# 2008 Trek 1.5



## 2ndGen

*2008 Trek 1.5*

*
Any 1.5 owners here?
What are your experiences with it? 
What would've been a "good" price for it?
Any upgrades you've done to your bike?

Thanks*.


----------



## Farmer Tan

I have a 2007 Trek 1000 which is the same as a 1.2 I believe. Close to what you have.

This is my first road bike and I love it. Handles well and hasn't given me any problems. Great bike if you're first getting into it. Put some good miles on it. No upgrades. Everything stock...well, except for tires. The stock ones were crappy.

This spring I'm throwing down for a Madone 5.2 but hanging onto the 1000 for some commuting and rain rides.

Enjoy!


----------



## MANTEIGA

*Nice Ride...*

Bought one last january for a winter bike.... At the time everyone thought it was a 6.9.!? (same paint job )

Sora-Tiagra derailleur combo pak needs to be upgraded though..choppy throws and that little knob thing that breaks your thumb whenever you want to shift is a huge pain in the ass..... not to mention you have to shift from the hoods only... 
other than that i absolutely 
loved the bike, almost 95% the same geo as madone too.... (easy transition from seasons) 
sadly 
i had to sell it to make space. miss it though.


----------



## 2ndGen

Farmer Tan said:


> I have a 2007 Trek 1000 which is the same as a 1.2 I believe. Close to what you have.
> 
> This is my first road bike and I love it. Handles well and hasn't given me any problems. Great bike if you're first getting into it. Put some good miles on it. No upgrades. Everything stock...well, except for tires. The stock ones were crappy.
> 
> This spring I'm throwing down for a Madone 5.2 but hanging onto the 1000 for some commuting and rain rides.
> 
> Enjoy!


A guy bought in a 1000 while I was in the shop.

I was looking for a used 1000 earlier in the year, 
but they were few and far in between.

Did come across a full 105 2006 1500, 
but too small for me.

Yeah...5.2 is the target later in the year.


----------



## 2ndGen

MANTEIGA said:


> Bought one last january for a winter bike.... At the time everyone thought it was a 6.9.!? (same paint job )


Even the wheelset would throw people off.  



> Sora-Tiagra derailleur combo pak needs to be upgraded though..choppy throws and that little knob thing that breaks your thumb whenever you want to shift is a huge pain in the ass..... not to mention you have to shift from the hoods only...


Yeah...read that. I'll ride them until they break (or until I get P'd off enough), then upgrade. 



> other than that i absolutely loved the bike,
> almost 95% the same geo as madone too....
> (easy transition from seasons)
> sadly i had to sell it to make space.
> miss it though.


This one'll be a keeper for me.

When I upgrade to a better bike, 
if I don't keep her here as a poor weather ride,
I'll send her to Puerto Rico to my house on the beach 
to ride those beautiful coasts along with my first MTB for the trails.

Her possible future home next winter
(my place is at the other end of that beach)...


----------



## Malone

Long time lurker, first time poster...

I bought one last spring for $950, and am very happy with it. The dealer gave me a big discount on some crankbrother's pedals and a Trek Incite wireless bike computer. My bike was a special order because my dealer doesn't stock 1.5, just 1.2 and 2.1

After doing some research, I felt the 1.5 was the best compromise of price vs performance. Plus I really liked the black / white / red paint.

The day after I took it home, I did a 39 mile benefit ride. While I loved the bike, I wasn't very impressed with the tires, so I bought a pair of Bontrager Race Lite Hard Cases. These roll faster, handle better, and are more durable. They are slightly heavier though but are flat resistant.

The "Select" stock tires will only be used with my indoor trainer. For everything else I will use the Race Lites.

So far, I haven't had any problems with brakes, shifting, etc. But I am thinking about replacing the bar tape. The white is starting to look a little funky...

I'm undecided regarding the saddle. It is pretty skinny and uncomfortable, but on the other hand it doesn't feel like it is causing any friction with my legs. Hard to describe, but I'm sure you guys know what I mean. Everything is a trade off, especially comfort vs speed.

In August, I did my first century. While it was certainly a very long day (kind of windy and quite a few hills), it was very satisfying, and I was very happy with my 1.5

This spring I will be doing my first triathlon, and of course the 1.5 will be the highlight of my day. 

In July my bike club is going to do a multi day ride across the state. 50 - 80 miles per day, 7 days, with an optional day off in the middle. I hope the timing will be right and I'll be able to join them. 

I also have an 07 Trek 4500 mountain bike, and while sometimes it is tough to choose, I think the road bike is more fun. It is just so dang fast! The blacktop trails here can get very curvy and have lots of little rolling hills - it is like I have my own self powered roller coaster!

Enjoy your 1.5!

Malone out.


----------



## 2ndGen

Malone said:


> I bought one last spring for $950, and am very happy with it. The dealer gave me a big discount on some crankbrother's pedals and a Trek Incite wireless bike computer. My bike was a special order because my dealer doesn't stock 1.5, just 1.2 and 2.1.
> 
> After doing some research, I felt the 1.5 was the best compromise of price vs performance. Plus I really liked the black / white / red paint.


