# Which 2011 Trek Madone is equivalent to a 2006 Madone 5.9SL?



## Phil_T

I recently had my 2006 Trek Madone 5.9 SL frame returned to Trek for warranty replacement due to a bond failure with the Bottom Bracket Shell. When I bought this bike it was pretty much the top of the line race bike that was advertised as being ridden by the US Postal team. I loved the bike and I am pretty bummed that it broke as I like the more traditional horizontal top tube look. The good news is that Trek has offered to replace the frame and I was informed that they were going to give me a 2011 5.9 frame. I looked this bike up on the Trek website and this bike lists for $4200. I paid $5700 for my 5.9 SL 5 years ago! This does not seem to be an equivalent frame. When I look at the bike that is configured like the 2006 5.9 SL with full Dura-Ace, Carbon Stem, Handle Bars and Seatpost and Bontrager XXX wheelset I come up with the 6.7 SSL. This bike lists for $6700 which is about the equivalent price considering inflation. Another couple reasons it seems to me that the 2011 5.9 is not an equivalent frame is that this is not an OCLV construction frame and it isn’t even offered with a full Dura-Ace gruppo and Bontrager carbon pieces (is it not worthy?). I would be very interested in what others feel would be fair and reasonable replacement frame…..I bought the top of the line race frame and feel that it should be replaced with an equivalent.


----------



## gambo2166

The 2011 5.9 frame is a great frame its about 2lbs and a lot stiffer then your old frame. I know its not OCLV but its better then the old 5.9 by far. It is up to Trek to make the call, I think you will be very happy with this frame.


----------



## Phil_T

Thanks for the reply! I have no doubt that the 5.9 would be a great bike. But there is a reason none of the 5 series bikes are offered with the top of line components, which is because it is not a top of the line frame. Anybody who wants a full Dura-Ace equipped Trek bike would be directed to the 6 series line where that is offered. The 5.9 is a $4200 bike and is equipped accordingly, and as Trek indicates is the affordable Madone. My 5.9SL wasn't the "affordable model" it was the top of the line race bike. After reviewing the Trek site the SSL technology method is clearly a notch above the OCLV construction and is not an equivalent replacement. But when I look up the bike that is near identically equipped to my 5.9SL and has a OCLV frame constructed in the USA it lists the Madone 6.5. Is there a reason that I am not seeing as to why the 2011 6.5 frame is the one closest to my 5.9SL and not the new 5.9 made using TCT construction?


----------



## Trek2.3

To a great extent what they offer is determined by the frames they have on hand and how long you'll be willing to wait. I suspect that they also consider depreciation (wear and tear). The usual goal of a warranty is to replace what you've GOT in 2011 not what you HAD in 2006.

That said, tell your LBS you concerns and, if you will, that you will wait for a 6.5 frame. It might work. The 5 series frames are Taiwan-made so they are cheaper to Trek. If you are willing to "pay up" a bit it might not hurt to offer.


----------



## jellis25

After doing a little research, it looks like the frame was actually the second tier oclv 110 where the madone 5.9 ssl oclv 55 was the top tier. The 110 and 55 were later changed to black and red carbon which where the 5-series and 6-series frames. 

The only argument you may have is that there is now a 6-series ssl which makes the normal 6-series a second tier carbon/frame. 

For the most part I would agree which trek that the 5-series is the comparable frame to the 5.9 sl in 2006.


----------



## Phil_T

I appreciate the input on frame equivalency however I am still struggling with seeing the logic in how a bike model that retails for $4200 could be equivalent to a bike that sold for $5700 in 2006. Trying to be more objective however I looked at trying to establish equivalency to my Madone 5.9SL on the following:

Cost: Madone 6.7SSL $6700 (very close considering inflation)

Frame Construction: Madone 6.2/6.5 OCLV

Bike Build (full Dura-Ace, CFiber Stem, Bars SPost, Bontrager XXX wheels): Madone 6.7SSL

Bike advertised as Race Team Bike: Madone 6.9SSL

Can't seem to find a good concrete reason why the 2011 Madone 5.9 is the equivalent to my 2006 Madone 5.9SL .


