Trek vs Specialized MTBs

[SadieKate]

Not going to dispute Trek over Specialized. Have no current knowledge of either, but I owned Trek mtbikes in the 80s.

[bcipam]

Not going to dispute Trek over Specialized. Have no current knowledge of either, but I owned Trek mtbikes in the 80s.

Since I don't remember ever seeing Trek MTBikes in the 80's I looked it up. They did make what appeared to be a mountain bike the, Trek 850, which they made uo until 1989 when they came out with the 970. Both bikes look more like sport/hybrids but then so did most MTBikes in the 80's. In 1991 they came out with the 8500 which now starts looking like a mountain bike (it was a hardtail with about 2" of front travel) and in 1992 they came out with a full suspension bike.

I don't recall seeing any of these back when. They may have been more popular back East or the midwest then here on the west coast. Here, most folks were riding Specialized early on.

That is one things - bikes are regionalized. Out here you see alot of Santa Cruz and Turners, probably not so much back east.

Again I do like SPecialized cause I've had alot of bikes by them and I know they take care of their customers. I just haven't heard the same about Trek.

[SadieKate]

I could have saved you the effort since it was my first mountain bike -- 1986 dark green Antelope 850. The original mountain bikes were fully rigid so it didn't "appear to be a mountain bike," it was one. I can go get it out of my mother's garage if you feel the need to see it in person.

Thank goodness the spiffy roller cam brake they came with died a quick death. Happy hour design brilliance, let's put the brake underneath the chainstays so it will collect even more mud.

[snapdragen]

Hey sadiekate - I had an dk green 850 too, I think. But mine didn't have a funky brake placement. Gave it to my niece a couple years ago, it lived a good life in Berzerkly until someone stole it out of her basement....

[SadieKate]

Cool. Amazing what giant hunks o' lead we rode trails with back then.

[madisongrrl]

Trek and Specialized make great bikes. I own a 2001 Rockhopper Comp and a 2006 Trek Fuel Ex 9 (but we've already had this discussion).

I pulled up the specs on both bikes (the Trek 6500wsd and the specialized stumpjumper disc, right?)

While the components are a bit nicer on the Specialized than the Trek, those disc brakes on the Specialized are mechanical disc, not hydralic disc breaks. Huge difference....

As long as you fit well on the Trek, I'd me more inclined to go with that bike (if you have your heart set on one of the two). It will be easier to upgrade the drivetrain components than it will be to up grade those mechanical disc brakes to hydralic (very costly, especially if you can't install them yourself & and even if you can, you still need costly tools like a torque wrench to do it).

As someone else stated, if you asked your lbs to upgrade that specialized stumpjumper to hydralic that would be a good option also. But, I'll bet it would push the price up to $2000 give or take. So it depends on your budget and how each bike fits you.

Also, Hayes Sole brakes are the bottom of the line hydralic brakes in that product line and I'm not sure how good they are. So you might want to do a little research before you buy.

[madisongrrl]

I'm not a fan of Trek and I really love Specialized but I'm not very impressed with the Women's specialized bikes. Trek is doing a much nicer job than Specialized is right now. The top of the line full suspension Specialized women's bikes are not that great. They have given the men's lines the Brain shocks, yet still the womens bike gets the Fox Triad. That sucks! The top of the line women's Trek is way better (Fuel EX 9's). It has better wheels and lots of carbon pieces. I really dislike Trek bikes, but I did buy the Trek EX 9 instead of the Specialized Stumpjuper FSR Women's Expert. The Trek was hands down the better bike....

Since I don't remember ever seeing Trek MTBikes in the 80's I looked it up. They did make what appeared to be a mountain bike the, Trek 850, which they made uo until 1989 when they came out with the 970. Both bikes look more like sport/hybrids but then so did most MTBikes in the 80's. In 1991 they came out with the 8500 which now starts looking like a mountain bike (it was a hardtail with about 2" of front travel) and in 1992 they came out with a full suspension bike.

I don't recall seeing any of these back when. They may have been more popular back East or the midwest then here on the west coast. Here, most folks were riding Specialized early on.

That is one things - bikes are regionalized. Out here you see alot of Santa Cruz and Turners, probably not so much back east.

Again I do like SPecialized cause I've had alot of bikes by them and I know they take care of their customers. I just haven't heard the same about Trek.

[bcipam]

Just a recommendation re mechanical vs. hydraulic disc bakes. Disc brakes of any kind is a big improvement over "canties", side pulls or v-brakes. I choose mechanical disc brakes when I upgraded my Fisher because frankly for a futz like me there's less to go wrong, maintain or fix. I'm a big gal and have absolutely no trouble stopping with my mechanical disc brakes. I can do wheelies without a problem! Yes I agree hydraulic are best but mechanicals are good as well. And if a small gal, I would stay with V-brakes. Disc brakes add weight to the bike.