Trek Domane 5.2

2»

Comments

  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    gareth2134 wrote:
    Go on then Genius put your source behind it then and show us all that Trek isn't a Top brand

    Surely the onus is on you to prove that it is ? That's why I asked you for a source for your comment earlier.
  • gareth2134
    gareth2134 Posts: 198
    Matchstick Man wrote:
    You said "the" top brand. Not "a". Try to keep up

    Go on explain or show us why. Just reading all your posts with people you come across as an expert and argue with so many but you never back anything up.

    So come on please show us all why Trek is not a top brand
  • Matchstick Man
    Matchstick Man Posts: 565
    gareth2134 wrote:
    Matchstick Man wrote:
    You said "the" top brand. Not "a". Try to keep up

    Go on explain or show us why. Just reading all your posts with people you come across as an expert and argue with so many but you never back anything up.

    So come on please show us all why Trek is not a top brand

    I never said it wasn't. Jesus. I'm sure their bikes are fine, it's just that they're about as cool as the name "Gertrude". For a bloke.
  • gareth2134
    gareth2134 Posts: 198
    Matchstick Man wrote:
    gareth2134 wrote:
    Matchstick Man wrote:
    You said "the" top brand. Not "a". Try to keep up

    Go on explain or show us why. Just reading all your posts with people you come across as an expert and argue with so many but you never back anything up.

    So come on please show us all why Trek is not a top brand

    I never said it wasn't. Jesus. I'm sure their bikes are fine, it's just that they're about as cool as the name "Gertrude". For a bloke.

    lol
  • gareth2134
    gareth2134 Posts: 198
    Imposter wrote:
    gareth2134 wrote:
    Go on then Genius put your source behind it then and show us all that Trek isn't a Top brand

    Surely the onus is on you to prove that it is ? That's why I asked you for a source for your comment earlier.


    I say The Top Brand and not A top brand for which is on my own fault so I concede on being top brand. No bike can really be considered the top bike as all components differ and this was my point as to comparing it to a focus or mid range car. But the Frames are well made above average models and they have one of the biggest Tech teams building and designing the models so it does carry it's weight in the top Brands section.

    All round for me Trek works fine if it didn't I would have Scott or Pinarello which IMO have beter frames but I prefer the Geometry with Trek design.

    :lol:
  • Matchstick Man
    Matchstick Man Posts: 565
    This is going to blow your mind. Make sure you're sitting down before reading the following:

    There is bugger all difference between any "brand" frame other than the paintjob. Whilst the marketing bods will attempt to confuse you with talk of asymmetric stiffpliance which make their latest frame climb like its on rails and corner like a feather, in reality you couldn't measure the difference in performance between them outside of a laboratory.
  • gareth2134
    gareth2134 Posts: 198
    Matchstick Man wrote:
    This is going to blow your mind. Make sure you're sitting down before reading the following:

    There is bugger all difference between any "brand" frame other than the paintjob. Whilst the marketing bods will attempt to confuse you with talk of asymmetric stiffpliance which make their latest frame climb like its on rails and corner like a feather, in reality you couldn't measure the difference in performance between them outside of a laboratory.

    This is going to blow your mind to, so quick get a cup of tea and put your slippers on but.......

    Prove what you have said then because this must mean that all Scientific and Engineering expertise are fooling us all and that the bikes from 1960 are the same as today.

    Where did you uncover this ?
  • Matchstick Man
    Matchstick Man Posts: 565
    gareth2134 wrote:
    Matchstick Man wrote:
    This is going to blow your mind. Make sure you're sitting down before reading the following:

    There is bugger all difference between any "brand" frame other than the paintjob. Whilst the marketing bods will attempt to confuse you with talk of asymmetric stiffpliance which make their latest frame climb like its on rails and corner like a feather, in reality you couldn't measure the difference in performance between them outside of a laboratory.

    This is going to blow your mind to, so quick get a cup of tea and put your slippers on but.......

    Prove what you have said then because this must mean that all Scientific and Engineering expertise are fooling us all and that the bikes from 1960 are the same as today.

    Where did you uncover this ?