Yeah, I had problems finding them here too.

There are 1.7's and 1.9's, but supposedly only in England. 

The 1.5 is the best deal in the 1.X Series.

For the money, it's hard to beat. There are cheaper bikes or bikes with better components that cost just slightly more, but I believe that the Trek has the best "buildable" frame. It's upgrade worthy. 

The 2.1 come with 105 comps and a better set of wheels, but besides that, it's essentially a 1.5. Identical frames. Alpha Black. 




> The day after I took it home, I did a 39 mile benefit ride. While I loved the bike, I wasn't very impressed with the tires, so I bought a pair of Bontrager Race Lite Hard Cases. These roll faster, handle better, and are more durable. They are slightly heavier though but are flat resistant.


Saddle, Tires and Pedals...the "first" ugrades definitely. 










> So far, I haven't had any problems with brakes, shifting, etc. But I am thinking about replacing the bar tape. The white is starting to look a little funky...


I'm hearing good things about the drivetrain. 
As for the tape? That's also another on my "first" to replace list. 
It looks good...until you begin to actually touch it. 



I have an '07 Gary Fisher Opie MTB that I just love. 

But I got back on the Roadie kick when I picked up a vintage Roadie someone put out.

And what's more fun than riding a trail? 

Riding down Broadway in the middle of New York City Traffic! 

I've done it on my MTB! It rocks! 

"I'm taken your cheese man! I'm takin' your cheese!"

:lol:











> Enjoy your 1.5!
> 
> Malone out


I sooooo will!

Pics coming next week. 

:thumbsup:


----------



## 2ndGen

Ok, so I just picked up my 1.5. 

As soon as I got home, I got dressed up in my biking gear and hit the streets. 

Truth be told, I bought this bike sight unseen! :lol: 
I tested a 1.2 in the Autumn of last year and liked it. 
It was only a 54, too small for me, but I knew I liked it.

This was the first time I actually rode a 1.5. It is noticably different from the 1.2 I road. 
I bought it on faith believing it was better than the 1.2 
(which was good enough for me in the first place)
and it was only slightly more. 

Man...am I one happy camper! I haven't really ridden in months, but today I averaged 20mph comfortably.
I only wish I had more time to ride it.

Other than stretching out the cockpit a bit, the bike is awesome. I will definitely be upgrading the drivetrain. 
My MTB shifts smoother than this set up. To me, this bike is worth the upgrading. 

With another $300., I'll have her at 17lbs even bringing it up to $1100. total.

First accessory, a Trek computer.  Had it put on today.

Next? Saddle, Tires & Dura Ace Derailleurs and of course clipless pedals.

Which reminds me, I thought the bike was going to come with toe clip pedals, a triple crank and white handlebar wrap.To my very pleasant surprise, it came with black wrap (something else I was going to change right away), standard pedals and a compact crankset!  

And I got to ride it on a beautiful 60+ degree day.


----------



## 2ndGen




----------



## K&K_Dad

btw.. you can shift the in both directions from the drops.. just takes practice... I've got the 1.2 and did some upgrading.. straight to full rival.. I coulda had the 1.5 but the price difference wasn't worth it..


----------



## 2ndGen

K&K_Dad said:


> btw.. you can shift the in both directions from the drops.. just takes practice... I've got the 1.2 and did some upgrading.. straight to full rival.. I coulda had the 1.5 but the price difference wasn't worth it..


You do know that their frames are different Series frames, right? 

The 1.5 is the Black Series which is shared with the 2.X Series. 
It also came with a carbon seat post.
Better fork & wheelset also. 

That was the main reason I chose it over the 1.2. 

Well, to be brutally honest, that and the wheelset that I'm already looking to replace with a lighter set. 

Price difference for me? 
1.2 $699. 
1.5 $725. 
No brainer in my case. 
I know I got really lucky with this purchase. 

However, I really loved the 1.2's paint scheme a lot. 



I "think" I'm going to go with a full Ultegra upgrade one of two ways. 
If I don't upgrade to a Madone 5 Series, I'll buy and upgrade kit.
If I get the Madone, I'll transfer all it's Ultegra drivetrain to the 1.5 and upgrade that to Dura Ace. 






.


----------



## K&K_Dad

for that price you'd be stupid not to go for the 1.5.. my seatpost is the same as yours though. I realize that there are differences in some parts but one of my biggest factors were the 2 extra mouths I have to feed. I'm glad I went with the 1.2 since now I know i'll never run shimano again(as long as I can help it). I think everyone starting out should buy a lower model end so that the next one they buy will be what they want. but I must say you definitely got a deal on yours, especially if it's NOS..


----------



## 2ndGen

K&K_Dad said:


> for that price you'd be stupid not to go for the 1.5.. my seatpost is the same as yours though. I realize that there are differences in some parts but one of my biggest factors were the 2 extra mouths I have to feed. I'm glad I went with the 1.2 since now I know i'll never run shimano again(as long as I can help it). I think everyone starting out should buy a lower model end so that the next one they buy will be what they want. but I must say you definitely got a deal on yours, especially if it's NOS..


Brand new. 

