# 2300c



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

anyone know anything about a 2005 2300C?

I am finding very little info, they appear to be kind of rare for some reason (other than the fact that they seem to have only made them for one year.)

I am looking for a geometry chart to try to determine the actual size of a frame I have. I have an e-mail in to Trek and I am sure they will respond within a day or so but I was wondering.

The numbers on the rear dropouts are 242155-52 and 242156-52...is it a 52 cm?


----------



## cryoplasm (Jun 14, 2008)

What do you want to know? I can't make any particular questions out from the verbal diarrhea which has been posted here.

The 2000 series was reintroduced in 2003 using what they called ZR9000 alloy in the main frame. The model was called TREK 2300.

In 2004 there was TREK 2100, 2200 and 2300 again same frame but with OCLV carbon rear seatstay. Same models continued in 2005..2007 with a variation in colour/paint scheme each year. In 2007 the rear stays were downgraded to TCT carbon from OCLV, for the US market only.

The only downside to TREK's was the shabby geometry. Very unusual course of action and of-course no help whatsoever to the discerning rider.

In 2008 TREK changed their geometry and unified it across the board. I've no experience of riding the new geometry but still the figures look strange. Plus a lack of their Pro-Fit in the 1 or 2 series is a real put off.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

Re-read the question...I suppose I should have been more specific for those with poor reading comprehension.

First question: does anyone have a specific link to a geometry chart for the 2300C ?
Second question: Do the numbers stamped on the dropout correlate to the frame size? For example, do the digits "52" after the dash mean it is a 52 cm frame?

You can get down off your high horse, there was no reason to insult me or Trek just because YOU didn't understand what I was asking.

As for the history lesson that is NOT what I asked, I certainly read what was available before posting here. This ain't my first rodeo...

According to Treks archives, the 2300C was only made in 2005. It has a rear suspension in the form of an elastomer block (called s.p.a. by Trek)


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

cryoplasm said:


> What do you want to know?* I can't make any particular questions out from the verbal diarrhea which has been posted here.*
> 
> The 2000 series was reintroduced in 2003 using what they called ZR9000 alloy in the main frame. The model was called TREK 2300.
> 
> ...


I hope you're talking about your own. I can get all Grammar Nazi on it, if you wish.


----------



## HIMEHEEM (Sep 25, 2009)

First!


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

HIMEHEEM said:


> First!


Hey! Where'd your signature go?!?!


----------



## HIMEHEEM (Sep 25, 2009)

PlatyPius said:


> Hey! Where'd your signature go?!?!


It was made of carbon....I left it in direct sunlight.


----------



## Chain (Dec 28, 2006)

Does trek make good bikes?


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

Chain said:


> Does trek make good bikes?


Does Cryoplasm® make gud asshats?


----------



## HIMEHEEM (Sep 25, 2009)

I got my verbal diarrhea from taco bell.


----------



## firstrax (Nov 13, 2001)

52 refers to the answer to the ultimate question + 10.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

oh look....the cavalry has arrived!.....hi guys!


----------



## HIMEHEEM (Sep 25, 2009)

firstrax said:


> 52 refers to the answer to the ultimate question + 10.


That's not right...52 is not a prime.

The correct answer is "6".(also not prime, but correct nonetheless)


----------



## cryoplasm (Jun 14, 2008)

Yes the lurkers with negative contribution.


----------



## bikeboy389 (May 4, 2004)

cryoplasm said:


> Yes the lurkers with negative contribution.


1200+ , 4000+ and 20K + posts definitely = lurkers, Mr. 80 posts.

Look. You were kind of rude right off the bat, and pretty amazingly missed the part where the OP says he's looking for a geometry chart for that model. There are better, FAR better, ways to explain that you're not sure what the OP is looking for.

Your post was a negative contribution. We aren't adding to TOG's understanding either, but at least we're not rude to him.


----------



## Hollywood (Jan 16, 2003)

cry-o-plasm said:


> Yes the lurkers with negative contribution.


my mom says I'm a winner. :thumbsup:


----------



## cryoplasm (Jun 14, 2008)

Paris-Roubaix 2005, George Hincapie.

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/road/2005/apr05/roubaix05/tech/?id=/tech/2005/features/hincapie_bike

Without washing the point over, Trek's geometry did stink for a good few years of the previous decade. This is not an insult but a plain observation.

My bad, the bike you are referring to is this one:

http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/2005/archive/2300c

It did not have the elastomer. It is simply the compact version of the 2300 described in my previous post.