    I didn't say a 1960s bike is the same as a 2013 bike. I said a top end 2013 bike from brand A is practically identical to a 2013 bike from brand B. You really must practice reading.
  • gareth2134
    gareth2134 Posts: 198
    Matchstick Man wrote:
    gareth2134 wrote:
    Matchstick Man wrote:
    This is going to blow your mind. Make sure you're sitting down before reading the following:

    There is bugger all difference between any "brand" frame other than the paintjob. Whilst the marketing bods will attempt to confuse you with talk of asymmetric stiffpliance which make their latest frame climb like its on rails and corner like a feather, in reality you couldn't measure the difference in performance between them outside of a laboratory.

    This is going to blow your mind to, so quick get a cup of tea and put your slippers on but.......

    Prove what you have said then because this must mean that all Scientific and Engineering expertise are fooling us all and that the bikes from 1960 are the same as today.

    Where did you uncover this ?

    I didn't say a 1960s bike is the same as a 2013 bike. I said a top end 2013 bike from brand A is practically identical to a 2013 bike from brand B. You really must practice reading.

    Oh right ok and you need to practice reading to then because I am still waiting for your Scientific evidence of this then. Because you clearly state their is "BUGGER ALL DIFFERENCE" in Brand A 2013 top bike and brand B 2013 so can you tell me all the manufacturers that are using ISO Speed Technology on their models other than Trek. You Name all that are and if your right then every single Brand will have it EVERYYYYYYY. waiting clown
  • Matchstick Man
    Matchstick Man Posts: 565
    "ISO Speed Technology"? :lol:

    I would show you my carefully prepared scientific study, but I suspect you'd be unable to read it.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    edited February 2013
    gareth2134 wrote:
    so can you tell me all the manufacturers that are using ISO Speed Technology on their models other than Trek. You Name all that are and if your right then every single Brand will have it EVERYYYYYYY. waiting clown

    Specialized uses a similar concept on the Roubaix - albeit with a slightly different execution. Norton used the 'isolastic' concept on motorcycle frames back in the late 60s.
  • Matchstick Man
    Matchstick Man Posts: 565
    Imposter wrote:
    gareth2134 wrote:
    so can you tell me all the manufacturers that are using ISO Speed Technology on their models other than Trek. You Name all that are and if your right then every single Brand will have it EVERYYYYYYY. waiting clown

    Specialized uses a similar concept on the Roubaix - albeit with a slightly different execution. Norton used the 'isloastic' concept on motorcycle frames back in the late 60s.

    And yet, pro bike riders change teams every year and the same guys win, regardless of what bike they're riding. Cavendish, for one, has won a hatful of races on a Scott, a Pinarello and a Specialized (at least, I've probably missed some). It's not F1 FFS
  • Dess1e
    Dess1e Posts: 239
    If you've only ever ridden Trek, how can you compare them to other brands?

    What bikes do Trek actually make, as opposed to being made for them by Giant?

    What is this absorption factor? Does it have a mathematical model?
    www.kentonrc.co.uk
  • Dess1e
    Dess1e Posts: 239
    ISO speed technology? Sorry could you tell me the actual standard number, I couldn't find the title on the ISO website, or the BSi site for the UK?
    www.kentonrc.co.uk
  • Grill
    Grill Posts: 5,610
    Dess1e wrote:
    If you've only ever ridden Trek, how can you compare them to other brands?

    What bikes do Trek actually make, as opposed to being made for them by Giant?

    What is this absorption factor? Does it have a mathematical model?

    What an idiotic stance. High-end carbon Treks are made in the US with the rest manufactured in China and Taiwan (Giant). Giant makes bikes for loads of other companies, but the carbon layups are specific to said companies. Who makes what is arbitrary in the cycling world.
    English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg
  • Dess1e
    Dess1e Posts: 239
    What stance did I take, I asked a question, hence the question mark at the end of the sentence.
    www.kentonrc.co.uk
  • Grill
    Grill Posts: 5,610
    Loaded rhetorical questions are an implicit means of trolling. If you actually cared you would have spent two minutes on Google as opposed to stirring the pot.

    To be clear I'm not defending the OP as he's clearly limited in scope and has a pretty severe case of "new bike-itis". This emotional attachment makes intelligent pragmatic discussion near impossible, so "feeding the troll" as it were is just an exercise in futility.

    @OP- You have a Trek. You like your Trek as well as all others that have come before and those which are waiting to be produced. We get it. They're fine, but at the end of the day you'll need to let your legs do the talking.
    English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg

Categories