I've seen pics of them with white bar tape.
Was happy mine came with black. 
Also, was happy it came without the toe clip strap pedals (just plain pedals).
And, I was happy I got a compact crankset. 
But most of all, I was lucky they even had it. 
I only found one other one and they wanted full MSRP. 



Can't lose on a 1.2. I think it's the most bike for the money. 
Again, I definitely got way lucky. 

:thumbsup:


----------



## 2ndGen

What I learned yesterday:

My 1.5 weighed @ LBS: *20.14lbs *"after" having the Cateye Computer installed. 

By my calculations, I should be able to bring her down to under 16lbs with about $1000.more (for wheelset/tires/pedals/Ultegra Kit).


----------



## K&K_Dad

Have you considered SRAM? Ultegra is ~ 5.38 lbs and Rival is ~4.94 lbs. SRAM is nice. and now that 'Lance' is running Red you can be a super fredalicious copy cat. :lol:


----------



## 2ndGen

K&K_Dad said:


> Have you considered SRAM? Ultegra is ~ 5.38 lbs and Rival is ~4.94 lbs. SRAM is nice. and now that 'Lance' is running Red you can be a super fredalicious copy cat. :lol:


:lol:

Actually, I have a lot of respect for SRAM coming from an MTB world. 
I thought about doing what MTB is famous for...mixing brands (SRAM & Shimano).
In some instances, SRAM/Shimano mixes ended up yielding better performance
from the drivetrain...but I don't know enough about RBing to experiment yet. 

With Shimano, at least I know what I'm getting (not that I'm in anyway knocking SRAM).

 

On my first ride, shifting was clunky and clumsy. 
I thought I'd break her in a bit and to give the drivetrain time to wear in a bit. 
On my 2nd ride, she peformed far better. 

I've ridden a Madone and they are nicer, but I don't see any reason to get rid of the 1.5 when I eventually get a Madone (or other brand upgrade bike).


----------



## drmayer

2ndGEN:

I just purchased a 09 1.5. 

I noticed that the 08 and 09 1.5 in the black/red/white are almost identical. The only difference being the 09 had the new Trek logo in all black and the 08 had it in outline black.

When i picked up my 1.5, i was expecting it to have a bold black logo, and it has the older outlined logo.

I asked the dealer about this, and he said that Trek made a design change after catalogs were printed to go back to the outline design on this bike. 

Now i see the picture of your 1.5 and it has the bold logo.

I normally wouldn't mind, but my trek store said that the only 08 models left over had the red/white color scheme. I paid the extra $60 to upgrade to an 09 to get the red/black/white colors. I feel like i may have been given an 08 frame.

Anyone else have an 09 1.5 in red/black/white? Post a picture if you do showing the logo.

Thanks!


----------



## 2ndGen

drmayer said:


> 2ndGEN:
> 
> I just purchased a 09 1.5.
> 
> I noticed that the 08 and 09 1.5 in the black/red/white are almost identical. The only difference being the 09 had the new Trek logo in all black and the 08 had it in outline black.



My 1.5 has the solid black Trek logo. 
I guess that makes it an '09. 

Looking at the '09 Frame on Trek's site (now that you mention it),
it's 2009 has the solid black logo too.

The '08 does have the outline lettering. 

Thanks for that info D. 






> When i picked up my 1.5, i was expecting it to have a bold black logo, and it has the older outlined logo.
> 
> I asked the dealer about this, and he said that Trek made a design change after catalogs were printed to go back to the outline design on this bike.
> 
> Now i see the picture of your 1.5 and it has the bold logo.
> 
> I normally wouldn't mind, but my trek store said that the only 08 models left over had the red/white color scheme. I paid the extra $60 to upgrade to an 09 to get the red/black/white colors. I feel like i may have been given an 08 frame.
> 
> Anyone else have an 09 1.5 in red/black/white? Post a picture if you do showing the logo.
> 
> Thanks!


Here is a photo from Trek's site for the '08.
The '09 on Trek's site definitely has the solid logo and it's an updated site, 
so that "Trek went back to the outline design" sounds like Phooey to me D. 

If I were you, I'd contact Trek directly and tell them what happened.

I'd use this info to take to your LBS. 
Maybe it would get you a refund for the premium you paid.

Nah...scratch that. YOU SHOULD get a refund for the whole bike, 
or if you're happy with it and want to keep it, demand they give you a leftover '08 price.
I'd threaten to tell Trek about this "bait & switch" tactic (which by the way is illegal). 
Mentioning "department of consumer protection" somewhere in your sentence would seriously drop the price!



If you lived anywhere near New York, I'd go with you and be the bad cop 
and make a big stink in the shop if they didn't want to do the right thing! 

:lol:

*2009 *












*2008*


----------



## drmayer

Thanks for the verification. I will definatly be looking into this further. 

Not because i really care one way or the other, just that i paid the premium for the 09 to get the colors i wanted and got an 08.


Edit: I found the serial #, and the first few digits are WTU07CXXXXX.

What does your serial # start with?


