[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference noted::bicycle

Title: Bicycling
Notice:Bicycling for Fun
Moderator:JAMIN::WASSER
Created:Mon Apr 14 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:3214
Total number of notes:31946

3052.0. "'96 Trek 1220 vs. 2120" by ROWLET::AINSLEY (Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow!) Fri Mar 08 1996 11:40

    I'm considering a '96 1220 for recreational/touring use.  I'm willing
    to spend the approximately 50% more for the 2120 if it's worth the
    money.  The bike store has a 1220 in stock, but not a 2120, so I can't
    do a comparison ride at the moment.  
    
    The 1220 is an all-aluminum frame while the 2120 is a carbon
    fiber/aluminum combo.  I've heard that the carbon fiber frame produces
    a rougher ride.  Any thoughts on this?
    
    The components that are different on the bikes are:
    
    The 1220 has the RSX 46/36/26 crankset, RSX100T front deraileur, RSX GS
    rear deraileur, RSX STI dual shifters, HG50 11-24 7-speed freewheel,
    RSX sealed hubset, RSX dual pivot brakes.
    
    The 2120 has the 105SC 52/42/30 crankset, 105SC Triple front deraileur,
    105GS triple rear deraileur, 105SC dual control for triple shifters,
    HG70 13-26 8-speed freewheel, 105SC hubset, 105SC dual pivot brakes.
    
    Are the 105SC components significantly better than the RSX?  How much
    of the price differential is due to the carbon fiber frame vs. the
    105SC components?
    
    How can I compare the gear ratios on the bikes?  Given that I don't do
    well at climbing hills, which would be better for me?
    
    Thanks,
    
    Bob
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
3052.1STOWOA::SWFULLERFri Mar 08 1996 12:3620
    Both of these frames are, I believe, sport to racing geometry.  Are
    you sure you want this quick handling for your type of riding?  Do
    you need braze on's for racks?  Is 32 spokes sufficient strength for
    you?  These are the things you need to answer in addition to steel
    versus aluminum, versus carbon. 
    
    Carbon has typically viewed as more comfortable than aluminum, however
    this is probably due to the oversize Cannondale tubes.  
    
    I would certainly suggest going with a triple.  There are a number
    of bikes coming with this standard now.  The new campy triple is
    hot in the market right now.
    
    I am a supporter of smaller frame builders.  People that I have helped
    build a bike from scratch, or custom frame with a parts kit, seem to
    hold on to them like their own child.   If you don't mind spending a
    bit more now, you could end up with something you'll never need to
    change.
    
    steve
3052.2ROWLET::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slow!Fri Mar 08 1996 16:2833
>    Both of these frames are, I believe, sport to racing geometry.  Are
>    you sure you want this quick handling for your type of riding?  Do
>    you need braze on's for racks?  Is 32 spokes sufficient strength for
>    you?  These are the things you need to answer in addition to steel
>    versus aluminum, versus carbon. 
    
    Both bikes are in the 'touring' section of the catalog.  The 2120 is
    the top of the line with the 1220 just below it.  Neither of them have
    rack mounts, but I don't plan on doing any non-supported touring.
    
>    I would certainly suggest going with a triple.  There are a number
>    of bikes coming with this standard now.  The new campy triple is
>    hot in the market right now.
    
    That is why I'm interested in those two models.  They are the only Trek
    triples (other than the 520).
    
>    I am a supporter of smaller frame builders.  People that I have helped
>    build a bike from scratch, or custom frame with a parts kit, seem to
>    hold on to them like their own child.   If you don't mind spending a
>    bit more now, you could end up with something you'll never need to
>    change.
    
    I would like to give my business to my local bike shop.  They have been
    very good to me and I try to return the favor by purchasing everything
    I can from them.  I only order mail order when they don't have/can't
    get what I want.
    
    I've ridden my purchased new/last year leftover Peugot for 6 years, so
    I'm not going to get rid of a new bike in a few years just because
    some new model comes out.
    
