# Choice between my first road bike



## fries (Jun 16, 2015)

Hey guys, I need your experienced perspective on which new bike I should purchase, if you don't mind.

I'm a brand new road rider and I'm buying my first entry level road bike. I've done a bit of research and hit up a few local bike shops in my area and narrowed it down to two bikes.

Option one is a 2015 Trek 1.1 C, which has all Claris components. The price is $850 CDN.

Option number two is a 2011 Norco CRD 2, which has a Tiagra rear derailleur and the rest of the components are Sora. The price on this one is $700. 

Bike 1 comes with unlimited tune ups for 3 months, and bike 2 only comes with 1 free tune up.

Any comments would be appreciated!


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

fries said:


> Hey guys, I need your experienced perspective on which new bike I should purchase, if you don't mind.
> 
> I'm a brand new road rider and I'm buying my first entry level road bike. I've done a bit of research and hit up a few local bike shops in my area and narrowed it down to two bikes.
> 
> ...


You won't need more than one tune up. If you need that. Is the Norco a Carbon Fiber fork? It didn't say. It is a triple. Do you live in a hilly or mountainous area? It will weigh a lot more I suspect. That said, these are both absolutely fine bikes. I have a Sora Gouppset and I'm happy with its performance.

more important than the bike, and this sounds weird, I know, is the fit... Ow much of a fit do you get with each bike? Let that be your deciding factor. Tune-ups are minor... Fit is EVERYTHING.


----------



## fries (Jun 16, 2015)

PBL450 said:


> You won't need more than one tune up. If you need that. Is the Norco a Carbon Fiber fork? It didn't say. It is a triple. Do you live in a hilly or mountainous area? It will weigh a lot more I suspect. That said, these are both absolutely fine bikes. I have a Sora Gouppset and I'm happy with its performance.
> 
> more important than the bike, and this sounds weird, I know, is the fit... Ow much of a fit do you get with each bike? Let that be your deciding factor. Tune-ups are minor... Fit is EVERYTHING.


I'm not sure about the fork material. The info I could find said it was an alloy. So I'm going to guess some sort of steel alloy? Do you prefer the carbon fiber forks?

I live in a mostly flat place, a couple hills but nothing major. 

The Norco is a triple, yes. What makes a triple good or bad? Obviously it is added weight.

The fits were the same on both bikes. The Norco is a 52.5 and the Trek is a 52. So basically the same size frame. I think they mostly felt the same. But now that I've ridden both, do you have any tips for me if I go back and ride them once again? Anything to specifically look out for while making a comparison? 

Thanks for the help!


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Why do you care about the weight? are you competing? Bottom line is the Norco is the better deal of the two.

HOWEVER, you say this is your first road bike, I usually recommend to first time roadies to buy a new or used bike for less than $500 and that includes accessories. Then after you've been riding for 3 to 5 years and doing so consistently and you love the sport then treat yourself to a better bike than the two you're looking at. Otherwise you could end up with a semi expensive piece of garage art if you discover cycling isn't for you.


----------



## fries (Jun 16, 2015)

froze said:


> Why do you care about the weight? are you competing? Bottom line is the Norco is the better deal of the two.
> 
> HOWEVER, you say this is your first road bike, I usually recommend to first time roadies to buy a new or used bike for less than $500 and that includes accessories. Then after you've been riding for 3 to 5 years and doing so consistently and you love the sport then treat yourself to a better bike than the two you're looking at. Otherwise you could end up with a semi expensive piece of garage art if you discover cycling isn't for you.


Weight isn't is a super huge issue. The main thing is less weight=faster. Which, again isn't a huge deal since I won't be racing or anything, just using the bike recreationally.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Assuming both fit the same... For a noobie looking to improve fitness/ do some recreational riding, either bike will do. If you want to save yourself ~$150 upfront, go for the Norco, but I will say that (IMO) the 2015 Trek will generally sell faster for more than a 2011 Norco, if/ when you get to that point. 

Re: any weight differences? Irrelevant. Drivetrains? In the environment you describe, either will do, but assuming you're relatively fit, you won't need a triple.

All else being equal, pick the shop you like best and buy from them.


----------



## romrah (Mar 19, 2015)

The only point I would offer would be if you can try them both out do so. I have triple from my last bike didn't love it but didn't hate it just never used the 30. If it was me I would check out the ride and then focus on the gearing to see if that is to your liking.. As others noted the Trek will re-sell faster..


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

If you get either bike I wouldn't sell it when when or if you get a better bike because you can use the old bike for when you go camping, commuting someplace where you have to lock it up and don't want to risk losing your good bike or getting the new one scratched up from transporting. There's all kinds of rides where an older bike with less monetary investment becomes an asset to have.