----------



## 2ndGen

drmayer said:


> Thanks for the verification. I will definatly be looking into this further.
> 
> Not because i really care one way or the other, just that i paid the premium for the 09 to get the colors i wanted and got an 08.
> 
> 
> Edit: I found the serial #, and the first few digits are WTU07CXXXXX.
> 
> What does your serial # start with?


WTU185CXXXXX

Also, I've found a "warranty sticker" with "February" and "'09" punched out.

Would this mean that this is when the warranty is over?
Wouldn't think so since the frame has a 5 year warranty. 

So it has to be the date that the bike was completed.
The bike came from an actual Trek Store (not a distributer/dealer).


----------



## 2ndGen

drmayer said:


> Thanks for the verification. I will definatly be looking into this further.
> 
> Not because i really care one way or the other, just that i paid the premium for the 09 to get the colors i wanted and got an 08.
> 
> 
> Edit: I found the serial #, and the first few digits are WTU07CXXXXX.
> 
> What does your serial # start with?






*Here's what you need to do!*

:lol:


*NSFW*


----------



## drmayer

I called the Trek Store and inquired. The got back to me after talking with Trek that they have made the '09 1.5 with both logo types. 

I'm waiting for a response from the factory to verify.

Meanwhile, here's a pic:


----------



## 2ndGen

drmayer said:


> I called the Trek Store and inquired. The got back to me after talking with Trek that they have made the '09 1.5 with both logo types.
> 
> I'm waiting for a response from the factory to verify.


A pretty surefire way to find out is to compare the components on your bike.

I think '08's had Bonty Cranks while '09's come with FSA's. 

So says the Trek site...mine has the FSA crankset. 
You seem to have an FSA crankset too. Is it?


----------



## drmayer

I have the Bontrager Crank.

Here is the response i just received from Trek:

David,

Thanks for writing. The 1.5 did have a mid-season change in the graphics. When I look at the '09 model on our internal website we still show the outline logo as in the attached picture. It's still an '09 though, we were just later in changing the Trek logo design. I hope you enjoy the bike and please let me know if you have any further questions.




I will reply to Trek with this info.


----------



## drmayer

Another response from Trek:

David,

Same situation there. There really has been no change between the '08 and '09 models other then those two things which where later on in the
'09 model year. Not all bikes go from a solid '08 model to an '09.
They don't all get changed from year to year, sometimes we carry a particular model or color forward, as in this case. Occasionally due to supply issues or design changes small differences will occur during that time. You can find bikes with the bold letters and the Bontrager cranks as well, or vice versa the outline lettering and the FSA cranks probably from that transition period. The current white/black bike still has a
2008 part number because the model itself didn't change, just a few detail changes occurred mid production run in 2009. The black/white models never went on closeout because there was no definitive difference between the '08/'09 models until the graphics got changed and that was a running spec change, not a model year redesign or anything. 


Sounds like you got lucky with an "updated" '09.


----------



## 2ndGen

I just got "luckier"! 

The only weak link in the drivetrain is the front der. 
I came across a 6500 Ultegra front der. for $10. and the seller even brought it to me. 
So, that questionable part has been addressed.

Correct me if I'm wong here, but the Trek site has the solid lettering for the '09 with the FSA crankset, right? 
And on that same site, in the archive, they have the outlined lettering with Bonty cranks. Right?

Trek's response to you confused me a bit...they almost said it backwards. 
When I read what they wrote, it reminded me of the "These aren't the droids you're looking for" 
Jedi mind trick of Obi Won Kenobi in Star Wars when the StormTroopers confronted them. 




Wow...that's funny. I'm on their site now trying to get you the link and they've removed the Black/White bike picture for the '09 1.5. They only have the Lime/White picture (note that even the Lime/White bike has the bold lettering). 

http://www.trekbikes.com/int/en/bikes/road/1_series/15/





Ok...let me check the archive;

Here's the 2008 with the outline lettering and the Bonty cranks spec'd. 

http://www.trekbikes.com/int/en/bikes/2008/archive/15#






Your bike looks like a what they describe to be a 2008 to me. 
My bike looks like what they describe to be a 2009. 

Granted, it's true what they said that the bikes are basically identical (besides graphics and cranksets), but that's not the point. 

You paid for a 2009 and actually paid extra for a specific 2009 (color-wise). 
You didn't get what you wanted. I'd seek some sort of recompense. 

Your LBS messed up and if they aren't going to own up to it, then it should be known. 
Give them a chance to redeem themselves. Tell them you paid for a 2009 and got a 2008. 
2008's are significantly less than 2009's and are going at great prices (again, I got mine for $725.00). 

Demand a 2009 bike or a refund for the difference of a leftover 2008 either in cash or in upgrades to your bike and you'll keep you mouth quiet about it or possibly even tell the world how your LBS did a great job taking care of the situation. 

:thumbsup:


----------



## 2ndGen

drmayer said:


> Another response from Trek:
> 
> David,
> 
> Same situation there. There really has been no change between the '08 and '09 models other then those two things which where later on in the
> '09 model year. Not all bikes go from a solid '08 model to an '09.


Those two things being the FSA/Bonty Crankset and the Trek Lettering. 