----------



## the sarge

I see it as right and wrong. Yes what they have offered you is probably as good if not better based on last 5 years of development, however when you spend 5700 dollars and your frame breaks to me they need to honor the insane amount of money with a equal OR BETTER current model. read the fine print in the warranty and then ask for justification of why you are getting cheaped out on. Personally I would throw a fit if you were giving me something cheaper then what i paid 5 years ago for something that should not have failed which is why the waranty exists in the first place.

5700 is alot of damn money to spend, hell my motorcycle cost me that. there is no way i would let them cheap out on me I would call trek's warranty dept personally and nicely ask questions and then throw a fit if i felt the answers were BS.


----------



## 200miler

Phil_T said:


> I appreciate the input on frame equivalency however I am still struggling with seeing the logic in how a bike model that retails for $4200 could be equivalent to a bike that sold for $5700 in 2006. Trying to be more objective however I looked at trying to establish equivalency to my Madone 5.9SL on the following:
> 
> Cost: Madone 6.7SSL $6700 (very close considering inflation)
> 
> Frame Construction: Madone 6.2/6.5 OCLV
> 
> Bike Build (full Dura-Ace, CFiber Stem, Bars SPost, Bontrager XXX wheels): Madone 6.7SSL
> 
> Bike advertised as Race Team Bike: Madone 6.9SSL
> 
> Can't seem to find a good concrete reason why the 2011 Madone 5.9 is the equivalent to my 2006 Madone 5.9SL .


I think you are wandering far afield here. Trek has warrantee on the FRAME, not the components. You are trying to compare apples and oranges. Those components that are near and dear to you should be simply moved over to this new frame. 

You are not turning in the complete bike for replacement only the frame. There are some bits and pieces that come with the new frame because of design changes, ie, crank bearings, headset/bearings, fork., seat post. Take your olde components and once mounted, you'll have more than the equivalency you trying to rationalize.

Continuing to rationalize your desires with what is really going to happen will make for a much longer thread, create more churn, especially for the Trek-haters, but in the end will net you nothing but indigestion.

I'd also recommend that you do NOT contact Trek directly. Their warrantee process starts with the LBS and goes thru to the LBS's "inside" contact [ have no idea what that job title is]. This inside guy is one one who says "yea" or "nay". If you call Trek CS you're talking to a phone answerer who merely redirects your inquiry to someone else who will no doubt give you short shrift on the subject. There have been many posts, in several forums, complaining about being rebuffed when the poster called Trek himself. Do yourself a favor, talk to the LBS, express your concerns, keeping in mind what the warrantee actually covers, and just maybe the LBS can get you an improved offer.

And yes, I've had warrantee experience with Trek, and yes they've been very generous thanks to my LBS
YMMV
-dg


----------



## mohair_chair

If you insist on comparing costs, you need to figure out how much your original frame cost. (HINT: It wasn't $5700.) And then you need to figure out how much the new frame costs. (HINT: It's not $4200.) That might be a reasonable comparison. Comparing your $5700 purchase price from years ago to their current $4200 selling price for a different model is a completely useless exercise. That's beyond apples to oranges. That's apples to cows. 

Also, consider this. You bought a computer 5 years ago for $1000. It breaks, you warranty it, and they offer you the same exact model as a replacement, but now it only sells for $700. Are you getting ripped off?


----------



## jellis25

You can call your LBS to confirm but I believe the 5-series frameset is about $2000. Throw in some rxxxl wheels and you are at about $4500 add the groupo and you are at $6500 without a complete bike.

It is tough to compare because the prices and models are different now. The only thing you are getting is a new frame and the odds and ends that go with it. The 5-series is the comparable model.


----------



## MarvinK

Sadly... the 5.9 is actually a better bike all the way around than your old 2006 bike. That frame is 2 major revisions old--and, frankly, wasn't that great even at the time. The more recent Madone frames have a lot more technology. Sure, your replacement frame isn't made in the USA--but that $4200 price is more about a nice bike with modern technology... and less about Lance... than the $5700 you paid for the old Madone.


----------



## okiefo

The 2011 5.9 Madone is far superior to your old 5.9 in every way. If it were me, I'd take it and ride it. You will be extremely surprised at how much better it is.


----------



## jamesdak

LOL,let me help you out some. Trek warranted my 2010 4.5 frame with a 2011 5.9 frame, So now you've got some justification!

