# 2010 Madone 5.5 vs 2011 Madone 5.2



## mucker (Jan 16, 2011)

I'm trying to decide between these two bikes. The 2010 5.5 will be around $3400 and the 2011 5.2 is about $3000. Both bikes are discounted with a bigger discount on the 5.5. The 2010 5.5 comes with full Force and Bontrager Race X Lite wheels. The 2011 comes with Ultegra and a slightly heavier wheelset. 

2011 5.2 http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/road/madone/madone52/

2010 5.5 http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/2010/archive/madone55

I can't find much of a difference between the 2 except the 2011 has some of the features of the 6 series and is slightly lighter than last year's 5 series. Should I just save the cash and go with the 2011 or go for the 2010?


----------



## Chops88 (Aug 21, 2010)

I have just bout the 2010 4.5 and looking at the 5.2 I really wish I had forked out the extra cash! 

Lightness is the order of the day so if you can afford the 2011 then I would go for that. 

Just my opinion though. 





.........................
Blog Post - Garmin 410 Review


----------



## Trek2.3 (Sep 13, 2009)

How much lighter? $300 to save 2 ounces isn't a good buy. You are better off losing 2 pounds off your gut.


----------



## mucker (Jan 16, 2011)

I think the 2010 may be lighter than the 2011 for complete bikes. The 2010 comes with wheels that are 300 grams lighter and Force is lighter by about 150g. I don't think there is a big difference in the weights of the two frames and the 2010 is OCLV vs the TCT 2011.

Is there a difference between the 2 frames from a performance standpoint?


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

I don't know about the new 5-series, but last year's 5-series had a more comfortable ride (at least at smaller frame sizes) than the 6-series. My guess is the 2011 5-series will have a lot of the stiffness of the 2010 6-series. I preferred the stiffness of the 6-series, and I like some of the newer features like the clean duotrap sensors. I'd get the 2011 (even though I love SRAM) and ask them to swap out the wheels or buy it without wheels and buy something better. Either way it should run less than $3400 and you'll capture the significant weight savings--weight savings in the drivetrain won't matter.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

300g is a HUGE weight difference in wheels.


----------



## mucker (Jan 16, 2011)

MarvinK
I was wrong on the wheels. I thought the wheels on the 2010 were race X lite but they are just the race lite series. The 2011 has just the race wheels and the weight difference is 200g. 200g is not worth the $400 difference. I'm not going to race and if I would I'd pick up a lighter wheelset and have a set of training wheels. I'd rather have the better frame and you confirmed some things I had been reading.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

Either way, the Race Lites and Race are both heavy and expensive for what you get... see if you can get a couple hundred back for the Race wheels and buy some BWW, Soul or Neuvation wheels. Those Race wheels don't belong on a $3000+ bike.

http://www.bicyclewheelwarehouse.co...et-race-ten-white-edition-1451g/prod_146.html


----------



## mucker (Jan 16, 2011)

Just an update. I went with the 2011 5.2. Based on everything I read, it seemed like the 2011 was a slightly better frame even though it is not OCLV. I didn't swap out the wheels and just got the stock bike. With XC pedals, the bike weighs in the mid 17s. Today was the first real hour plus ride because of all the snow we have had in the NE. Did 40 miles and will say that it kicks ass. I haven't been on a road bike in almost 20 years and forgot what it felt like. It feels stiff enough and I didn't notice any flexing in the frame when climbing or descending. The only issue is that seatmast kept slipping because I'm afraid to torque it without a torque wrench. I ordered some carbon compound and a torque wrench which I should have had anyway.


----------



## birdshill (Feb 15, 2011)

I am trying to decide between the 2011 4.5, or the 5.2. I am not sure about the difference between the carbon quality between these two models. I want the bike for triathlon sprints, and a few long rides. I understand your process of trying to decide between the different bikes.


----------



## birdshill (Feb 15, 2011)

HI, I am also trying to decide between the 2011 WSD 4.5, or the 5.2. I will be using the bike for triathlons, and some longer distance rides. If I get the 4.5 I am planning on changing the stock wheels to HED areo wheels. I am not sure how much the 90mm BB makes with the 5.2 compared to what is on the 4.5.
Any thoughts- I would like the best bike for the dollar value,


----------



## ghost6 (Sep 4, 2009)

birdshill said:


> HI, I am also trying to decide between the 2011 WSD 4.5, or the 5.2. I will be using the bike for triathlons, and some longer distance rides. If I get the 4.5 I am planning on changing the stock wheels to HED areo wheels. I am not sure how much the 90mm BB makes with the 5.2 compared to what is on the 4.5.
> Any thoughts- I would like the best bike for the dollar value,


So the difference in real cost between these two is about $600. The 5.2 has internal cable routing, full Ultegra instead of 105 and the BB90 frame is stiffer and weighs less. Actual numbers for weight would help. This comparison is handy if you haven't seen it: http://www.trekbikes.com/au/en/bikes/compare/#/madone52wsdu,madone45wsdu,empty

The weight difference between Ultegra and 105 is 183 grams.


----------



## birdshill (Feb 15, 2011)

Thanks, I appreciate the reply. The information you provided is very helpful.


----------