> They don't all get changed from year to year, sometimes we carry a particular model or color forward, as in this case. Occasionally due to supply issues or design changes small differences will occur during that time. You can find bikes with the bold letters and the Bontrager cranks as well, or vice versa the outline lettering and the FSA cranks probably from that transition period.


That's perfectly reasonable, but...






> The current white/black bike still has a 2008 part number because the model itself didn't change, just a few detail changes occurred mid production run in 2009.


My 200"8" has a 2009 dated manufacturing sticker.  

Annnd, it has an FSA crank.

Annnd, it has solid black lettering.

That's 3 for 3...coincidence? 

 





> The black/white models *never went on* *closeout *because there was no definitive difference between the '08/'09 models until the graphics got changed and that was a running spec change, not a model year redesign or anything.


Again, I got mine at $725.00.

MSRP was like what? $1049.00?

Street price was from $799.00 at the cheapest to $999.00 average. 
.


----------



## 2ndGen

drmayer said:


> I have the Bontrager Crank.
> 
> Here is the response i just received from Trek:
> 
> David,
> 
> Thanks for writing. The 1.5 did have a mid-season change in the graphics. When I look at the '09 model on our internal website we still show the outline logo as in the attached picture.



On their website, the '09 had the solid lettering. 
It couldn't be downloaded as a picture because it was an Adobe Flash graphic. 
But it didn't have the outline lettering. It had the solid lettering.

Again, that picture I described has been removed from their site now. 

 









> It's still an '09 though, we were just later in changing the Trek logo design. I hope you enjoy the bike and please let me know if you have any further questions.



According to their site, the '08 was the only bike that had the outline lettering.

Even the '09 Lime/White has solid lettering.

Is it just me or does what their responses say differ from what is actually up on their site?


 


In a Ricky Ricardo voice..."Trek! You got some splaining to do!"

:lol:


----------



## drmayer

I don't think its the fault of the LBS, hearing the response from Trek. They must have just removed that color from the site as it was there when i look a while ago.

Trek stated that they did not put the 08 black/white on closeout (meaning i couldn't get a leftover 08 at a discounted price) because they were so similar.

IMO its more of a f-up by Trek and not the LBS. 

I did notice that the Bonty crank is a double and the FSA cranks are compact. Different chainring sizes. I suppose if i wanted the smaller ring sizes of the FSA i could get them.


----------



## 2ndGen

Their so similar it's difficult to tell them apart outside of the lettering (which in no way affects performance) and the crankset. 

If I were you, I'd still make a big stink about it and see if you could get some "free" stuff! :lol:

Do you have a sticker on the tube under your crank? 

If so, what date is punched out?

Like I said, for my bike, it's February 2009.


----------



## drmayer

From Trek's response, the 09 actually has an 08 part number in their system. I couldn't see that sticker that had a date punched out. 

I'm pretty much over it, and i guess it was enough to remove the color from the site.


----------



## 2ndGen

drmayer said:


> I'm pretty much over it, and* i guess it was enough to remove the color from the site*.


:lol:


----------



## 2ndGen

drmayer said:


> From Trek's response, the 09 actually has an 08 part number in their system. I couldn't see that sticker that had a date punched out.
> 
> I'm pretty much over it, and i guess it was enough to remove the color from the site.


Update: The Black/White is "back on" Trek's site.


----------



## 2ndGen

2ndGen said:


> What I learned yesterday:
> 
> My 1.5 weighed @ LBS: *20.14lbs *"after" having the Cateye Computer installed.
> 
> By my calculations, I should be able to bring her down to under 16lbs with about $1000.more (for wheelset/tires/pedals/Ultegra Kit).


And now...she's down to *19.07* lbs.


----------



## zac

2ndGen said:


> And now...she's down to *18.07* lbs.


2NDGEN, Maybe I missed something, but a couple of comments and observations:
-What is the point of buying an entry level bike, then completely rebuilding it for $$$, in the hopes that you will shave a few pounds, when you could have started at a higher price point and been working with higher level frame/components that didn't need replacing? 

-I understand you wanting to get lighter, don't we all, but going from 20lbs (if that is what it was) on a Trek 1.5 to 16lbs is going to cost some serious change even if you are buying used. You can find some sub 1400gr wheels for less than 1000, but anything in the super light category is going to cost you some serious coin, new or used. Plus Ultegra SL groupset is not going to get that bike down to 16lbs, I doubt even SRAM Red would.

-In that vein, and you probably know this, your biggest cost/gram bang-for-the-buck part's swap are saddle, wheels, frame and fork. Hell just using superlight butyl tubes like Conti Race Lights or Bontrager Race Lights or latex tubes can shave 50+grams for less than $20.

-Kindly post the mod's you have made, so others who may be interested can follow suit.

-Also if you know, what is the weight of your frame and fork, because this will tell you whether or not you can reach your target weight.


----------



## RoadNewb

I got a '08 1.5 for $500 back in Feburary. Haven't put too many miles on it yet but so far it has been fun to ride but still up for debate if I need to upgrade anything. The shifters are not my favorite and it is a rough ride if you are not on completely smooth surface but I think once I can take it out for a longer ride that I will be happy.


