# CAAD9 5 vs.Trek 2.3



## abcgt2l (Mar 11, 2009)

Just getting back into riding and looking for a good quality beginner bike that hopefully I won't have to upgrade in a year or two.

Looking at either a CAAD9 5 or Trek 2.3. Problem I'm having is I need a 63" CAAD9 or 64" Trek can find either locally to test ride. I can get a CAAD 9 5 for $1200 or Trek for $1600. Looking for a comfortable ride, reading some of the posts on this sight has me nervous about the all aluminum frame .

Any thought would be appreciated. 

I've even considered the Six Carbon 6 because it is carbon and comes in a 63", however is more than I really want to spend on a 1st bike.


----------



## tober1 (Feb 6, 2009)

Get the CAAD9. A simple search will teach you that  

Just got the 9-5 myself and love it. 
As far as your size. I just hope we never get in a fight.


----------



## B15serv (Apr 27, 2008)

They are very different bikes. The only downside to the caad is that it may be a little rough on you at first but you will get used to it. The downside to the Trek is that its a slouch in comparison and always will be no matter how used to it you get. The cannondales are super fast bikes and a quality build.


----------



## shibaman (May 2, 2008)

I had a 2.3 trek. Nice cruiser bike. Comfortable but not my kind of bike. I also had a Caad 8 with DA parts. With the right wheels and right tire pressure you can put lots of miles on a caad 8 or 9. There is a reason why people still race these frames. Speed and quality.
An alternative would be buying a used Dale System six. Caad 9 rear triangle, and over sized carbon up front. An amazing frame. Smooth on your body, but goes real fast when you stand on the pedals.

http://www.roadbikereview.com/cat/latest-bikes/road-bike/cannondale/PRD_368155_5668crx.aspx

http://www.roadbikereview.com/cat/latest-bikes/road-bike/cannondale/PRD_367055_5668crx.aspx :thumbsup:


----------