    Bob
3052.3test drives in orderCOOKIE::MUNNSdaveWed Mar 13 1996 16:325
    The best way to decide which bicycle is best for you is to ride both 
    models, up some steep hills if you want to decide which gearing is best 
    for you.
    
    What prices were quoted for the 1220 and 2120 ?
3052.4ROWLET::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slow!Sat Mar 16 1996 22:1315
    $799 for the 1220 and $1299 for the 2120.  I'm trying to figure out if
    the 2120 is worth the 50% premium over the 1220.
    
    I rode the 1220 today.  I REALLY like the STI shifting.  The bike was a
    54 cm and  I need at 52, so I couldn't get 100% comfortable on it, but
    I didn't find anything that I didn't like.  I'm going to try and ride a
    2100 (2120 w/out the triple chainring) next weekend and see how the
    carbon fiber frame feels.
    
    What is the difference between the RSX and 105SC components, besides
    the 7-speed freewheel on the RSX and an 8-speed freewheel on the 105SC?
    
    Thanks,
    
    Bob
3052.58 or 7 sp levers?EDSCLU::NICHOLSMon Mar 18 1996 09:2911
>    What is the difference between the RSX and 105SC components, besides
>    the 7-speed freewheel on the RSX and an 8-speed freewheel on the 105SC?
    
I will guess that the RSX has the STI levers since Iknow 105 does and you
dont mention RSX doesnt.  In that case, the RSX levers MAY only support 7
speed rears, making a potential change to 8 that much more expensive.  I
am not fully up on my component groups, hopefully someone else will support
(or shoot down) my guess.  I doubt they would be different, but you might also
be sure the rear hubs are the same width (130mm is 8/newest road standard.)

--Roger
3052.6ROWLET::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slow!Mon Mar 18 1996 13:406
    What makes the 105 better than the RSX, other than the possibility that
    the RSX only supports a 7-speed freewheel?
    
    Oh yeah, and we all know that RSX is only 16-bits, right? :-)
    
    Bob
3052.7LHOTSE::DAHLMon Mar 18 1996 17:126
RE: <<< Note 3052.6 by ROWLET::AINSLEY "Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow!" >>>

>    Oh yeah, and we all know that RSX is only 16-bits, right? :-)

Hey, some PDP-11's had 22-bit physical addresses at least!
						-- Tom
3052.8UHUH::LUCIAhttp://asaab.zko.dec.com/people/tjl/biography.htmlThu Mar 21 1996 17:0216
That's why there were overlays [.ODL files].  Now you  know why you have
redundant gearing across chain rings.

The RSX and RX100 both take an 8 speed cassette and handle a tripple chain ring.
RSX is "non-racing", RX100 is "entry-level" racing.  I believe that means the
RX100(105) is the same design as ultegra/dura ace, with lesser quality/heavier
parts.  RX100/RX105C are reported to be mechanically identical, according to
most sources I've spoken to, with the difference being in the finish.  They are
both  OEM line parts.  I've never seen RX100/RSX (and rarely 105) in catalogs. 
There is just no market for them on custom-built bikes.  

I bought some new wheels based on ultegra hubs and I put a Dura Ace cassette on
it, cause it wasn't much more than the Ultegra ($40 and $35 respectively).


Tim
3052.9The 1220 is mineROWLET::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slow!Mon Apr 01 1996 10:2123
    Thursday night I went to the bike shop to order the 1220 and was
    pleasantly suprised to be told that they had just gotten a bunch of
    bikes in at the other shop, one of which they thought was a 1220.  A
    quick check of the computer inventory and a phone call to the other
    store and it was mine.
    
    It was transferred to my store on Friday and Saturday I went in and had
    my cateye and pedals transferred from my old bike and new water bottle
    cages added.  A few short test rides and everything was adjusted pretty
    darn close to where I expect it to be permanenty.  I loaded it up on
    the yak-rack and went home, itching to ride, but the 30 MPH winds told
    me to stay home.
    
