Trek 2.1 for £1000 C2W?

bengboy
bengboy Posts: 12
edited February 2010 in Road buying advice
Can't find much info about the Trek 2.1 which my LBS recommend. Can anybody tell me what their experience of this bike is?

Obviously they don't have much good to say about PX SL Pro Carbon / Dolan Mythos / etc, but they can't sell it to me!

Coming from MTB, it's making life a bit difficult having too many bikes to choose from! I imagine all are going to feel fast etc for me, so probably should just buy one and get on with it. Part of me is thinking go PX carbon or I'll always be wondering what it was like, but am I just getting carried away with cheap carbon over quality alloy?

Comments

  • bengboy
    bengboy Posts: 12
    Does ANYBODY have any experience of the Trek 2.1? Good, bad, or ugly???
  • Joycie
    Joycie Posts: 127
    I've seen it in my LBS if that counts? And I'd also love to get my hands on the WSD model but they're only selling that in America this year.

    The 2.1 is a fairly new arrival on the scene as it only became available at the turn of the year (which is why it's not featured in the Trek catalogue).

    You can find out more on the spec on the Trek website and it is a lovely looking bike in real life...
  • bengboy
    bengboy Posts: 12
    Still no takers / people got experience of it, now people are back at work checking the bike forums?!?
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,686
    As Joycie says it has only recently come out so there's probably not many people riding them yet. I think it slots in somewhere between the 1.7 and 1.9 from last year both of which were good value bikes and I can't imagine it won't be a decent machine.
  • sarkmeister
    sarkmeister Posts: 142
    I cant help you with how good it is, but I'm also hoping to get a Trek 2.1c next month on the Cycle2Work as well. To be honest its mainly because I like the look of it, and my local Trek dealer is really helpful.
    Orange Crush 2010
    Trek 1.5c
  • porker33
    porker33 Posts: 636
    I bought an 09 1.9, which is the same frame, with Ultegra throughout.

    i am very pleased with it, it does everything I want, nothing has gone wrong and I think the looks and build quality are superior to many bikes I considered.

    You will find quite a bit of bias on forums against Trek, because they do not currently fit in with the cycling clique, having said that other owners I have spoken to seem happy with theirs.

    As stated 2.1 is new, the only thing that puts me off slightly is the price, i paid less than your figure for a 1.9, which is now a 2.5,,,this may be the way of 2010 bikes, but it seems full price rather than a bargain at this price point.
  • and107
    and107 Posts: 55
    Maybe not much help but i got a 2.3 in january which is quite similar in spec except the brakes and the crank i think the frame is exactly the same and the wheels are different all that said i would of got the 2.1 if trek had any but they were out of stock at trek with a three month wait love the frame colour on that model
  • iRider
    iRider Posts: 33
    I have a Trek 2.1!

    Only recently got it, but so far.. Its good in the corners, handles speeds well and its pretty smooth as well. I went for it as it is a more relaxed riding position to other road bikes, so for C2W it would be great. The 105 and Tiagra parts are very responsive and the paint job on the frame is awesome.

    All in all, a real head-turner!

    Hope this helps.
    "Pain is temporary. Quitting lasts forever."
    Lance Armstrong
  • Aud Reekie MTB
    Aud Reekie MTB Posts: 164
    Well, I h ave a Trek 2.1 on order, also through B2W!.

    Have been on a test ride. Comparing to my 2005 Cannondale R700, it's more comfy (ride and geometry), yet still seems plenty stiff enough. Looks great imho!

    The 'dale has a compact, so decided to go for a triple really just so I have another option (and to justify the purchase in that it's in some way different!). Am hoping I don't slow down on the hills by sitting and spinning since I was doing fine on the compact!

    Just bought 105 chainset and ultregra brakes for £65 and £60 respectively, which seemed a bit a of a steal (the tiagra brakes will go on the dale and the R600 chainset will go on fleabay!)

    Andy
  • murraymint77
    murraymint77 Posts: 43
    Nothing wrong with the Trek.
    But for the money i'd be looking at the Planet x sl carbon or the Boardman just a lot better speck for your money. Full ultegra and a carbon frame on the px for the same money a no brainer in my mind
  • Philby
    Philby Posts: 328
    Top quality aluminium is as good as many carbon bikes - the current issue of Cycle Plus has the Cannondale CAAD 9 winning a test against Planet X.

    All bikes in this price range are solid performers - the decision is mainly about fit, groupset, wheels and of course design and colour!
  • murraymint77
    murraymint77 Posts: 43
    Philby wrote:
    Top quality aluminium is as good as many carbon bikes - the current issue of Cycle Plus has the Cannondale CAAD 9 winning a test against Planet X.

    Philby
    Do you have febs cycling plus already as i don't remember this test in jans issue.
    The reason i mention the px is it has a lot of good review and the group set ultegra over 105.
    I like the look of Trek and specialized but the spec on them is allways a notch down to many bikes at a simlier price. Know what your saying about alloy frames as i currently ride one but with carbon post and bars to take some of that road buzz
  • Mike400
    Mike400 Posts: 226
    Joycie redirected me here (I started a topic about the bike)

    Im just waiting on C2W to be rolled out in my workplace, but Im 99% decided on the 2.1

    As for the Boardman, I had a look at one but buying from halfords put me off big time, and the Trek doesnt really feel any heavier.

    IMO the 2.1 frame is as good or better than the boardmans carbon - just because its carbon doesnt automatically make it better, just different.

    Im still wavering because I know you can get better spec for the £, but then im used to 2009 prices and things are very different this year re value for money.

    At the end of the day IMO the 2.1 has a top rate aluminium frame so it should respond well to upgrades, and the standard 105 kit is decent enough anyway unless you are semi-pro or something.....

    But thats just my two cents.
    twitter @fat_cyclist
  • AMcD
    AMcD Posts: 236
    Joycie wrote:
    I've seen it in my LBS if that counts? And I'd also love to get my hands on the WSD model but they're only selling that in America this year.

    The 2.1 is a fairly new arrival on the scene as it only became available at the turn of the year (which is why it's not featured in the Trek catalogue).

    You can find out more on the spec on the Trek website and it is a lovely looking bike in real life...

    Joycie, I got the WSD model from my LBS (well Edinburgh actually) so they can be bought! I got mine in December. I love it, especially the looks, though have only been out a couple of times what with work and snow. My husband also bought the men's version at the same time (we both got them on the B2W scheme). Despite having the same bike we don't look like twins what with the difference in size and paintwork :D .

Categories