# Trek OCLV 120 vs. 110



## martym (Feb 23, 2004)

What are differences in ride and handling between the (2004) OCLV 110 and 120? Is the stock headset prone to problems? Can a Chris King be installed on the frame? Thanks for your feedback.


----------



## rjc5488 (Oct 1, 2002)

*not too much of a difference...*

The oclv 110 is a little lighter, but i beleive also gives up a little comfort compared to the heavier oclv 120. But, when i say heavier, i think the weight difference in the frames are very minimal. I have the oclv 120 frame, and its vrey comfortable, but i cannot compare it to the 110 due to the fact i have not ridden it, but its still carbon, so im guessing its still pretty comfortable. The bottom line is, theres not much difference unless youre a hardcore weight weenie.


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

*trek schmek*

they are overrated an overpriced if its anything like my brothers' 110 hes has had constant headset trouble, not too mention the frikin steerer tube isnt even solid carbon but aluminum


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

*Kenyon get a life*

If its not your taste fine but don't bash something you know NOTHING about. I advise you to not open your mouth in social circles if you don't have the information. Besides if he is having trouble with his fork, it is more likely the bearings in his headset and is easily solvable by a competant mechanic. Aluminum steerer tubes are no better or worse then carbon steer tubes. Think before you post please. Trek are not over priced by any means. In fact, popular belief states you get the most performance in the 1900-2500 dollar range for a high end pure carbon bike from a Trek. Not liking them is NOT thumbing your nose at conformity either, so save it! 

The 110 is more stiff and light. The name 120 vs 110 is in reference to the actual amount of carbon in the layering process. I have owned both and do own both currently. I ride 6+ hours on the 110 and it is more then adequate for comfort. The forks on both models are different. I prefer the 110. Everything from ride comfort to quality can be changed by your wheels and seat so bear that in mind. I'd get the frame you like the looks of more and or can afford


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

*hmm...*

i know that for some reason trek installs the lower headset cup themselves and u have to send it bak to them for fixin which is silly. an we've actually several 'competant' mechs look at it jerkoff. an basically its a production issue, so %$#%$ off pisshead




CARBON110 said:


> If its not your taste fine but don't bash something you know NOTHING about. I advise you to not open your mouth in social circles if you don't have the information. Besides if he is having trouble with his fork, it is more likely the bearings in his headset and is easily solvable by a competant mechanic. Aluminum steerer tubes are no better or worse then carbon steer tubes. Think before you post please. Trek are not over priced by any means. In fact, popular belief states you get the most performance in the 1900-2500 dollar range for a high end pure carbon bike from a Trek. Not liking them is NOT thumbing your nose at conformity either, so save it!
> 
> The 110 is more stiff and light. The name 120 vs 110 is in reference to the actual amount of carbon in the layering process. I have owned both and do own both currently. I ride 6+ hours on the 110 and it is more then adequate for comfort. The forks on both models are different. I prefer the 110. Everything from ride comfort to quality can be changed by your wheels and seat so bear that in mind. I'd get the frame you like the looks of more and or can afford


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

I didn't realize the Treks still used carbon layering. I thought OCLV were injection molded like a piece of plastic. Regardless, they're very expensive in Europe. A complete DA10 Madone lists for $6000 dollars


----------



## teoteoteo (Sep 8, 2002)

*No Longer*



kenyonCycleist said:


> i know that for some reason trek installs the lower headset cup themselves and u have to send it bak to them for fixin which is silly. an we've actually several 'competant' mechs look at it jerkoff. an basically its a production issue, so %$#%$ off pisshead



It's basically now a non-production issue as Trek no longer uses this method to produce the 5900's. Since the post was about 2004 models your post is not valid. I'll also add in that anytime you give an less than well rounded answer on a legitmate question and team it up with a strong dose of attitude you should expect strong response like the one from Carbon110. Opinion is okay but make damn sure it pertains to the question at hand (the 2004 Treks).


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

*Haha!*

"".....an we've actually several 'competant' mechs look at it jerkoff. an basically its a production issue, so %$#%$ off pisshead""

Why I oughtta........hahahaahaha


----------



## haiku d'etat (Apr 28, 2001)

*First And Last Warning*

play nice or don't play at all.

http://www.roadbikereview.com/guidelinescrx.aspx

please review the above forum guidelines. posts such as this will not be tolerated.

thank you and have a nice day.


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

*Eeeeezzzeeee tough guy*

We all know the responsibility being Administrator bears and we appreciate it. However, Kenyon and myself are exchanging some playful antagonism.

Please make the distinction in the future when it is necessarry to "threat" ie "First and Last warning" the members of the board and when simple disagreements are not versed in a manner of polite articulate expression. Just because we are being candid we eachother doesn't merit breaking the rules. 

You might find more success in undermining the tendancies that fuel angry posts ( which the above are not ) by other methods. For example, you could send a private message or perhaps approach it like Doug did by simply asking the posters to be nice and soliciting common sense that they not put him in the awkward position of admonishing members of the board. Or you could put a picture of Dirty Harry instead of James Brown on crack for your avatar and start using the word "punks and Jamf" alot LOL !

Certainly RBR is no place for "catharsis" and giving vent to angry banter or personal attacks but it was unecessarry here in this case to try and circumvent a potential plethora of vindictive posts. But you just started the job so, I'm sure you'll find the balance as Doug did 

Besides its not your fault Kenyon is failing in cognitive guidance right? Muhuhuhuhuhuhu HAHAAHH hohohoh hehehe whooooooo just kidn Kenyon

NOTE TO READERS: The above does not reflect the beliefs and convictions of Road Bike Review nor is the behavior condoned or recommended by any of its administrators or sponsers. Please do not attempt this at home unless you live in Canada or have more then one ip address =)


----------



## haiku d'etat (Apr 28, 2001)

*check your private messages nm*

no message


----------



## gregg (Oct 30, 2000)

J's being easy on both of you. I would have given you (Carbon110 a warning) and deleted Kenyon's post altogether.

-gregg


----------



## plus_vite (Feb 3, 2004)

*Every time a question like this is asked...*



martym said:


> What are differences in ride and handling between the (2004) OCLV 110 and 120?


Everytime a question like this is asked, some marketing guru has to wear the biggest grin ever.

He did his job well. 

-Plus vite...


----------

