# Sutra vs. LHT



## karlkras (Nov 25, 2005)

Hi folks,
So I visited a LBS here today to check on options for the LHT I may consider and they threw a curve ball at me by mentioning that Kona had a touring rig as well and showed me the catalog for the 2008 model.
I have to say my first impressions are "wow", that's a pretty impressive setup for the < $1200 price tag and I believe it includes the racks.
Anyone have experience with these two bikes side by side? I'm comparing the stock build that Surly offers, which is about $200 less. I'm also a bit concerned about the practicality of the use of disc brakes of the Kona when on an actual tour.

A side note:
This same shop also carries the Trek 520. Why is it that Trek is able to provide a life time frame warranty while these others offer very limited (4 years) of warranty? That's starting to sway me towards Trek now which is a pretty impressive bike in it's own right. But it is a Trek. rrr:


----------



## Durandal (Aug 31, 2005)

There's nothing wrong with the trek. Of the three it has the most traditional touring geometry and it comes well specked and has the lifetime warranty. The Disc brakes could pose a slight problem if they took a hit in the back country where the few bike shop there are probably wont have parts to fix it. With the Kona you get name brand Cro Moly, though, as compared to no name with the Trek and Surly, but the Kona also has an odd handlebar, which is good if you like that kind of bar. Myself, of the three I'd go with the LHT, but thats because it has a nice Crankset compared to the others which use external bearing cranks.

Either way they are good choices. Another way to go would be to buy a cheaper bike like the Fuji Touring or the Windsor Tourist (Same bikes but the windsor is half the price on ebay.) and upgrade the parts on it, Most of the specs are the same, and those that aren't can be upgraded for less. And there is hardly a bike shop in the world that won't have replacement parts for it. And Fuji has a Lifetime frame Warranty and two year parts warranty. (Not sure about the Windsor's, they are sold by http://bikesdirect.com they say that the manufacturer handles the warranty, but a quick google pulled up nothing on an actual site for windsor.)


----------



## StageHand (Dec 27, 2002)

If you want the lifetime warranty, go with the Trek. The best value is the Surly, but you should have a lot of confidence in the shop as I've seen some sub-par Surly complete bikes out of the box. Frames are pretty solid all around.

The only practical issue with the disc brakes is spare parts. Do you believe that you'll break rotors or calipers while touring? What spare parts are you willing to carry? If you stick with rim brakes, what are the odds you're wheel doesn't get mangled? Can yo uget one easily? But, really, how exotic are the places you're going? I wouldn't think the disc brakes are an issue.


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

Kona makes a nice bike for the money, but I'm not too sure I'd want 700c disc brake wheels on a touring bike, and a set of racks don't really justify the price difference between the LHT and the Kona Sutra. the Sutra's fork looks cheesy compared to the LHT, and I notice the Sutra's frame still has the studs for cantilevers or V-brakes.

I'd go with the LHT. The Trek? As you said, it's a Trek, and after 4 years, you won't care much about a warranty anyway.


----------



## karlkras (Nov 25, 2005)

StillRiding said:


> the Sutra's fork looks cheesy compared to the LHT, and I notice the Sutra's frame still has the studs for cantilevers or V-brakes.


Good points. Looks like they decided the use of disc brakes would give it more bling and changed spec's mid release, and now that you mention it, the bike appears more of a "sport" level bike trying to be a tourer.

thanks.


----------



## karlkras (Nov 25, 2005)

Durandal said:


> There's nothing wrong with the trek. Of the three it has the most traditional touring geometry and it comes well specked and has the lifetime warranty.


I'm sorry, I didn't mean to knock Trek. I've owned 2 520's in the past 20 years and was very happy with them. There's just so many on the road and I'm not all that fond of the Bontrager line. 



Durandal said:


> Either way they are good choices. Another way to go would be to buy a cheaper bike like the Fuji Touring or the Windsor Tourist (Same bikes but the windsor is half the price on ebay.)


I considered the Windsor but am a bit dubious about the level of support I would be able to get on this if needed. I have to say there's a certain amount of price prejudice involved in my reluctance to go this route. Whether warranted or not I can't help but think "you get what you pay for" when considering this bike. While the bike itself might be fine and "as good as the more expensive models" from my experience, it's the not so obvious intangibles, e.g., customer service, that get lost in the savings. I've broken 3 frames in the past and I've been fortunate that each case was handled reasonably well under the warranty program of the manufacturer. I would be worried of the ability for this "company" to come through (not to mention the solvency) and the amount of work needed on my part to manage it if this were to happen.


----------



## Steve B. (Jun 26, 2004)

karlkras said:


> Why is it that Trek is able to provide a life time frame warranty while these others offer very limited (4 years) of warranty? That's starting to sway me towards Trek now which is a pretty impressive bike in it's own right. But it is a Trek. rrr:


Trek can offer a lifetime warranty because they don't really warranty the frame for life.

Do a Google of "Trek warranty sucks" and you will get pages of folks that have been told by Trek to piss up a rope, myself included.

I purchased a Lemond Ti road frame from them back in the early 2000's. Trek owned and manufactured Lemond at this point in time. The paint started peeling right away. So I send it back under warranty and they re-paint. That starts peeling right away and they told me too bad, you only get one free re-paint. The frame was two years old. So I get a local paint shop to strip and re-paint. No peeling. 2 years later the frame develops a crack at the cable stop on the down tube. It's Titanium !, they are not supposed to break in this manner !. Chainstays ?, b-bracket ?, head tube junction ?, OK maybe, but this was alongside the downtube in a non-stress area and points to a manufacturing problem. But because I had the frame painted outside of Trek, they decline the lifetime warranty. 

So Trek sells you on a lifetime warranty that has a long list attached as to under what conditions the warranty is void. Riding and using the bike is at the top of the list.

So don't use their warranty as a reason for determining value.

SB


----------



## blakcloud (Apr 13, 2006)

Thanks for dredging up a five year old thread and enlightening us with your "I hate Trek story" when the original post was about Surly and Kona. After 428 posts you think you would know by now.


----------



## PBike (Jul 6, 2007)

Durandal said:


> There's nothing wrong with the trek. Of the three it has the most traditional touring geometry and it comes well specked


But who wants a speckled bicycle?


----------



## surly boy (Sep 8, 2011)

I ride a Surly Cross Check for commuting and touring. It is a great bike. I bought the frame and built it up myself. I use XT V brakes with travel agents and Ultegra STI levers. Works great, no exotic parts.


----------



## Chris_T (May 7, 2007)

Steve B. said:


> Trek can offer a lifetime warranty because they don't really warranty the frame for life.
> 
> Do a Google of "Trek warranty sucks" and you will get pages of folks that have been told by Trek to piss up a rope, myself included.
> 
> SB


Do a google of "Trek warranty sucks" and you'll get what you looked for. You could probably substitute just about any bike manufacturer and the hits would be proportional to their sales volume. My one warranty experience with Trek was great so I guess we cancel each other out.

One is far more likely to post a negative experience than a positive one - positive is expected.


----------