Seriously though, the 2011 5.9 frame is worlds better than what you have. Trek is really hooking you up there considering the age of your bike. All the compatible components will be swapped over so you are going to end up with a much nicer bike than you have now.

As to your concerns about the origin of the CF, let me ask this. What REALLY is the difference in terms of any physical characteristic?


----------



## Phil_T

After all my deliberation and concerns with getting an OCLV frame the issue has been settled and Trek is sending me a 2010 Trek 5.9 OCLV frame that was made in Waterloo. Since the frame construction was one of my concerns this has been addressed and I am looking forward to building this bike up and riding it. The bike is the Onyx frame with the red/white decals and looks very sharp. You have to pick your battles and I decided that I needed to look at the positive side of things and be thankful that Trek decided to replace my frame and stand behind their warranty.......thanks Trek! Since I just finished building up a new Santa Cruz Blur LT carbon mountain bike and soon I will be starting the build of my new road bike it is going to be a great year for riding and racing! Thanks for all the input on helping me realize that the newer 5.9 Madone is going to be a great bike and a step-up from my old 5.9SL.


----------



## jamesdak

Glad your happy, that's really all that matters. But it seems like a bit of a strange decision. While talking with other bikers about my replacement frame they were all drooling at the mouth about some of the features Trek designed into the new 2011 5.9 frame. But I'm a novice so what do I know?

After a 5 year stint in the U.S. manufacturing world I will say that I believe we put too much credit on the "Made in the USA" label. I saw some pretty crappy QA across the board from several USA manufacturing giants. Truth is we are not unilaterally superior to anyone in my opinion. 

Either way, you're happy so that's very cool. Shoot us some pictures of the bike when it's finished and of course tell us how it rides. I just got done doing 65 miles on mine and it was fabulous!


----------



## jnbrown

Personally I think you are getting shafted by Trek.
They are replacing what was the highest end frame with a mid range frame.
I have a 2000 5500 and have ridden a 6.2 and it wasn't that much better.
My 5500 replaced a 5200 so I didn't have to settle for less.
I would hold out for a higher level six series frame and also inquire about paying the difference only if they refuse a replacement at no charge.
Once you cave in you have no recourse.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead

Phil_T said:


> I appreciate the input on frame equivalency however I am still struggling with seeing the logic in how a bike model that retails for $4200 could be equivalent to a bike that sold for $5700 in 2006. Trying to be more objective however I looked at trying to establish equivalency to my Madone 5.9SL on the following:
> 
> Cost: Madone 6.7SSL $6700 (very close considering inflation)
> 
> Frame Construction: Madone 6.2/6.5 OCLV
> 
> Bike Build (full Dura-Ace, CFiber Stem, Bars SPost, Bontrager XXX wheels): Madone 6.7SSL
> 
> Bike advertised as Race Team Bike: Madone 6.9SSL
> 
> Can't seem to find a good concrete reason why the 2011 Madone 5.9 is the equivalent to my 2006 Madone 5.9SL .


Trek is not giving you an equivalent "bike", they are giving you an equivalent frame. As you stated, the new 5.9 does not have top of the line components, thus, the reason it less expensive. 

I suppose Trek could offer to "fix" your existing frame. Would you rather have that or a new 5 series frame?

Regardless of where the 5 series frame may fit in their new lineup, I think you would be hard pressed to argue that the frame they are providing is a lesser frame than what you have. (Based on weight, stiffness and/or performance)


----------



## jellis25

jnbrown said:


> They are replacing what was the highest end frame with a mid range frame.


I believe this statement is incorrect. Please read above or do some more research to ensure you have your facts straight.


----------



## jnbrown

Please tell me why?
Was the 5.9 SL not the highest end frame in 2006?
Is a 2011 5.9 not midrange in the Madone lineup?


----------



## jellis25

jnbrown said:


> Please tell me why?
> Was the 5.9 SL not the highest end frame in 2006?
> Is a 2011 5.9 not midrange in the Madone lineup?


The SSL was the highest frame. 

The 2011 5.9 is debatable as it is a high end but not the highest. This reasoning would make all models apart from the lowest and highest range models mid range. My beef was more with the first question.

I hope this clear everything up.


----------



## jellis25

jnbrown said:


> Please tell me why?
> Was the 5.9 SL not the highest end frame in 2006?
> Is a 2011 5.9 not midrange in the Madone lineup?