    Yesterday afternoon, the winds died down to about 15 MPH, so my fiance
    and I went out, her on her 6 month old Trek 730 and me on the 1220. 
    Since her endurance isn't up yet and she's riding a hybrid bike, we
    only did 10 miles, but I LOVED IT!.  The STI shifting is very smooth
    and only once did I hit the wrong lever and shift opposite to my
    intention.  The gear spacing is a lot closer than on my old bike and
    the triple will ensure I haven't lost anything by giving up my larger
    rear cluster.
    
    Bob
3052.10WMOIS::GIROUARD_CTue Apr 02 1996 07:143
    Congrats, Bob! Ain't new rides wonderful?!!
    
    Chip
3052.11ROWLET::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slow!Tue Apr 02 1996 09:349
    Thanks Chip.  Now if the !@#$%^ wind would die down a bit.  It's
    supposed to be 25-35 MPH again today:-(
    
    The downside is I've got to spend more money.  I was transferring more
    stuff from my old bike to the new one last night and discovered that my
    frame pump is too long to fit and that there is no way to mount my
    blinking rear light...arrgggghhhH!
    
    Bob
3052.12WMOIS::GIROUARD_CTue Apr 02 1996 11:473
    Bummer! Good Luck!
    
    Chip
3052.13UHUH::LUCIAhttp://asaab.zko.dec.com/~lucia/biography.htmlTue Apr 02 1996 15:364
25-35MPH will give you one heck of a nice tailwind.  I'm on my way out there in
the next half hour or so.

Tim
3052.14BUSY::SLABOUNTYGo Go Gophers watch them go go go!Tue Apr 02 1996 16:397
    
    	RE: Tim
    
    	That only helps when you're riding with the wind.  There's a
    	good chance you'll have to turn around and go the other way
    	eventually.
    
3052.15UHUH::LUCIAhttp://asaab.zko.dec.com/~lucia/biography.htmlWed Apr 03 1996 18:531
oops. left off the smiley face.  I must have thought it was obvious.
3052.16BUSY::SLABOUNTYAntisocialWed Apr 03 1996 19:285
    
    	Oh, OK.
    
    	8^)
    
3052.17Definately a happy Trek ownerROWLET::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slow!Thu Apr 04 1996 09:3515
    Well, I took the bike out for a short club ride last night.  A bit
    windy, but warm.  The brakes are a lot better than on my Pugeot, with
    most of that difference probably due to the difference between a $400
    bike (6 years ago) and an $800 bike.  I'm still somewhat dazzled by the
    STI shifting; it's like I'd think, "I probably should shift up a gear"
    and it happened.  I'm also impressed by how smooth the shift is.  Most
    of the time, the only reason I know I've changed gears is my cadence
    has changed.  There's no noise, no clunk feeling as it moves to the
    next gear.
    
    At this point in time, I'd have to say that my decision to spend the
    money for STI was at least as good as my decision to buy a $400 bike
    rather than a $250 bike 6 years ago, was.
    
    Bob
3052.18MPOS02::PEREZTrust, but ALWAYS verify!Sun Apr 21 1996 00:081
    which STI shifters/derailleurs does the 1220 use?
3052.19ROWLET::AINSLEYDCU Board of Directors CandidateMon Apr 22 1996 14:215
    re: .18
    
    RSX.  See .0 for the details.
    
    Bob
3052.20great time to buy bikes...SMURF::LARRYThu Aug 22 1996 12:118
    Just bought my wife a 1220 at Nault's in Manchester NH for $611!  This is
    a great time of year to buy at bike.  Unlike some other shops in the
    area Naults will deal.  Another shop had the bike "on sale" for $750.
    
    It is a pretty bike.  BTW the RSX components are 7 speed.  The 8 speed
    components start with the RX line as far as I can tell.
    
    -Larry