----------



## 2ndGen

zac said:


> 2NDGEN, Maybe I missed something, but a couple of comments and observations:
> -What is the point of buying an entry level bike, then completely rebuilding it for $$$, in the hopes that you will shave a few pounds, when you could have started at a higher price point and been working with higher level frame/components that didn't need replacing?


Because there are no 15lb range Ultegra SL equipped bikes with superior wheelset/tire combinations and custom tailored cockpits to "me" specifically for $2,000. 





> -I understand you wanting to get lighter, don't we all, but going from 20lbs (if that is what it was) on a Trek 1.5 to 16lbs is going to cost some serious change even if you are buying used.


Everything will be brand new and the new components/drivetrain will all be superior to the stock parts (their being lighter is a benefit of the upgrades). 





> You can find some sub 1400gr wheels for less than 1000, but anything in the super light category is going to cost you some serious coin, new or used.


Neuvation R28's are at least 3 lbs lighter than stock Bontrager SSR's and are only $250./set. 




> Plus Ultegra SL groupset is not going to get that bike down to 16lbs, I doubt even SRAM Red would.


Not upgrading drivetrain to save weight...but for superior shifting and reliability to stock drivetrain. 




> -In that vein, and you probably know this, your biggest cost/gram bang-for-the-buck part's swap are saddle, wheels, frame and fork. Hell just using superlight butyl tubes like Conti Race Lights or Bontrager Race Lights or latex tubes can shave 50+grams for less than $20.


Going with Micehelin Pro 3's because their "better" than stock Bonty's. 
If they turn out to be lighter, all the better. 



> -Kindly post the mod's you have made, so others who may be interested can follow suit.


So far, nothing but Wellgo MG8 clipless pedals (240 grams).
This however will be one area where I'll later go up in weight.
I'll be using Shimano XT MTB Pedals. (100 grams more). 




> -Also if you know, what is the weight of your frame and fork, because this will tell you whether or not you can reach your target weight.


Have no idea of frame/fork weight, but just in wheel swap, saddle and drivetrain, 4lbs is completely attainable based on upgraded part's weight compared to stock parts weights.

Example: 
Upgrade wheelset: 1620 grams VS Stock wheelset: 3,000 grams = 3.13056412 pounds savings. 

Bontrager Saddle VS Fi'zi:k looks like 124 gram savings (over a 1/4 lb). 

The Ultegra Kit is easily going to be lighter than the FSA Vero Crankset/Sora & Tiagra Kit not to mention much better. Crankset alone is good for 40 grams. 

Tires, 40 gram savings.

4lbs once it's all done (tires and all) or at least, enough of a 3lb + savings will have the bike in the 15lb range. 

Even at just those numbers, it looks like a convervative 1580 grams (or 3.48 pounds).

That'll bring the bike in at: *15.59 *lbs

(That's 15.59 lbs and stronger in every part changed including the 100 gram penalty for going from Wellgo pedals to Shimano MTB XT Pedals. The Wellgo's are SPD's and if I can use my Shimano MT41 Shoes with them then I might not even swap them out.)



Based on what I've posted, is this realistic or am I missing something?


----------



## 2ndGen

RoadNewb said:


> I got a '08 1.5 for $500 back in Feburary. Haven't put too many miles on it yet but so far it has been fun to ride but still up for debate if I need to upgrade anything. The shifters are not my favorite and it is a rough ride if you are not on completely smooth surface but I think once I can take it out for a longer ride that I will be happy.


Sweet deal! :thumbsup: 

My bike had shifting issues, ride comfort issues, all that. 
But, either I got used to it or the bike just settled down after being broken in a bit. 
Now, she feels a lot smoother than when new and I've tweaked and adjusted her a bit. 
Try playing with tires pressure. Mine was filled at shop without even using a guage. 
I used the proper pressure and that made a huge difference. 

Still, I don't like the stock Bonty tires. 
I'm going to go with Michelin Pro 3's as mentioned before or possibly Continentals.


----------



## zac

2ndGen said:


> Based on what I've posted, is this realistic or am I missing something?


I would say you are missing something. My guess is the weight of the SSR wheels is not 3kg, and indeed much less. While I don't know what they are I would be surprised if they were more than 2500grams. I would also suggest that if they are 3kg, then perhaps the LBS scale was not accurate when you initially weighed in at 20lbs with a computer. 

I can see where you are going, and I understand how you are getting there, but bear in mind that a full on Madone 6.x with your proposed outfit would be well over 16lbs. I sincerely doubt that a frame that is easily significantly heavier is going to come in lighter.

Excellent choice on the Ultegra, but if weight is not a big concern, go with 105, save some $$ and get an excellent group. Hell even SRAM Rival or Force.


----------



## 2ndGen

zac said:


> I would say you are missing something. My guess is the weight of the SSR wheels is not 3kg, and indeed much less. While I don't know what they are I would be surprised if they were more than 2500grams. I would also suggest that if they are 3kg, then perhaps the LBS scale was not accurate when you initially weighed in at 20lbs with a computer.
> 
> I can see where you are going, and I understand how you are getting there, but bear in mind that a full on Madone 6.x with your proposed outfit would be well over 16lbs. I sincerely doubt that a frame that is easily significantly heavier is going to come in lighter.
> 
> Excellent choice on the Ultegra, but if weight is not a big concern, go with 105, save some $$ and get an excellent group. Hell even SRAM Rival or Force.


