# HELP: Trek 1.1 or 2.1?



## rickyh (Apr 26, 2011)

HELP

This will be my first road bike. I have a good LBS and they are very helpful with my mountain bike stuff and I am now looking at getting into road riding. I have narrowed the choices down to a 2010 Trek 1.1 for $650 or a 2011 Trek 2.1 for $1,250. Just coming into the sport, I don't want to get something that I'll regret weeks or months later. I'm sure the 1.1 would do the job but, will I regret not getting the 2.1? I have read alot of reviews and I keep seeing that many like the 1.1 but the riders on the 2.1 say it's so much faster than the 1 series bikes. From my viewpoint, is it worth $600 to get the 2.1 over the 1.1 just coming into the sport? Also, the 2.1 will be towards the top of my price range so I may not be able to get as many extras as I could if I got the 1.1 I.E. pedals, computer, etc.

What is yall's input on this? Oh yea, I want to get one asap and they have the 1.1 in my size in stock but the 2.1 is not in stock for my size.


----------



## Blackss06 (Feb 26, 2011)

I test rode a 2.1 and I really liked the geometry, it was more compact and easy to get into the drops and shift/brake from them. However, for the price I would never buy it. The bike felt like a tank. I don't know what the weight is but I wouldn't hesitate to say 24lbs+. 

Does your shop have any used bikes? You can get some GREAT used bikes in your price range. 

I have no experience with the 1.1 but if you know that you'll stick with road riding, I'd say get the 2.1, if you're not sure and iffy on sticking with it, the 1.1 would probably be better. Of course theres nothing compared to riding them, so take them out and see how they feel on the road.


----------



## rickyh (Apr 26, 2011)

`My shop doesn't have any used bikes. I did ride the 1.1 and it felt good, I just didn't want to be too quick to rule out the 2.1. As of now, I am not opposed to spending the extra $600 but I would only be comfortable spending the extra if I knew I was really getting alot more bike for the money. On the other hand, the 1.1 would be a good bike to introduce me to the sport and for the price, it is more attractive to me. I know that if I stick with the sport, I would upgrade within a couple of years. The two main factors that I'm not sure of is having a 16 speed vs 20 speed, aluminum vs carbon fork, and also the shifting components.


----------



## llcooljunr (Aug 21, 2010)

I am currently riding last year's 1.1. At the time, my budget pretty much dictated the bike that I was going to have. I enjoy riding it, putting around 600 miles on it. I changed out the saddle and put some shimano 105 pedals since. I have no complaints with it. The 1.1 is a good bike to really get into road riding. I'm thinking in a couple years I'll probably upgrade.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

rickyh said:


> I have read alot of reviews and I keep seeing that many like the 1.1 but the riders on the 2.1 say it's so much faster than the 1 series bikes.


Considering the motor (you) propels the bike, I highly doubt that statement.

If the 1.1 fits well and you're happy riding it, I say buy it, ride it and don't look back. There's always going to be something better, so focus on becoming a better, stronger rider and have fun doing it! 

Also, the price of accessories (helmet, shorts/ bibs, jersey, shoes, pedals, saddle bag, bike computer, etc.) can add up quick, so going with the 1.1 will allow some extra funds for those items. ATMO.


----------



## Jerry-rigged (Jul 24, 2009)

Does the shop carry any other models of the 1.x series? If the frame of the 1.x fits you, but you want a better group, the 1.2 lists for only a bit more, and has 9-speed sora/tiagra group.


IMHO, buy the best bike you can afford... 105 will last a long time for normal folk... If you can't justify the 2.1, the 1.5 has 105, and the 1.2 is a good deal too...


----------



## TrekBikeRider (Jul 21, 2010)

If you can afford the bike and all the other things you need to start riding AND don't want buyers remorse 5-10 rides in, go for the 2.1. The 1.1 has an aluminum fork whereas the 2.1 has a carbon fork (the 1.1 is the only model that has the aluminum fork... others have carbon). Also, the 2.1 has 105 shifters and derailleurs and the 1.1 has the 2300 gruppo. Plus an upgrade on the wheels on the 2.1. And the frame is a lighter form of aluminum. 