The bike with SPA was a Carbon 5200/5900 prototype as seen in 2005. Lots of Klein's (Aura) of this era had the SPA and it was ported over.

Which figures are you after?


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

cryoplasm said:


> Yes the lurkers with negative contribution.


How quaint and amusing...


----------



## ph0enix (Aug 12, 2009)

cryoplasm said:


> Yes the lurkers with negative contribution.


Speaking of lurkers, you registered in 2008 but have 80 posts. I'm not saying it's a bad thing but you shouldn't call anyone a lurker.


----------



## cryoplasm (Jun 14, 2008)

ph0enix said:


> Speaking of lurkers, you registered in 2008 but have 80 posts. I'm not saying it's a bad thing but you shouldn't call anyone a lurker.


I fail to see any semblance of a point here.


----------



## ph0enix (Aug 12, 2009)

cryoplasm said:


> I fail to see any semblance of a point here.


Why am I not surprised?


----------



## HIMEHEEM (Sep 25, 2009)

cryoplasm said:


> I fail to see any semblance of a point here.


You are precisely correct. 
This thread is nonsense.
View attachment 216496


----------



## cryoplasm (Jun 14, 2008)

What a sheer amount of touchiness on this forum. If I didn't know any better I'd think this thread was overrun by touchy-feely post pubescent hags ready to blow their top off at the drop of a hat. How easily people get upset on matters which don't even remotely or personally concern them.

LOL people!!


----------



## Chain (Dec 28, 2006)

cryoplasm said:



> What a sheer amount of touchiness on this forum. If I didn't know any better I'd think this thread was overrun by touchy-feely post pubescent hags ready to blow their top off at the drop of a hat. How easily people get upset on matters which don't even remotely or personally concern them.
> 
> LOL people!!


I believe that all hags are post pubescent by definition...:thumbsup:

I like touchiness but prefer cougars to hags.

Do you prefer beets or bacon?


----------



## HIMEHEEM (Sep 25, 2009)

cryoplasm said:


> LOL-people


Exactly...


----------



## cryoplasm (Jun 14, 2008)

Chain said:


> I believe that all hags are post pubescent by definition...:thumbsup:


No doubt. Coming from firsthand example.


----------



## Chain (Dec 28, 2006)

cryoplasm said:


> No doubt. Coming from firsthand example.


Why are you a frightened child?


----------



## Argentius (Aug 26, 2004)

Oi, son! Stop pickin' on the old man, he's been cooped up on his own too long. And he does good work out there...

ps ibtd.


----------



## MCF (Oct 12, 2006)

Did someone say BACON!?!?!?!? I love me some good BACON!!


----------



## q_and_a (Aug 3, 2009)

Sorry, just reading this for the first time.

The OP asks if anyone knows where he can find the geometry specs for his bike.

Cytoplasm tells him the bike sucks and he doesn't write well and then is some how confused That people think he is a dutchbag?

Did I get this right?


----------



## cryoplasm (Jun 14, 2008)




----------



## Aindreas (Sep 1, 2010)

Kabooom.


----------



## cryoplasm (Jun 14, 2008)




----------



## Gripped (Nov 27, 2002)

cryoplasm said:


> http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/2005/archive/2300c
> 
> It did not have the elastomer. It is simply the compact version of the 2300 described in my previous post.


OMFG!

The link you provided states, and I quote, "Frame	ZR 9000 w/s.p.a. rear suspension."

You insult people and don't know how to read.


----------



## kykr13 (Apr 12, 2008)

Hollywood said:


> my mom says I'm a winner. :thumbsup:


Your mom says I'm a...


----------



## Aindreas (Sep 1, 2010)

TouchOGray has a posse, yo.


----------



## concretejungle (Jul 13, 2009)

Aindreas said:


> TouchOGray has a posse, yo.


You gotta respect the Lounge posse because getting beat down by 3 people just wasn't enough.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

ok boys....move along...there's nothing to see here...

FWIW I have the full pdf that Heather over at Trek sent me this evening.......you guys need any info on a 2005 Trek I have it ALL, head tube angle, trail, stand over, wheelbase....and more.....

signed....
The Lurker


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

Gripped said:


> OMFG!
> ..........................and *STILL* don't know how to read.


there we go....fify

whew.....glad I'm post pubescent....why don't we invite this kid over to our "home base" and show him how it's done?


----------



## thedago (Sep 30, 2009)

this was fun- thanks everyone


----------