By the way, here's a couple of interesting bikes if mail order doesn't bother you: 

BH Zaphire Tiagra Bike | Shimano 10 spd | Carbon Fork

Or this: Fuji Cross 1.1 Frameset - 2013

By the way it's true the Trek will sell faster, but we're talking about bikes in the $700 range, in 5 years you could sell the Trek for $200 privately and the Norco for $175, is $25 or even $50 in 5 or so years difference in the resale price worth getting lessor components?


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

It's pretty much a toss-up, but I would go with the Trek.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Rashadabd said:


> It's pretty much a toss-up, but I would go with the Trek.


Not really, Claris is not as smooth shifting as Tiagra/Sora and the Sora Shifters are better, obviously it' not a huge jump like going to 105 in terms of mechanical action, and the quality of construction is better with the Tiagra/Sora group package. 

However the Claris does have lower gear ratios because that groupset is aimed toward a beginner cyclist with no physical abilities, ie: hasn't done anything cardio like running before jumping over to a bike. The Claris equipped bike a person will out grow faster if they stay with cycling.


----------



## obed (Jan 12, 2014)

go with the trek...
absolutely avoid mail order, box stores and sporting goods stores....those are fine for folks who know fitting and can do set up and maint...
work with an LBS that gets to know you, understands your needs and abilities...
oh, and a good fitting is much more than general frame size... and feel is more than how it feels in 10 minutes around the parking lot...a good LBS knows this and will work to make you enjoy the bike and get the most out of it, they want a long term customer, not todays sale


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

froze said:


> Not really, Claris is not as smooth shifting as Tiagra/Sora and the Sora Shifters are better, obviously it' not a huge jump like going to 105 in terms of mechanical action, and the quality of construction is better with the Tiagra/Sora group package.
> 
> However the Claris does have lower gear ratios because that groupset is aimed toward a beginner cyclist with no physical abilities, ie: hasn't done anything cardio like running before jumping over to a bike. The Claris equipped bike a person will out grow faster if they stay with cycling.


To me it is because, in all honesty, most riders probably aren't going to stick with either group long if they really get into the sport. They will be upgrading at least some of the components to 105 or swapping over to Rival. That's what I would do at least. You can get 105 shifters and components for pretty cheap on eBay, etc.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Rashadabd said:


> To me it is because, in all honesty, most riders probably aren't going to stick with either group long if they really get into the sport. They will be upgrading at least some of the components to 105 or swapping over to Rival. That's what I would do at least. You can get 105 shifters and components for pretty cheap on eBay, etc.


This is true, however if the OP decides to keep the bike and purchases another later the Norco will be more able to keep up with his increasing abilities vs the Trek, and the components will last longer on the Norco. Why upgrade a bike to 105? He won't be needing to that for at least 2 to 5 years if he stays with the sport and by then he'll be ready for a new bike because he outgrew the frame's ability as well as the components and can get new one with 105 already on it. He potentially could outgrow the Trek in 2 to 3 years vs 4 to 5 on the Norco. (note, I said "potentially")


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Rashadabd said:


> To me it is because, in all honesty, most riders probably aren't going to stick with either group long if they really get into the sport. They will be upgrading at least some of the components to 105 or swapping over to Rival. That's what I would do at least. You can get 105 shifters and components for pretty cheap on eBay, etc.


Because they perform significantly better IMO. 105 and Rival are two of the best values in the business given what you pay for them. The Trek with a couple of cheap component upgrades over time is the best all around bike out of the options he presented. He could come away with a relatively inexpensive bike that wouldn't be a liability regardless of who is riding with or where he is riding. A couple of cheap upgrades and he has a bike he can grow with for a while to be honest.


----------



## fries (Jun 16, 2015)

Thanks for all the discussion, guys. It helps me out a lot more than you think.

I'm going to go test ride both once again and then make my decision. Are there any specific things to look out for? Or things to pay attention to while riding?


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

fries said:


> Thanks for all the discussion, guys. It helps me out a lot more than you think.
> 
> I'm going to go test ride both once again and then make my decision. Are there any specific things to look out for? Or things to pay attention to while riding?


Fit, comfort, feel, handling. Those all come down to how comfortable do you feel after 30-min to an hour on the bike. Is there any pain in your neck, shoulders, back, knees, etc. Do you have a bunch of toe overlap with the front wheel? How does it feel to be riding it out on the road? Other than that, just how much you like it and want to ride it....


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

fries said:


> Thanks for all the discussion, guys. It helps me out a lot more than you think.
> 
> I'm going to go test ride both once again and then make my decision. Are there any specific things to look out for? Or things to pay attention to while riding?


