login
Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0
-
No new posts
 2006-12-03 1:17 PM |
 3 |  Subject: Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0Anyone with feedback on the following would be helpful. I have an opportunity to acquire a Trek 1000 or Pilot 1.0 with Membership Rewards points from Amex. I'm looking for feedback on either bike. Here is my story: 6'4" - 220lbs - 34" inseam Bike uses: -duathlons and possibly future sprint distance tri events I went to the trek store and only looked at the 1000 (before I realized the Pilot was an option from Amex). They had it in a smaller size so I couldn't test out a fit. The other issue is I'm not sure what my fit is. The sale rep said that he thought I would probably be a 63. I'm not sure if they charge to fit but I also felt a little guilty taking too much time when I wouldn't be purchasing anything from them at the store. Right now I ride a vintage Ross 12 speed that was a hand-me-down. Anything I get is certainly an improvement. I want to be sure that whatever I buy will last me a while because I don't really have the budget to a buy a bike every few years. Question: Is the Pilot a better choice than the 1000? Thanks in advance. ClydeSDale1 Edited by ClydeSDale1 2006-12-03 1:40 PM |
| 2006-12-03 6:14 PM in reply to: #614552 |
Expert 1024 | Subject: RE: Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0 Looking at the specs on both bikes at www.trekbikes.com, they are virtually identical. The 1000 comes in some smaller sizes, but they both max out at 63. Got a coin handy you can flip? |
| 2006-12-03 6:29 PM in reply to: #614552 |
Master 1265   CT | Subject: RE: Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0 The Pilot has a slightly more relaxed geometry for a more comfortable ride while the 1000 has a more standard road bike geometry. The Pilots are referred to as "comfort" bikes allowing for a slightly more upright positioning in the saddle. Both are good. I would try to ride both. Either way, you're getting a good deal  |
| 2006-12-03 7:47 PM in reply to: #614552 |
Champion 10471 Dallas, TX | Subject: RE: Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0 I have a Trek 1000. Now, at 4,000 miles and 2 years... I am VERY READY to get a new road bike. The gearing on the Trek has always been *special*... but then again, it's Shimano Tiagra (? something like that). The key to the Trek 1000 is finding a mechanic who can find the *sweet spot* for the derailer, etc. So, the Trek 1000 will be a great starter bike, but if this is something you really enjoy doing... you will probably want to upgrade in a couple of years. It's a great entry level bike though and you will be able to do many, many miles on it. Good luck! Edited by KSH 2006-12-03 7:47 PM |
| 2006-12-03 9:15 PM in reply to: #614552 |
Master 3019 West Jordan, UT | Subject: RE: Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0 Theoretically the 1000 would be a little faster because it has traditional race bike geometry. The Pilot has a more upright 'comfort' gemoetry like the above poster said. It's intent is to let you sit more upright, so you may not be able to tuck as far down in the drops as you would on the 1000. In real life I do not think you will notice much difference, but if your intent is to race I would get the 1000. Component wise they are about the same bike. |
| 2006-12-03 10:02 PM in reply to: #614552 |
Veteran 225 Dothan, Alabama | Subject: RE: Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0 I bought a Trek 1000 as a beginner bike this March. I've had no significant problems. The bike is fast enough; I passed plenty of more expensive bikes this year. Matter of fact, it was a great joy of mine. So, I love my bike. However, it is a road bike. Even with aerobars and a fast forward seat post the geometry is still a little off, and being that far forward makes the bike a little less stable. Also, it is a very stiff alum frame, good for power transfer, but a little rough to ride on less than ideal pavement. Having shared all that, I just bought a nice tri-bike (QR Seduza) as an early Christmas present, as I intend to move up to HIM distance this year, and comfort is an issue. It (Seduza) is a great bike, but I still ride and enjoy my Trek. BTW - I'm 6' 1" with a 34" inseam, and I'm on a 58cm. Good luck. Hope you love the bike whichever you pick. |
| 2006-12-05 2:54 PM in reply to: #614552 |
Expert 743 Minnesota | Subject: RE: Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0 What is more important, race position and aerodynamics or comfort? |
| 2006-12-05 10:57 PM in reply to: #614552 |
Expert 1092 Earth | Subject: RE: Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0 I have had a Trek 1000 for 5-6 years now. The bike is a work horse. Once it is set up, you shouldn't have too much of any problems with it. The gearing is set for touring, not racing. Sure you can race it, and I have. I have profile clip on aero bars, but you can't really re-route the shift cables. Mainly because the shifters are routed to the brake levers. So if you want to stay aero it is pretty hard to do so. And as someone else pointed out, the clip on bars can make the ride a little unstable. The only complaint I have had, the stock rims are too soft. They will wear your brakes out faster than needed. (My rims were red annodized, I bent the front one and had to replace it. The rear ended up chewing up the brake pads, while the front pads were fine.) |
| 2006-12-09 12:58 PM in reply to: #614552 |
| 3 | Subject: RE: Trek 1000 or Trek Pilot 1.0 I went to the LBS today and noticed some key differences in the 1000 vs. 1.0. For starters the pilot 1.0 has an extra set of brake handles so you can brake in an upright position. I am not sure I liked the extra handles but I am sure others would appreciate them while riding upright. The frame was slightly different between the two as others detailed and after a brief conversation I decided on the 1000 to get me through the next few years of races and for recreational family use. Thank you for everone's feedback! Clyde |
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK