Pinarello or Trek

steveneast
steveneast Posts: 6
edited November 2008 in Road beginners
Upgrading my Massi ultimate and intend on doing a lot of Sportives next year, (already have 2 100 milers booked).

Have looked at the Trek Madone 2008 5.2 and was impressed, my LBS has in a Pinarello F4:13 and fell in love!!!!!!

Any views based on my intentions are welcome!!!!

Comments

  • System_1
    System_1 Posts: 513
    Sounds to me like you've decided on the Pinarello. :D

    I've ridden neither so my views are worth ignoring, but since they both get fantastic reviews, and assuming they both fit properly, I think I'd go for the Pinarello. The Trek has a very odd looking seat tube/seat post cluster to my eyes and the Pinarello doesn't have that 'Lance' connection that Trek seem to have picked up. Then again, if you're a Lance fan....

    Try and get a ride on both and see what one rides best. If they are both similar there's nothing wrong with choosing between them based on what looks best.
  • FORUM EXPERT
    FORUM EXPERT Posts: 80
    If racing heritage counts then it is the Madone. 5.2 won the Tour de France in '07 and Trek have now racked up 12 Grand tour victories in less than 10 years.

    F4:13 is not a true Pinarello as the frame is sub contracted out o another frame maker whereas the Madone is made in house at Trek.

    Ridden both and have made my choice
  • John.T
    John.T Posts: 3,698
    Can not comment on the Pinarello but the Trek is a great ride. Light, stiff but comfortable. The seat post arrangement works very well as it gives the best points of an adjustable seat post and an integrated one. Just make sure you get the right size cap when you get the bike as they are rather expensive to change later.
    My Fleet.
  • JesseD
    JesseD Posts: 1,961
    Go for the Trek, it rides like a dream is comfortable all day but is still stiff enough in the BB to climb with ease. I had one and am going to probably buy a 5.5 Madone next year.
    Obsessed is a word used by the lazy to describe the dedicated!
  • spanielsson
    spanielsson Posts: 776
    I've not tried the Pinarello, however I do have one of these that is 7kg......................

    DSCF6699.jpg

    Light, stiff and really comfy all day long :D
  • FORUM EXPERT
    FORUM EXPERT Posts: 80
    Change the wheels and it would be under the limit for not a lot more.

    Ps Out of the box they weight just 7.3kg
  • John.T
    John.T Posts: 3,698
    My 56cm 5.2 weighs 7.48kg with a long seatpost cap and SPD-SL pedals. Everything else is standard. It is nearly 1kg lighter than my old 5200 and is a better ride.
    Spanielsson. Is that a 5.2 Performance with Sram Red. Very nice.
    My Fleet.
  • roadrider84
    roadrider84 Posts: 335
    Go for the trek, you will not be disapointed. The frame is unbelieveably comfortable which is perfect for Sportive rides. It is fantasticly light which assists when climbing hills. Go for the 5.1 as they are on offer at the moment. Got mine for 1600!
    Trek Madone 5.1

    Bianchi Via Nirone
  • 996JAT
    996JAT Posts: 94
    The Trek 5.2 wieghs 7.3Kgs, anyone know how much a Trek 1.7 and on the otherside a 6.9Pro?

    No wonder i cant get up hills.
  • spanielsson
    spanielsson Posts: 776
    John.T wrote:
    My 56cm 5.2 weighs 7.48kg with a long seatpost cap and SPD-SL pedals. Everything else is standard. It is nearly 1kg lighter than my old 5200 and is a better ride.
    Spanielsson. Is that a 5.2 Performance with Sram Red. Very nice.

    I had a 5200, the 5.2 really is a different bike in every aspect.

    It's a standard 5.2 frameset that I used my cyclescheme voucher to partly fund, the groupset is full Sram Red, pedals are now Look Keo Carbons and the wheels are now Bontrager Race X Lites, not the standard Race Lites as in my first photo.

    I'm not sure how the Ultegra SL groupset compares to the Sram, no doubt it's better than the Rival on my cross bike. The big difference between the off the peg 5.2 and my bike is the price tag, the extra money spent by wouldn't make any difference to most people (including me).

    Trek lifetime warrany was also something else that made the decision to buy the 5.2 easier too.

    Pics of the latest spec.....
    DSCF7272.jpg
    DSCF7273.jpg
  • roadrider84
    roadrider84 Posts: 335
    Spanielson, are those the Tacx Arnesen rollers I see in that picture? I'm thinking about getting some, are they any good?
    Trek Madone 5.1

    Bianchi Via Nirone
  • ScottieP
    ScottieP Posts: 599
    Can someone tell me the difference between a Madone 5.2 Pro and a Madone 5.2? I've been looking in the 2009 Trek brochure (downloaded from their website) and the only difference seems to be the colour... can anyone enlighten me? The are both OLCV Black carbon and full Ultegra SL. I prefer the colour of the Pro- but surely I'm missing something.

    Thanks
    ScottieP
    My cycling blog: http://girodilento.com/
  • roadrider84
    roadrider84 Posts: 335
    The 5.2 Pro comes with a shorter head tube to give the bike a racier feel.

    The 5.2 Performance comes with a slightly longer headtube which makes the bike slightly more appealing for those who like Sportives etc.
    Trek Madone 5.1

    Bianchi Via Nirone
  • spanielsson
    spanielsson Posts: 776
    roadrider84 wrote:
    Spanielson, are those the Tacx Arnesen rollers I see in that picture? I'm thinking about getting some, are they any good?

    They are Tacx Antares rollers. They arrived last week from Wiggle, I've used them 5 times without any problems.

    I bought a turbo trainer last year, the rollers are slightly less boring to use (and they are not as difficult to use as everybody makes out :wink: )
  • oldwelshman
    oldwelshman Posts: 4,733
    Pinarello
    http://s290.photobucket.com/albums/ll245/oldwelshman/
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aK5Bfqj5fxY
  • John.T
    John.T Posts: 3,698
    edited November 2008
    The only difference between Pro and Performance frames is 3cm longer head tube on the Performance and the colour. The bikes also differ in spec as the Pro comes with a standard 53/39 chainset and the Performance has compact or triple options. The ride and handling are the same.If you use a stack of spacers then you would be better going for the Performance model.
    Here is mine. I set it up more like a compact frame bike as I wanted a 55.5cm top tube and 120mm stem. I just move the stem down and fit tribars for TTs. Also fit deeper rim wheels.

    trekmadone52fd1.jpg
    My Fleet.
  • ScottieP
    ScottieP Posts: 599
    Thanks for the explanations between the Trek Performance and Pro - that's very helpful. IF I was able to afford one I would definitely choose the performance over the pro with that information and I'd try to find an 08 model to save a few hundred quid (and they look better!)

    I test rode a Trek 5500 (with full Dura Ace in 2005) and it was the nicest bike I've ever ridden. I ended up buying a Specialized Allez Elite (after my bonus didn't come in) which I still really enjoy as well.

    Good luck making the choice.

    ScottieP
    My cycling blog: http://girodilento.com/
  • steveneast
    steveneast Posts: 6
    Many thanks.

    Going to test ride the Madone next week, have passed over the Pinarello as the lbs have an Orbea orca in that I am also going to test!!!!!1
  • JesseD
    JesseD Posts: 1,961
    steveneast wrote:
    Many thanks.

    Going to test ride the Madone next week, have passed over the Pinarello as the lbs have an Orbea orca in that I am also going to test!!!!!1

    You'll still buy the trek :D
    Obsessed is a word used by the lazy to describe the dedicated!
  • kingrollo
    kingrollo Posts: 3,198
    Pinarello - reconsider !

Categories