# 06 5200 vs 06 5.2SL



## sprinter1979 (Jul 30, 2005)

I need a little help...

I have read some comparsions of the 5.2 and 5.2sl, but i want to know how the 5.2sl compares to the 5200. These are the two bikes i have narrowed it down too.

I went to my lbs today and they have a 06 5200 in my size, so they are bringing it down from there other store for me to try out on monday. They said that if i wanted the 06 5.2 sl i might have to wait up to 3 months. 

What would you guys suggest? Is it worth it to wait for the 5.2sl? Or is the 5200 close enough that i should just by that now?

Thanks for any suggestions?


----------



## 3465mike (Dec 7, 2004)

sprinter1979 said:


> I need a little help...
> 
> I have read some comparsions of the 5.2 and 5.2sl, but i want to know how the 5.2sl compares to the 5200. These are the two bikes i have narrowed it down too.
> 
> ...


THE 5200 USES THE OLDER, NON MADONE SYLE OCLV FRAME THAT TREK SEEMS TO BE SLOWLY FAZING OUT.IN ADDITION, IT'S MADE WITH CARBON 120 VS. THE CARBON 110 OF THE 5.2SL, THE 110 BEING LIGHTER.....ALSO NOTE THAT A 5.2 SL RETAILS FOR AROUND 3 GRAND, AND IS THE SAME EXACT FRAME USED ON THE 5.9SL, WHICH IF PURCHASED ALONE COSTS 3 GRAND! IN OTHER WORDS YOUR BASICALLY GETTING ALL OF THE COMPONENTS FOR FREE BECAUSE THE STICKER ON THE BIKE IS 5.2SL INSTEAD OF 5.9SL! THE ONLY PROBLEM IS, I DON'T THINK TREK IS BRINGING BACK THE 5.2 SL FOR 06..........SO BUY ONE IF YOU CAN FIND ONE.......NOW


----------



## jmelani (Jul 22, 2005)

3465mike said:


> THE 5200 USES THE OLDER, NON MADONE SYLE OCLV FRAME THAT TREK SEEMS TO BE SLOWLY FAZING OUT.IN ADDITION, IT'S MADE WITH CARBON 120 VS. THE CARBON 110 OF THE 5.2SL, THE 110 BEING LIGHTER.....ALSO NOTE THAT A 5.2 SL RETAILS FOR AROUND 3 GRAND, AND IS THE SAME EXACT FRAME USED ON THE 5.9SL, WHICH IF PURCHASED ALONE COSTS 3 GRAND! IN OTHER WORDS YOUR BASICALLY GETTING ALL OF THE COMPONENTS FOR FREE BECAUSE THE STICKER ON THE BIKE IS 5.2SL INSTEAD OF 5.9SL! THE ONLY PROBLEM IS, I DON'T THINK TREK IS BRINGING BACK THE 5.2 SL FOR 06..........SO BUY ONE IF YOU CAN FIND ONE.......NOW



5.2 SL 2006 will happen. Once again this will be Trek's most popular high-end bike. I agree with this post, wait and get the 5.2 SL, or find an '05 if you can. Trek is sold out, but you might find one in stock.


----------



## sprinter1979 (Jul 30, 2005)

thanks for the info both of you  

I am going to try and get a 5.2 sl now.


----------



## JRS (Jul 30, 2005)

*Worth the difference?*

The only difference between the 5.2 and the 5.2 sl is a lighter carbon which results in a total of a whpping 50 gram weight savings. The big difference between the 5200 and the Madone is that the Madone has a 1-piece head and tob tube which is quite a bit stiffer in the front end than the 5200 according to Trek. I just bought a 5.2 used framset and it is awesome! Your choice.

Jeff


----------



## dcp (Feb 17, 2005)

*A little simplistic*

Lets see, the SL frame is lighter, the SL fork is lighter, 110 is a good deal more stiff than 120 in frame and fork, the Madone 5.2 is more aero, and the Madone 5.2 may absorb vibration better.

As for the SL 5.2 vs. 5200. I have the former, my wife has the latter. The construction is quite different. The top tube and head tube is the biggest difference, but the seat stays are very different too.

The bottom line is that mine is more racy (lighter and stiffer); hers rides more plush while still being a performance bike. We both love our bikes and have no regrets.