The SSL was the highest frame. 

The 2011 5.9 is debatable as it is a high end but not the highest. This reasoning would make all models apart from the lowest and highest range models mid range. My beef was more with the first question.

I hope this clear everything up.


----------



## mucker

In 2006 the highest frame/model was the SSLx with OCLV boron. 
Next was SSL which was OCLV 55 carbon.
Then the SL which was OCLV 110 carbon. 

http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/2006/archive/

His 5.9 SL frame may actually be slightly lower on the ladder than the replacement frame if you just look at where they fall in the lineup, but he is getting a better frame than what he had.


----------



## jnbrown

Seems like the 2011 5.9 might be lower grade carbon being TCT vs OCLV 110:

Each of our three OCLV carbons are designed to give riders the right balance of performance and value. All of these OCLV frames are hand-made in the USA.



OCLV Red, formerly OCLV 55, is Trek’s premium carbon fiber and uses a significant percentage of high modulus carbon fiber arranged according to our most complex lay-up schedules. Examples include our 6 series Madones, Top Fuel SSL and Elite 9.9.



OCLV Black, formerly OCLV 110, is Trek’s high-performance carbon fiber and employs intermediate modulus carbon and our Tour-proven lay-up schedule. Examples of OCLV Black include the Madone 5.5 and 5.2 and the Fuel EX 9.9.



OCLV White, formerly OCLV 120, is Trek’s workhorse carbon fiber and uses predominantly standard modulus carbon for great performance.



TCT carbon (Trek Carbon Technology) is Trek’s value-orientated performance carbon fiber. These frames are made in Asia under direct supervision of US Trek engineers. Examples include Madone 4.7, 7.9FX and Elite 9.8.


----------



## mucker

jnbrown said:


> Seems like the 2011 5.9 might be lower grade carbon being TCT vs OCLV 110:
> 
> Each of our three OCLV carbons are designed to give riders the right balance of performance and value. All of these OCLV frames are hand-made in the USA.
> 
> 
> 
> OCLV Red, formerly OCLV 55, is Trek’s premium carbon fiber and uses a significant percentage of high modulus carbon fiber arranged according to our most complex lay-up schedules. Examples include our 6 series Madones, Top Fuel SSL and Elite 9.9.
> 
> 
> 
> OCLV Black, formerly OCLV 110, is Trek’s high-performance carbon fiber and employs intermediate modulus carbon and our Tour-proven lay-up schedule. Examples of OCLV Black include the Madone 5.5 and 5.2 and the Fuel EX 9.9.
> 
> 
> 
> OCLV White, formerly OCLV 120, is Trek’s workhorse carbon fiber and uses predominantly standard modulus carbon for great performance.
> 
> 
> 
> TCT carbon (Trek Carbon Technology) is Trek’s value-orientated performance carbon fiber. These frames are made in Asia under direct supervision of US Trek engineers. Examples include Madone 4.7, 7.9FX and Elite 9.8.


The grades above are the 2010 grades. He is also getting a 2010 5 series model which was made with OCLV Black/110.

The 2011 grades are different. From highest to lowest they are:

1. OCLV2 SSl
2. OCLV2 Red
3. 5 series TCT
4. 4 series TCT
5. 3 series TCT

My best guess, based on the info on the trek website and from online research, is that the 2011 5 series TCT carbon is equivalent to or slightly better than 2010 OCLV black carbon with the big difference being that it is produced overseas plus tech upgrades from derived from the 6 series.

From the trek website http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/story/madone5/technology
"The high-modulus carbon fiber used in our 6 Series and 5 Series bikes increases frame stiffness for extraordinary response and acceleration."

I had a choice between a 2010 5 series and a 2011 5 series bike. Both were same price and similar components and I went for the 2011 because of the trickle down tech from the 6 series. If I were him, I would've tried to get a 2011 5 series. But he is still getting a better frame than what he had because of the tech improvements since 2006.


----------



## jnbrown

Ok, it's hard to keep up with Trek's ever changing definition of their carbon grades.
I think the OP should just test ride the a bike with 5.9 frame to see if it is as good or better.


----------



## MarvinK

I would have definitely preferred the lighter, more refined and feature-rich 2011 over the US-made 2010... But both are improvements over the old frame.


