilling on a bike that is way over my requirements for my experience and ability?
There's a lot to be said for future proofing though and I'd rather max out on the bike and get the other bits later, than get a bike I may outgrow within a year and wish I'd bought a better one when I had the cash!
I appreiate I should and will do my own investigating, and even try to try one out , should one ever be in stock anywhere within my lifetime!

It's still good to get opinipons of more knowledgable and experienced riders though, as that helps me to form my conclusions, but doesn't replace my own opinion in the end.

 

[Sloth]

Trek is an expensive brand.

Yes, but is it worth it? Or is it overpriced for what you get?

 

[vickster]

I can’t see why you’d outgrow the Whyte, it’s already a top end spec,
People are more likely to go from flat bars to drop bars…I certainly did. I now have 5 drop bar bikes and no flats (I find flat bars too wide in traffic and uncomfortable for my shoulders over any distance).

Go ride them…only you can decide if you want carbon and it’s worth the extra

 

[Sloth]

I don't understand why the Trek weighs 10.5kg, with a single crank, 1x11 Deore 5100 mech (supposedly weighing less than a 2x set up?), when the Giant Fastroad Advanced 1, weighs around 9.8kg with a full two crank, 2x11 105 set up?/ Both are carbon, both have hydraulic discs and both are the same size and very simialr geometry.
Just trying to get my head around that.

 

[Sloth]

I can’t see why you’d outgrow the Whyte, it’s already a top end spec,
People are more likely to go from flat bars to drop bars…I certainly did. I now have 5 drop bar bikes and no flats (I find flat bars too wide in traffic and uncomfortable for my shoulders over any distance).

Go ride them…only you can decide if you want carbon and it’s worth the extra

I'm sure you're right, and the Whyte is currently still favourite. The Trek (or maybe FR Advanced 1) is a bit of a curve ball as I explore a higher budget.

 

[vickster]

What’s an FR Advanced 1?

To me, much over a grand for a single chainring flatbar seems overkill (especially as I don’t much like carbon frames). I’d spend less and get better wheels and tyres down the line if necessary

 

[Cycleops]

If it is unnecessary expensive for what you get it won't sell. Trek will soon realise that and reduce it to a more acceptable level. No reason why that should bother you, buy whatever you think gives better value and suits you.

 

[Sloth]

What’s an FR Advanced 1?

To me, much over a grand for a single chainring flatbar seems overkill (especially as I don’t much like carbon frames). I’d spend less and get better wheels and tyres down the line if necessary

FR Advanced 1 = Giant Fastroad Advanced 1, Advanced is pretty much a carbon framed version of the standard allu framed Fastroad SL1.

To be honest, I suspect you are right, as much as I like the sexy looks and lines of the Trek and FR Advanced, I'm not sure I'd appreciate the differences in riding enough to warrant the premium price.

 

[T4tomo]

I don't understand why the Trek weighs 10.5kg, with a single crank, 1x11 Deore 5100 mech (supposedly weighing less than a 2x set up?), when the Giant Fastroad Advanced 1, weighs around 9.8kg with a full two crank, 2x11 105 set up?/ Both are carbon, both have hydraulic discs and both are the same size and very simialr geometry.
Just trying to get my head around that.

Do a bit of googling on comparing manufacturers stated bike weights etc and report back on your findings

In addition stock bontrager wheels weigh a fecking ton, but then so do a lot of other brands stock wheelsets.

 

[si_c]

I'm guessing the starting point in the weight difference is the specification. The Trek has 40c gravel tyres to start with, the Giant has slick 32c wheels, there will be a significant weight penalty there. I'd also expect with wider tyres that the wheelset will be heavier as well. Then add in that the Trek uses MTB components and seems to be more oriented towards being a do it all ride anywhere type bike than the Giant and you get a better picture.

The Trek also has mounting points for mudguards as well. I think you've got a little distracted by the Crabon vs Alloy debate and aren't looking at like for like in the different ranges.

 

[T4tomo]

I'm guessing the starting point in the weight difference is the specification

No the starting point is that there is absolutely no standard method of measuring published claimed weights. is it giant that reuse to publish them on this basis. pedals on or off? with or without bar tape, bottle cages etc? weigh the dura ace version and publish that with the claris version.

by all means take a suitcase scale or similar when test riding, but otherwise completely ignore published weights