JRS said:


> The only difference between the 5.2 and the 5.2 sl is a lighter carbon which results in a total of a whpping 50 gram weight savings. The big difference between the 5200 and the Madone is that the Madone has a 1-piece head and tob tube which is quite a bit stiffer in the front end than the 5200 according to Trek. I just bought a 5.2 used framset and it is awesome! Your choice.
> 
> Jeff


----------



## rdkc01 (Aug 11, 2005)

Sprinter 1979. You are making the right choice with the 5.2 SL. Trek does not have this bike on the 06 line up. If enough dealers complain they may bring it back but you can expect to wait a long time for an 06. If your having difficulty finding an 05 let me know. I just bought one and I pick it up tomorrow. I did not pay retail. They are very hard to find. I may be able to direct you to a store. What Size are you looking for? I would be happy to help if I can. I just went through this pain staking experience and will help if I can. GOOD LUCK.


----------



## kws_man (Aug 11, 2005)

*2006 Madone 5.2sl*



rdkc01 said:


> Sprinter 1979. You are making the right choice with the 5.2 SL. Trek does not have this bike on the 06 line up. If enough dealers complain they may bring it back but you can expect to wait a long time for an 06. If your having difficulty finding an 05 let me know. I just bought one and I pick it up tomorrow. I did not pay retail. They are very hard to find. I may be able to direct you to a store. What Size are you looking for? I would be happy to help if I can. I just went through this pain staking experience and will help if I can. GOOD LUCK.


I ordered a 2006 Madone 5.2sl. My LBS ordered it on 07/14/2005 as he could not get any more 2005 models. I saw a picture of the 2006 model this afternoon, as the local Trek field rep. was in my LBS. The only bad thing right now, is that the bike is not due to come in until October. The '06 madone 5.2 sl is available, you just have to order it.

Good luck and happy riding!!


----------



## zac (Aug 5, 2005)

I may be biased...I ride a 5.2 SL...I'd definately wait. Much better frame, if you like that stiff lightweight sort of thing.

Zac


----------



## sprinter1979 (Jul 30, 2005)

http://www2.trekbikes.com/Bikes/2006/road/madonesl52.html# http://www2.trekbikes.com/Bikes/2006/road/madonesl52.html#

I just ordered a 5.2 sl madone last week and they told me they thought they would start seeing them by the end of this month. Also the link above shows the 06 finnally on treks website. I like the new color looks pretty cool. I hope we dont have to wait till october for this model to make its way to our stores.


----------



## PedalSpinner (Aug 24, 2005)

Good choice on the 5.2SL. I've got a 5.9SL and the sweetest thing about the bike is how stiff the frame is- power transmission and road handling are amazing compared with my old carbon Giant.

Just one thing- check the specs on the bike real carefully when you pick it up- unfortunately you cannot trust Trek will deliver as per their website specs. I ordered the 5.9SL based on the specs from the Trek web links like you but when the bike got delivered it had an X lite post instead of an XXX lite. I asked Trek what the deal was and they just reserved their right to downgrade their specs without any corresponding discount or even an excuse. Very disappointing when looking forward to a new machine after considering so carefully  Hope you have a better buying experience.


----------



## bike4life (Jul 26, 2005)

*06 Madone SL....Mid Sept.*

I bought the 06 5.2 SL and I was told Mid Sept.
This thing looks AWESOME!!

I can't wait!


----------



## johngfoster (Jan 14, 2005)

*Correction*

"Lets see, the SL frame is lighter, the SL fork is lighter, 110 is a good deal more stiff than 120 in frame and fork, the Madone 5.2 is more aero, and the Madone 5.2 may absorb vibration better."

While I personally haven't ridden the Madone SL 5.2, and so can't speak from personal experience, from what I've read, the Madone 5.2 (OCLV 120) is actually stiffer than the Madone SL 5.2 (OCLV 110). It may have to do with more beefy carbon (heavier) or the design (shark fin thingy).


----------



## zac (Aug 5, 2005)

johngfoster said:


> While I personally haven't ridden the Madone SL 5.2, and so can't speak from personal experience, from what I've read, the Madone 5.2 (OCLV 120) is actually stiffer than the Madone SL 5.2 (OCLV 110). It may have to do with more beefy carbon (heavier) or the design (shark fin thingy).



