Trek Fuel 8 vs Trek Lush SL

[schnuezel]

Hi All!

I'm new here. I'm trying to decide if the WSD of the Lush is worth it, or if I should just get the men's version (Fuel 8) which has a few more upgrades in the components. I'm 5'4", so I would get the 15.5 of either. I have short legs, longish torso, and short arms. Given that, I'm not sure I need a WSD. But I am looking for something that gives me a more upright position, and helps me with my phobia of super tight switchbacks. I ride all single track, up the mountain for several miles, then back down. Fairly technical stuff. And I'm hoping to turn into a better climber, so the ladies with the $5k+ bikes don't have to wait for me so much.

Any help is appreciated.

[TigerMom]

I am 5ft 1in and the more standover height that I could get, the better. Also check the bike weight. Specialized told me that the WSD bikes are usually slightly lighter than men's bikes due to women tend to be lighter in weight in proportion to height, so the company adjusted accordingly....maybe it will be the same for Trek?

As for the more upright position, I have found that the more I ride, the more I need to lower my handlebars. Unfortunately, I am so short that my bike handlebars are currently only level with my saddle, even with a negative 17 degree stem on my MTB. There were times where the hills were so steep that my front wheels would just spin in the air (even though I rode in a "crouched" position and on my saddle's nose). One of the more experienced riders said that I needed to lower my handlebars some more (hence, I installed a negative 17 degree stem on my MTB). Sure enough, that helped for both of my wheels to touch the dirt going up hill.

Also, I thought that my dream MTB would be a 29er (which worked great rolling over huge roots). But, the supertight switchbacks (which scare the hell out of me going downhill) work so much better with a 26er for me, that I am glad I ended up with a 26er. I will try out a 650B next though.

[indysteel]

Have you ridden either bike? Unless you have gobs of standover on the Lush, I find it hard to believe the Fuel has a low enough standover for you. But other elements of their respective geometries are different enough that I think you to test ride if you can. The Fuel's fork also has 130 mm of travel verses 110 on the Lush. How much travel do you want/need? I wouldn't get too wrapped up in the components. Both are nicely speced bikes, and components wear out and can be changed. Handling and fit should be what largely drives your decision. But see if you can demo one or both bikes.

[schnuezel]

I rode the Lush in a 15.5 today and it felt kinda short. I was afraid that on a tight switchback, my knees would hit the handle bars. The tech guy told me WSD are intended for longer legs, shorter torso, and since I'm the opposite, he agreed I should try the Fuel EX. They currently don't have one in the shop yet (they're still switching over from skiing), so I'll try it in a few weeks.

I currently ride a Rocky Mountain Element 10 which has a standover height of 724 mm. I just did some internet checking. The Lush has a standover height of 685 and the Fuel EX has a standover height of 745. I'm fine on my Element, but if the Fuel EX is really this high, that might be a deal breaker.

[thekarens]

My partner has a Fuel 8 and I have no problem with it. I'm 5'3 and it's the right size for me. She's 5'5 and its the right size for her as well. I have a long inseam and arms. She has the same inseam as me, but shorter arms.

[TigerMom]

I rode the Lush in a 15.5 today and it felt kinda short. I was afraid that on a tight switchback, my knees would hit the handle bars. The tech guy told me WSD are intended for longer legs, shorter torso, and since I'm the opposite, he agreed I should try the Fuel EX. They currently don't have one in the shop yet (they're still switching over from skiing), so I'll try it in a few weeks.

I currently ride a Rocky Mountain Element 10 which has a standover height of 724 mm. I just did some internet checking. The Lush has a standover height of 685 and the Fuel EX has a standover height of 745. I'm fine on my Element, but if the Fuel EX is really this high, that might be a deal breaker.

I can't wait to hear your decision. You are lucky that you will be able to try out the Fuel EX in your size in a few weeks before making your final decision. As a short female, most bike shops don't have my size in stock to try out.

[indysteel]

You could also consider going up a size in the Lush if the Fuel doesn't work. The standover on the 16.5" Lush is still less than the 15.5" inch Fuel according to Trek's website.

Also, I think I misspoke before. When I looked at Trek's website, I saw the Lush 29er SL and missed the fact that the Lush SL also comes in a 26er. My reference to 110 mm of travel was to the 29er, not the 26er. It looks like the Lush SL 26er comes with 120 mm of travel. '

But now that I'm comparing the right bikes, I have to wonder if you'll feel any less cramped on the 15.5" Fuel. The effective TT isn't that much longer than the Lush.