# Madone 3.1: 2011 vs. 2012



## Whodat (Oct 13, 2011)

This is just an academic question (for me anyway), as I already have my bike, and the cost:benefit analysis of a new one would have to factor in the cost of a good divorce attorney (i.e. distinctly unfavorable).
I was checking out a detail on my 2011's specs and inadvertently landed on the page for the 2012 version.

The 2012 version has a drivetrain that is a mix of 105 (rear derailleur, brifters) and Tiagra (front derailleur and cassette), with a SRAM S350 crankset thrown in. The 2011 version is all 105 except for a SRAM Apex crankset.
The 2012 version has an alloy seatpost, vs the carbon seatpost on the 2011.

On the other hand the 2012 has a frame made of "300 Series OCLV" carbon, while the 2011 had "3 Series TCT" carbon, and the the 2012 version has a headset that has integrated sealed cartridge bearings while the 2011 has "integrated semi-cartridge" bearings. 
The Headset on the 2012 version is described as 1-1/8" on top and 1.5" on the bottom (does this mean "tapered"?) while the 2011 version is simply 1-1/8".

The other components, most notably the wheels, seem to be the same.

Overall (on paper), is the 2012 version an improvement, a "downgrade" or equivalent, and in the real world, would any of these changes be detectable by an beginner-intermediate rider?

Thanks.


----------



## teoteoteo (Sep 8, 2002)

Whodat said:


> This is just an academic question (for me anyway), as I already have my bike, and the cost:benefit analysis of a new one would have to factor in the cost of a good divorce attorney (i.e. distinctly unfavorable).
> I was checking out a detail on my 2011's specs and inadvertently landed on the page for the 2012 version.
> 
> The 2012 version has a drivetrain that is a mix of 105 (rear derailleur, brifters) and Tiagra (front derailleur and cassette), with a SRAM S350 crankset thrown in. The 2011 version is all 105 except for a SRAM Apex crankset.
> ...


Carbon is the same, and yes the new model has the tapered fork. I wouldn't advise selling your old bike for the new one. I would say if you were looking to get more out of your current bike look to a wheel upgrade first.


----------



## Trek2.3 (Sep 13, 2009)

It's just marketing. The annual changes usually don't amount to much. That's true here.


----------



## johns81347 (Dec 28, 2011)

2012 Frame would be a bit stiffer due to the tapered headtube. Also, OCLV is a better layup than TCT... They went to different levels of OCLV for 2012 so the process is better across the board it's the materials that change/get lighter. Wheels are still cheap and heavy and grouppo is a toss-up. The 3.1 is a great beginner carbon bike but if it were me, I'd buy the one that I liked the colors more and whichever one was cheaper.


----------



## GDTRFB (Feb 12, 2011)

johns81347 said:


> 2012 Frame would be a bit stiffer due to the tapered headtube. Also, OCLV is a better layup than TCT... They went to different levels of OCLV for 2012 so the process is better across the board it's the materials that change/get lighter.


The part about the head tube is absolutely true, but the TCT vs OCLV is not as clear.
The label of "TCT" refers to a Trek carbon fram that is manufactured outside of the US.
The name (not the process) was changed to OCLV (300, 400, 500) for marketing purposes.
People want to identify with the OCLV label as opposed to the TCT label.
The TCT (or new 300,400 & 500) OCLV is manufactured in the same way the "traditional" OCLV is, just using different grades of carbon. The forks are different this year, and the 400 has a BB90. The layup is the same, a 2011 3.1 and a 2012 300, 2011 4.x, 2012 400 etc.
There is very little difference between the 2011 TCT & 2012 OCLV frames manufactured in Taiwan other than usual year-to-year incremental improvements.

The OCLV 600 is a considerable step up from the 300, 400 & 500 frames, as was the 6.x from the 3.x, 4.x & 5.x.

My 2004 1200SL has an OCLV fork on it.
That doesn't mean that that fork is better than the TCT one on my 2011 4.7.


----------



## Merckx Ti (Mar 8, 2008)

Pete2 said:


> The part about the head tube is absolutely true, but the TCT vs OCLV is not as clear.
> The label of "TCT" refers to a Trek carbon fram that is manufactured outside of the US.
> The name (not the process) was changed to OCLV (300, 400, 500) for marketing purposes.
> People want to identify with the OCLV label as opposed to the TCT label.
> ...


I agree 100% about the no difference between TCT and OCLV. It's all for marketing. However, the change in Head Tube lower bearing size and different fork will yield for a stiffer front end on the frame. It appears Trek has made this change on all their Carbon road bikes.
Conclusion is yes the 2012 version has a better frame. I also would prefer the 2012 Apex version over the 105. Just because I like Sram.


----------



## Whodat (Oct 13, 2011)

Yeah, I did like the Apex on a couple of other bikes I tried. But not $4-500 more. And I am really liking my (2011) 3.1, 105 gruppo and all.


----------



## Merckx Ti (Mar 8, 2008)

Actually the 2012 Trek 3.1 price difference between the partial 105 group bike and the total Apex group bike is just $50


----------



## Whodat (Oct 13, 2011)

Right, but I got my 2011 on sale.


----------



## Steelguy (Apr 25, 2010)

Whodat said:


> Overall (on paper), is the 2012 version an improvement, a "downgrade" or equivalent, and in the real world, would any of these changes be detectable by an beginner-intermediate rider?.


The new 3-series frame got a rave review (and five stars) in Cycling Plus for January, in the form of the Madone 3.5 (sold in the UK but not here). Previous 3-series bikes got three and a half or four stars. So you might well find it an improvement. The 3.5 has an Ultegra groupset. You can find the review online at bikeradar.com.


----------



## trekracer20 (Jan 10, 2012)

As others said, the carbon is almost certainly the same. The tapered head tube would be nice though, if the cost was the same.


----------



## Whodat (Oct 13, 2011)

Steelguy said:


> The new 3-series frame got a rave review (and five stars) in Cycling Plus for January, in the form of the Madone 3.5 (sold in the UK but not here). Previous 3-series bikes got three and a half or four stars. So you might well find it an improvement. The 3.5 has an Ultegra groupset. You can find the review online at bikeradar.com.


It is a great review, but looks like there are lots of differences--between 3.5 & 3.1. For example one of the most common criticisms of 3.1 is "crummy wheels"; 3.5 has "superb Bontrager wheel and tyre combo". So I'm not sure this is an apples to apples comparison. Also, the 3.5 is £1800, or $2800 (do Treks run higher in UK?)


----------