Specs and size-wise, you're looking at two closely matched bikes, so I doubt anything major will jump out at you during test rides, but one never knows.

Rather, pay attention to which shop takes more time setting you up on the bike and encourages you to get it out (on the roads) for awhile. They're likely the better shop to deal with, post purchase.


----------



## HyperCycle (Sep 5, 2012)

I have a 2013 Trek 1.1c and it's an excellent bike. It originally had a white saddle and white bar tape... I replaced the stock Trek saddle with a lighter, more comfortable saddle from Nashbar. I added a Cateye bike computer, saddle bag and Speedplay Frog pedals. You can't go wrong with a 1.1.


----------



## SlippedChain (Nov 4, 2013)

Can't speak to the Norco but I rode a 2010 Trek 1.1 for two years and for the money it was an awesome bike. It came with the Shimano 2300 groupset that was the very bottom of Shimano's line up and it was bullet proof. It was actually less finicky than the Ultegra on the CAAD 10 I ride now. I put almost 6K on that bike without a single mechanical failure. 

I still have the bike and use it on occasion as a backup and to let friends borrow when needed. I've had two people offer to buy it off me and wouldn't be surprised if I could still get 450-500 bucks for it.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

If the Norco has an alloy fork it's a no-brainer... CF fork will make an appreciable difference in feel and comfort. I'd go Trek. I work with with someone that has a Norco that's a few years old, alloy and a triple. It way outweighs my CAAd 8 which is a little under 21lbs with pedals and cages. I know, I know, weight doesn't matter.... That's why 14lb bikes are in this same price range right? 

That said... If like the way one looks better than the other, get that one!!


----------



## aureliajulia (May 25, 2009)

Trek, and ask the shop if it can upgrade to Tiagra for a reasonable price. A lot of shops have spare parts lying around; maybe a Tiagra group that someone else discarded in favor of 105. But that can wait, too.

In bikes, when they say alloy, they mean aluminum, not steel. Steel will either be called steel, chromoly, or the specific alloy, like 953, 853, 530, or whatever. 

A carbon fiber fork really improves the ride. Also, your bike fit should happen at purchase. Then spend the next few months fine tuning it with the shop. After you and they settle on the correct stem length, I recommend upgrading to a carbon stem. Does a lot to smooth road vibration through the handlebars.


----------



## 9W9W (Apr 5, 2012)

fries said:


> ....included tune ups for 3 months, and bike 2 only comes with 1 free tune up.


Wow! LBS #2 is clueless. tsk tsk tsk. probably losing out on quite a few sales for a few Hamiltons.


----------



## aureliajulia (May 25, 2009)

Just realized, the 2011 is $700, but retailed for $785 4 years ago. Is this a used bike? 

Not exactly a great deal, even if it is a new old stock bike. Or is it actually a newer bike?

Personally, I would't limit myself to these two. there are plenty of bikes in this price-range. Like the Cannondale CAAD8, the Giant Defy. Many others...

Both available at many components levels and prices: The Giant Defy 5 retails for only $640.00. You could easily get Tiagra on a high-rated bike. (I'm more familiar with Cannondale, though. Great aluminum frame sets). 

CAAD8 - ELITE ROAD - ROAD - BIKES - 2015

Defy | Giant Bicycles | United States

If you google specific makes and models reviews, you will find websites that give reasonably unbiased reviews with many buyers comments.Trek 1.1 review - BikeRadar USA

Anyway. I'd put the Trek on par with bikes like the CAAD8 and Giant Defy, and skip the Norco. 

JMTC


----------



## jetdog9 (Jul 12, 2007)

Honestly for $800 you can probably get a ton more bike used off of Craigslist or eBay. As risky as that might sound, I've personally had good bike purchase experiences through both of those channels and would recommend at least looking into it.

For $800+ US via eBay back in about 2010-2011, I scored a 2007 bike with full Dura-Ace 7800.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

jetdog9 said:


> Honestly for $800 you can probably get a ton more bike used off of Craigslist or eBay. As risky as that might sound, I've personally had good bike purchase experiences through both of those channels and would recommend at least looking into it.
> 
> For $800+ US via eBay back in about 2010-2011, I scored a 2007 bike with full Dura-Ace 7800.


You are correct, if you know what you're looking at you can score very nice bikes, some will be barely ridden thus you get a like new bike for a fraction of the cost. But if you don't know your bikes and components, and how to check for damage, and or excessive wear, you could buy a lot of trouble.


----------



## jetdog9 (Jul 12, 2007)

Too true.


----------