Thanks for the response. Haven't personally weighed the SSR's but have read on two seperate sites that the SSR's are 3001kgs. And this was precisely why they are said to be solid wheels for training or poor weather bikes. I guess ultimately, I'll know for sure when to do my swap and weigh my bike. 

Isn't there only a 1 or 1.5lb difference between a 1.X frame and a full carbon frame? 

I've read that the Madone 5.X comes in at 15.9 (w/o pedals).


----------



## clipz

i have a trek 1500 2009 model and its fantastic.


----------



## 2ndGen

Hi Zac, 

From BikeRadar.com:

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/road/product/15-08-27747?img=1

Front Wheel Weight:1286 g
Rear Wheel Weight:1816 g
Rims Brand:Bontrager 
Rims Model:SSR 

For a total weight of 3002g's or 6.61827711 pounds. 






And frame weight is: 
1610 g VS 1153 g for Madone 5.2

Just over a pound of difference in frames?

457 grams = 1.00751254 pound

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/road/product/madone-52-08-24147





Are these numbers correct? 

If so, then my expectations should be reasonable, right? 

NeuvationR28 Wheelset = 1350g 

That alone is a savings of 1652g (3.6lbs). 



A wheel swap alone would bring it down from 19.07lbs to 15.47lbs, right?



Sounds like an extremely "too easy" drop for me. 
But that's what the numbers are registering.


----------



## zac

2ndGen said:


> Hi Zac,
> 
> From BikeRadar.com:
> 
> http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/road/product/15-08-27747?img=1
> 
> Front Wheel Weight:1286 g
> Rear Wheel Weight:1816 g
> Rims Brand:Bontrager
> Rims Model:SSR
> 
> For a total weight of 3002g's or 6.61827711 pounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And frame weight is:
> 1610 g VS 1153 g for Madone 5.2
> 
> Just over a pound of difference in frames?
> 
> 457 grams = 1.00751254 pound
> 
> http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/road/product/madone-52-08-24147
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these numbers correct?
> 
> If so, then my expectations should be reasonable, right?
> 
> NeuvationR28 Wheelset = 1350g
> 
> That alone is a savings of 1652g (3.6lbs).
> 
> Right?



Wow, shocked at the wheel weight, those truly are boat anchors. Yes you will be loosing a ton of weight on the wheels alone.

But I still want to emphasize that your intended outfit probably wont get that bike down in the mid 15s. So I would suspect that your initial weighing was low. 

As I suspected the frame is a bit heavier, So my guess is you are going to be in the mid 16s to low 17s. 

You are correct in that a Madone 5.5 or 5.2 with either Force or Ultegra SL weighs in the high 15s to low to mid 16s with pedals and cages. But putting on 1400 gram wheels and a lighter saddle would easily get those bikes in the mid 15s.

Tires/tubes I am guessing the stock Bontrager tires are probably not lightweights. The Michelin Pro3 are fairly light, but not terribly durable. They are in line with the Bonty RXL tires and the Continental GP 4000s tires which are similar in weight and, to me, are more durable. Tubes: you can get good tubes such as Michelin Race Lights in the low 70gram weight or the Conti Aircomp UL in the low 80s, or an even more expensive ultra light butyl tubes in the 50gr weight class. Your current tubes are probably over 100grams.

Really though, build it the way you want to, then get it on a reliable and accurate scale.

Good luck
zac


----------



## kykr13

2ndGen said:


> Hi Zac,
> 
> From BikeRadar.com:
> 
> http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/road/product/15-08-27747?img=1
> 
> Front Wheel Weight:1286 g
> Rear Wheel Weight:1816 g
> Rims Brand:Bontrager
> Rims Model:SSR
> 
> For a total weight of 3002g's or 6.61827711 pounds.


I wonder how they weighed those wheels. I have an '08 2.1 which came with SSR's and recently weighed them (we've had some bad weather around here...). I came up with more like 2200 grams per set. Did they include tubes, tires, skewers and cassette?


----------



## zac

kykr13 said:


> I wonder how they weighed those wheels. I have an '08 2.1 which came with SSR's and recently weighed them (we've had some bad weather around here...). I came up with more like 2200 grams per set. Did they include tubes, tires, skewers and cassette?


See that is what I would have thought 2200-2500 grams or so. The Bonty RXLs are ~1495, the RLs are ~1650, I don't know the Race's and the SSR are a set down, but they even with 500 gram rims and freakishly heavy spokes and hubs, they are still gonna be in the mid 2000s.

2ndGen have you weighed these wheels: (wheels only, no tires, tubes, cassette, skewers, nor tape - although velox only weighs about 15grams a wheel)??

2200 wheels
100 skewers
560 tires
200 tubes
---------------
3060 grams total.


----------



## 2ndGen

kykr13 said:


> I wonder how they weighed those wheels. I have an '08 2.1 which came with SSR's and recently weighed them (we've had some bad weather around here...). I came up with more like 2200 grams per set. Did they include tubes, tires, skewers and cassette?