Jerry-rigged is incorrect about the 105 on the 1.5. It has Tiagra. 

Either way, you'll be out on the road, which is a good thing.


----------



## rickyh (Apr 26, 2011)

Well guys, I ended up getting a 2010 2.1. The guys at my LBS are great and really helped me out and hooked me up with some extras. They knocked off $225 the bike which brought it down to $1,025 and threw in some pedals, camelback water bottle & holder, and took off 10% off the computer and underseat bag that I got. I had just bought a new trek wahoo mountain bike 2 weeks ago from them and I really like their service. Anyways, it's been 20+ mph winds here in Southwest Louisiana for a while so it's less than ideal conditions but I'm gonna go for a good ride tomorrow.


----------



## llcooljunr (Aug 21, 2010)

Congrats on the new bike!


----------



## Opus51569 (Jul 21, 2009)

Congrats. Sounds like you got a good deal.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

Welcome to RBR. Nice bike.


----------



## Richard (Feb 17, 2006)

Good choice. The 2 series is just "more bike" than the 1 series, mostly in the frame and fork. Components wear out, but the frame they're hung on will last a long time.

We're a Trek dealer and, I hate to say it, I'm very unimpressed with the 1 series. I think the Cannondale and Felt offerings in that price range are better. But when you get to the 2series it's a different story. I would take a 2.1 over a Felt Z85 any day.

Congrats. Enjoy. And welcome to a new addiction!


----------



## kykr13 (Apr 12, 2008)

rickyh said:


> Anyways, it's been 20+ mph winds here in Southwest Louisiana for a while so it's less than ideal conditions but I'm gonna go for a good ride tomorrow.


I'm hoping it calms down to that so I can get out again.  

Enjoy the bike, I bought a 2.1 in '08 and it's been a great choice. And a good LBS is :thumbsup: .


----------



## rickyh (Apr 26, 2011)

So I'm looking for some tips since I'm new to road bikes. I will have between 30minutes to 1hour every day that I can dedicate to cycling. What kind of cadence should I keep? What training can I do to build strength and endurance? I have no hills where I live so all riding will be on flat roads. Lastly, where are some references for good riding positions?


----------



## clipz (Aug 28, 2008)

nice bike and great deal.


----------



## rickyh (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanks. Well, I went on a 10 mile ride today. First ride on a road bike and my avg pace was right at 4min/mile. I know that is probably terrible by some people's standards but you gotta start somewhere right? For the first 5 miles, I had a slight tailwind keeping my speed at 17mph but on the way back, the headwind held me to about 13-15mph. I tried to keep the same cadence the whole time.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

rickyh said:


> Thanks. Well, I went on a 10 mile ride today. First ride on a road bike and my avg pace was right at 4min/mile. I know that is probably terrible by some people's standards but you gotta start somewhere right? For the first 5 miles, I had a slight tailwind keeping my speed at 17mph but on the way back, the headwind held me to about 13-15mph. I tried to keep the same cadence the whole time.


Don't sweat it, you're doing fine. As you build saddle time you _will_ build strength/ endurance, so notch up your time/ effort and pay attention to what your body is telling you. There's no harm is skipping a day or slacking and taking an easier ride in between your harder efforts.

If you want to challenge yourself riding in the flatlands, 'race' to that tree/ sign down the road. 

Everyone's different, but initially shooting for a cadence of 80+ would be good. If you could do 90 to low 90's that would be great, but to start just stick with what feels comfortable/ natural and build from there.

As I mentioned in the gearing thread, I suggest a cheap, wired cadence computer (~$30). Varying cadence with conditions/ terrain and work on smoothing the pedal stroke.


----------