----------



## Tlaloc

*Downgrade*

Aren't the 2010 5.9s made in China with TCT carbon? This sounds like a downgrade to me. Your 5.9 sl was a made in Waterloo, OCLV, pro fit, top of the line race bike. The 2010 5.9 is a made in China, TCT carbon, performance fit sport bike that costs much less than your original bike. If I were to go from my 2007 5.9sl to the 2010 5.9 I would have to raise my handlebars because of the longer head tube. I wouldn't accept the 5.9.


----------



## mucker

Tlaloc said:


> Aren't the 2010 5.9s made in China with TCT carbon? This sounds like a downgrade to me. Your 5.9 sl was a made in Waterloo, OCLV, pro fit, top of the line race bike. The 2010 5.9 is a made in China, TCT carbon, performance fit sport bike that costs much less than your original bike. If I were to go from my 2007 5.9sl to the 2010 5.9 I would have to raise my handlebars because of the longer head tube. I wouldn't accept the 5.9.


This was answered on page 1 of this thread. He didn't have the highest level frame, the 2010 5.9 is oclv black and was made in the us, and it is an improvement over his 2006 frame because it is two generations newer. Handlebar height can be adjusted easily by moving headset spacers.


----------



## Tlaloc

*No, You're Mistaken*



mucker said:


> ... Handlebar height can be adjusted easily by moving headset spacers.


The 5.9 comes in the H2 (performance) fit. The 6 series come in the H1 (race) fit. In my size the 6 has a 16 centimeter head tube. The 5.9 has a 19 centimeter head tube. In addition the newer frames with the net molded bearings require at lest one spacer above the top of the headset. I actually measured my 5.9sl and if I had to switch to a 5.9 I would have to raise the bars at least two centimeters. The fit I use is a text book fit. The bars are 10 centimeters lower than my seat. Serious racers use an even lower fit than I do. I'm completely comfortable with this fit and if I were to change it I would put my bars even lower. I've ridden week-long tours with the bars one spacer lower than this. How do you figure you can lower the bars below the top of the head tube by removing spacers?


----------



## mucker

Tlaloc said:


> The 5.9 comes in the H2 (performance) fit. The 6 series come in the H1 (race) fit. In my size the 6 has a 16 centimeter head tube. The 5.9 has a 19 centimeter head tube. In addition the newer frames with the net molded bearings require at lest one spacer above the top of the headset. I actually measured my 5.9sl and if I had to switch to a 5.9 I would have to raise the bars at least two centimeters. The fit I use is a text book fit. The bars are 10 centimeters lower than my seat. Serious racers use an even lower fit than I do. I'm completely comfortable with this fit and if I were to change it I would put my bars even lower. I've ridden week-long tours with the bars one spacer lower than this. How do you figure you can lower the bars below the top of the head tube by removing spacers?


I never said that he could lower the bars below the top of the head tube. I made the assumption that the OP currently has spacers under his stem on his current setup. You are also assuming that he has the handlebars set as low as possible or that he has them set up the same way you do. If he does not have it set at the lowest possible height, he will use less spacers under his stem to achieve the same handlebar height.

One reason why I assumed he had spacers under his stem, is that I have a friend with a 2006 5.2 SL and he is running his with spacers below the stem.

The warranty does not guarantee that the purchaser will get an exact replica unless the same model is available. The OP’s bike was a 2006 which is no longer in production and no longer available. The closest thing to what he has in construction and price is the 2009 5 series which like you said is only available with H2 geometry. If he wants something with the H1 or race geometry, he will have to contact Trek and see if he can pay the difference between a 5 and 6 series frame to get that geometry.


----------



## Richard

MarvinK said:


> I would have definitely preferred the lighter, more refined and feature-rich 2011 over the US-made 2010... But both are improvements over the old frame.


+1.


----------



## TFR

*Trek Madone 2011 5.9*

Last month I got a 2011 Madone 5.9 as a replacement frame for a Lemond Triomphe full carbon frame under warranty (Lemond rear dropout cracked).
While I am still fiddling with the position, I have to say this is a great bike. I do some crits and this bike handles super. Like on rails in tight turns. Steady as anything in middle of pack. But will corner as quick as you want. Was concerned about Lemond warranty thru trek, but LBS (Schuss Ski and Bike) handled warranty, and all was well.


----------

