compare/contrast 2006 Trek WSD: 2200 vs. Pilot 2.1

[mmouwse]

Hello!
I am considering buying a used bike and have come across the Trek 2006 Pilot 2.1 WSD and Trek 2006 2200 WSD. They are both Triples.
I am confused! I know fit and ride are ultimately important, but I am confused about these two bikes. I have not yet ridden them as they are both some distance away from where I live AND I would like to learn about them both first...do my homework as it were.
Can anyone help me out?
Thank you!

[Bike Chick]

They are both great bikes. The major difference between the two is that the Pilot is a more upright bike than the 2200. Go to the Trek website and find the archives and look up both bikes to compare the two. Notice that the top tube on the Pilot is at an upward angle so you are in a more upright position, while the top tube on the 2200 is flat placing you in a flatter, more aggressive and more aerodynamic position. It just depends on what kind of riding you plan to do. I would also go to road bike review and do a search on both and see what you can find. A google search on either one may turn up some other reviews as well. Good luck.

[Zen]

Go to the Trek archives (http://www.google.com/search?q=trek+bikes+archive&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&client=firefox-a&rlz=1R1GGGL_enUS344US344) and compare.
Not just geometry but components as well.

[redrhodie]

I went to the Trek archives, and the main thing I could see that was different on those 2 bikes was one had carbon seat stays (the 2200) and the other didn't. The components were pretty similar (both really good). Carbon stays will give a more comfortable ride to an aluminum bike. Of course, condition of the bikes should be a big factor in your decision, as well as fit if they're different sizes.

I didn't even look at the geometry charts because I admit I wouldn't be able to offer any insight from them.