I have ridden both the 5.2 the 5.2SL. While I couldn't really tell which bike was quantitatively "stiffer," I could easily tell that the 5.2SL had more get up and go in the hills than the 5.2 did. (ie it responded quicker and was more lively). Now there is about a 1 to 1.25 lb. difference between the two bikes. Could it have been weight, sure, but to be honest it was the responce difference that made the SL feel livelier. Could it have been the wheels, sure. (I dont know about the difference between the wheelsets here the Race Lites (20/24) on the SL vs the Race Lite Aeros (16/20) on the 5.2). Again, I have not run any quantitative tests, but I sure would be interested in reading something if you have some links, thanks! 

Trek may provide a little help as far as the frame sets go. The SL (either 5.2 or 5.9) is Trek's design for a climber, and a stiff lightweight frame is the goal here. The 5.2 is Trek's road bike for longer rides, so a "softer" more plush ride with aero qualities is at a premium for it. I am a bit curious as to why Trek uses the exact same frame (except paint) for the 5.2sl and 5.9sl, whereas for the 5.9 vs. the 5.2 it uses the 110 vs the 120 OCLV.

As to the 5200 vs the SL, I would think hands down the SL to be the lighter and stiffer frame, especially if the 06 5200 frameset is similar to the prior 5200s.

Zac


----------



## dcp (Feb 17, 2005)

*Nah*

OCLV 110 uses a higher modulus carbon. When I was shopping early this year, I found a comparison on Trek's web site which showed that 110 is a good deal stiffer material than 120. Can't find it now, of course. In bikes using 110, less material is used, so it isn't as simple as saying 110 is stiffer than 120. Also, there is probably some stiffness advantage to the shaped tubes of the regular Madone over the round tubes of the SL. Frankly, I wouldn't expect that I would even notice the difference in stiffness between the two bikes, but I am pretty such that since the racers (who would notice the difference) are using the 110 bikes, it seems really unlikely that the Madone 5.2 would be stiffer than the 5.2SL. I will say that the 5.2SL seems very stiff. I could make my old 853 steel bike make all sorts of strange noices under high efforts. This one just goes without protest.

I suspect that the beefier carbon in the Madone 5.2 probably improves the ride by damping the vibration more, but I have no ride complaints.




johngfoster said:


> "Lets see, the SL frame is lighter, the SL fork is lighter, 110 is a good deal more stiff than 120 in frame and fork, the Madone 5.2 is more aero, and the Madone 5.2 may absorb vibration better."
> 
> While I personally haven't ridden the Madone SL 5.2, and so can't speak from personal experience, from what I've read, the Madone 5.2 (OCLV 120) is actually stiffer than the Madone SL 5.2 (OCLV 110). It may have to do with more beefy carbon (heavier) or the design (shark fin thingy).


----------



## trojanlete (Sep 2, 2005)

*Trek Madone vs. Madone SL vs. 5200*

I was told by a Trek representative (e-mail support) the following: the 5.9 Madone SL is approx. 3-4 ounces lighter than the 5.9 Madone (about 100 grams +/-), however the 5.9 Madone is "slightly" stiffer than the Madone SL. He also indicated that the Madone's were slightly "heavier" than the 5200 series, but that the Madones were much more efficient.

Based upon the information, it would appear that the differences between the Madone and Madone SL are negligible and the main differnce is aesthetics? Is this a correct assumption?


----------



## zac (Aug 5, 2005)

trojanlete said:


> I was told by a Trek representative (e-mail support) the following: the 5.9 Madone SL is approx. 3-4 ounces lighter than the 5.9 Madone (about 100 grams +/-), however the 5.9 Madone is "slightly" stiffer than the Madone SL. He also indicated that the Madone's were slightly "heavier" than the 5200 series, but that the Madones were much more efficient.
> 
> Based upon the information, it would appear that the differences between the Madone and Madone SL are negligible and the main differnce is aesthetics? Is this a correct assumption?


I wont dispute that, and it makes some sense: both the Madone 5.9 and the Madone 5.9SL are built with 110 OCLV for frame and fork. The fin and hump may add to the frames stiffness over the more conventionally framed SL. However the Madone 5.2 and 5.2SL are two different beasts. The 5.2SL and the 5.9SL are the SAME frame and fork, whereas the 5.2 is 120 OCLV.

The only difference between the 5.9SL and the 5.2SL are paint, wheels and component group. I haven't been able to weigh an 06 5200, but an Ultegra equiped 03-04 5200 was noticably heavier than an 05 5.2SL in a side by side pick up test. Maybe the newer Ultegra 6600 series group is that much lighter than the 6500 series...cause the 9 spd cassette on the 5200 certainly is lighter.

Zac


----------