LOL! Where were you when I was hunting down those weights! :lol:

Actually, it was a bike testing site (site is linked to posts).

Now, "more like" 2200 grams? 
Did you get an exact number (do you remember by any chance)?


----------



## 2ndGen

zac said:


> Wow, shocked at the wheel weight, those truly are boat anchors. Yes you will be loosing a ton of weight on the wheels alone.


Even at the proposed 2200gram weight suggested so far, there's an easy 1lb loss for a couple hundred dollars.  

But again, this wasn't the first time that 3000+ g's was mentioned for the SSR's, so again, I guess the only way to really know will be to actually weigh them on a scale in a bike shop.

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=131310











> Tires/tubes I am guessing the stock Bontrager tires are probably not lightweights. The Michelin Pro3 are fairly light, but not terribly durable. They are in line with the Bonty RXL tires and the Continental GP 4000s tires which are similar in weight and, to me, are more durable. Tubes: you can get good tubes such as Michelin Race Lights in the low 70gram weight or the Conti Aircomp UL in the low 80s, or an even more expensive ultra light butyl tubes in the 50gr weight class. Your current tubes are probably over 100grams.


Going just by "looks", the Continentals look like they'll be heartier for the roads I ride (suburban NYC area). I'm coming from a MTBing and I'll take a few more grams for a stronger tire any day. I considered the Pro 3's at someone's suggestion (who deals with Neuvation R28's). 




> Really though, build it the way you want to, then get it on a reliable and accurate scale.
> 
> Good luck
> zac


Yep. Thanks a lot for the info Zac.


----------



## 2ndGen

zac said:


> 2ndGen have you weighed these wheels: (wheels only, no tires, tubes, cassette, skewers, nor tape - although velox only weighs about 15grams a wheel)??
> 
> 2200 wheels
> 100 skewers
> 560 tires
> 200 tubes
> ---------------
> 3060 grams total.


Nope...just what I read online from bike review site.

Maybe in England "wheelset" includes skewers, tires, tubes, etc...?

 

:lol:


----------



## kykr13

2ndGen said:


> LOL! Where were you when I was hunting down those weights! :lol:


I posted that about a month ago in the thread you referenced about Bontrager vs. DA/OP. I took the SSR's off of my bike since I got a really good deal on a set of Race wheels. They threw in new tubes and tires so I took them off and put on the tires that were on the SSR's (still have some life in them and roads are crap here). Because of that and moving the cassette over to the new wheels, all I had to do was remove the front skewer and weigh them (on a digital kitchen scale) - estimating the weight of the rim tape. So that's why...


----------



## 2ndGen

kykr13 said:


> I posted that about a month ago in the thread you referenced about Bontrager vs. DA/OP. I took the SSR's off of my bike since I got a really good deal on a set of Race wheels. They threw in new tubes and tires so I took them off and put on the tires that were on the SSR's (still have some life in them and roads are crap here). Because of that and moving the cassette over to the new wheels, all I had to do was remove the front skewer and weigh them (on a digital kitchen scale) - estimating the weight of the rim tape. So that's why...


When wheels are weighed, what does "it" include (besides obviously spokes, hub, etc...)?

I automatically assumed skewers, cassette, etc...


----------



## PJ352

2ndGen said:


> When wheels are weighed, what does the rim include (besides obviously spokes, hub, etc...)?
> 
> I automatically assumed skewers, cassette, etc...


Manufacturers normally weigh wheels without skewers and always without cassettes, rim tape, tires and tubes. Then whatever number appears on the scale gets 'recalculated' by - 10% or so and published. At this point weight weenies come along, reweigh the wheels and publish the correct weight.


----------



## 2ndGen

PJ352 said:


> Manufacturers normally weigh wheels without skewers and always without cassettes, rim tape, tires and tubes. Then whatever number appears on the scale gets 'recalculated' by - 10% or so and published. At this point weight weenies come along, reweigh the wheels and publish the correct weight.


Ahhh...thank you PJ. 

Good to know.


----------



## 2ndGen

*Ahhh...got some pleasant news about my buying decision! *


















*2009 Trek 1.5 
chosen as Bicyclying's
Best $1,000. Road Bike 
in June 2009 issue (page 84). *


----------



## 2ndGen

https://www.bicycling.com/gear/detail/0,7989,s1-16-95-2364-0,00.html












*Issue:* May 2009 
*Page:* 84 Editorial Review



"_This year, in choosing our finalists in this category, we tried an experiment: 
We kept the drivetrain and parts spec similar 
(same model of derailleur on all bikes, for instance), 
but expanded the price range to see what a few more bucks would buy. 

We found that, in the case of Trek's 1.5, you get the most compliant ride of the group,
with the kind of smoothness and ride tuning we'd expect from a bike that costs more than $1,100. 

Handling is novice-friendly yet not plodding. 

It delivers confidence from the start and yet, as your skills grow, 
the Trek 1.5 will feel more capable as well. 

So why the 1.5? 

You pay only a little more, and that premium gives you a platform worth building on over the years_."


----------

