# Trek Madone 4.7



## samuel

Does anyone know when the Madone 4.7 will be available? I suspect that it will now be a 2009 model. I know the 4.5 has been a success for trek.


----------



## Dwwc

should be shipping now


----------



## samuel

do you know this for sure? that is good news. i will have to contact a trek dealer to get the whole story. i was hoping that they would be shipping very soon.


----------



## Dwwc

I just received one today at my shop. They are still shipping in limited quantities, I ordered 4 and received one. They look nice though.


----------



## hendrick81

I just saw one at my LBS yesterday, nice color sceme, but cost $600 more than the 4.5, and the only real differnece is ultegra, the 4.5 has 105. I am a proud owner of an 08 madode 4.5


----------



## uzziefly

They make madones with 105? No idea they did.

How's the ride? (bike, not gruppo)


----------



## hendrick81

Ya the 4.5 is 105 equipped. I think it rides great, very comfortable,fast and light. great price to. I got mine for $1900 out the door.


----------



## andysk

I bought a madone 4.7. it looks simply superb - the color and graphics is brand new, and ride's great, what with ultegra components. i'd say this is the best value for money madone out there


----------



## airrix

I've also just picked one of these awesome road bike up. However, since this is my first road bike I have nothing to compare it to. Just completed a 70k ride yesterday and it was great! I'm loving my ride!


----------



## jpryor

*Specs are wrong on 2009 Madone 4.7*

I just purchased a Trek Madone 4.7 from my LBS. I wanted one of the 2008 4.5s (they were selling them for $1900) but they couldn't find a 60cm. They could only get the 2009 4.5 for $2400. They said they could order a 60cm 2009 4.7 for $2600. When I asked about the difference, the LBS owner showed me the Trek website. The spec on the 4.7 was (and still is) full Ultegra SL, so I ordered it.

I picked the bike up last night (planning for a final fitting tonight) and discovered Ultegra components on the bike, not Ultegra SL. I asked what was up with that and the LBS guy doubled checked the website and sure enough, the spec was Ultegra SL. Trek was closed by this time, but he called his local Trek rep and the rep said the spec was SUPPOSED to be Ultegra, but they hadn't updated the website yet.

I told the LBS that I knew it wasn't his fault (because Trek is lame about customizing a bike build), but this had to be fixed. I purchased a 4.7 according to the spec on the website (FULL ULTEGRA SL). I told him there are 3 options:

1) Send me an Ultegra SL 4.7 (and we'll exchange bikes) or send the Ultegra SL parts and upgrade my bike to what I purchased.

2) Send me a Madone 5.2 for an even swap (this is a long shot, but worth trying).

3) Keep the bike (and the pedals) and give me my money back. I've been seriously considering a Immortal Spirit (full carbon/Dura-Ace for $2000 online).

Honestly, I couldn't tell the difference between Ultegra and Ultegra SL if I were blind-folded, but it is over $200 in difference. I'm waiting until tonight's fitting to give them time to figure out what they want to do. I'll keep you posted.


----------



## jsedlak

I don't think my Ultegra components have the SL name on them, but the color and size of the logos definately shows them to be SL. Are you sure this isn't the case? The SL have bigger logos and are a dark gray. The non-SL pieces are a shinier metallic color and have a small logo.

edit, by the way the Trek site claims a $2799 MSRP on the 4.7. If you got yours for $2600 and non-SL, that could represent the price difference.


----------



## jpryor

No, these are definitely Ultegra, not the SL. They are bright shiny metal instead of the gunmetal gray like the SL. Also, the Trek rep (according to the bike shop guy) said that the 4.7 was supposed to be spec'd with Ultegra. You have to buy a 5.2 to get the Ultegra SL components. At any rate, I should have more info in about 90 minutes...heading over to the LBS tonight.


----------



## jpryor

*Extremely disappointed*

Wow, I'm simply amazed at the fact that any company can stay in business when they have absolute zero customer service. I stopped into the LBS tonight to find out what they learned from Trek about the 4.7 spec issue. Trek stands by their Ultegra spec end of story. The LBS guy had the audacity to ask if I wanted to see the dealer website!

I'll tell you all what I told him. I worked in IT for 8 years doing websites and I could update the Trek consumer website with the correct 4.7 specs faster than anyone on this forum could change a derailleur. There is simply no excuse for Trek to not market what they are actually selling. Nevermind the fact that the LBS owner told me the difference between the 4.5 and the 4.7 was the Ultegra SL. They (the LBS and Trek) apparently want me to accept the fact that I am not getting what I was told I was purchasing!!! Again, Ultegra vs. Ultegra SL will make zero difference to my biking performance (they're mere grams difference), but it's principle and overall value of the bike (the upgrade from Ultegra to Ultegra SL is over $200).

I have to wait for the LBS owner to come back into town on Monday. I left the bike with them. I don't want possession of it and I certainly don't want to ride it. What a huge disappointment in my Trek experience. Regardless of what happens, I can guarantee that I will NEVER purchase another Trek product and I'm going to make sure everyone I know hears the story. I'm sitting here out $2800 and have no new bike to ride. 

Ok, I have to go have a beer and chill, because I'm just fuming hot right now. I'll post an update when I hear more (Monday). The LBS will likely end up with a 4.7 and pedals back on the shelf. Could someone tell me again why I should be dealing locally, paying a higher price, and paying taxes on that higher price? I'm beginning to think the QR Seduza for $2k is a much better deal. :mad2:


----------



## PJ352

If I've got the sequence of events right, it seems that your LBS misspoke about the 2009 4.7 specs. Rather than contacting Trek and getting confirmation that all the bikes on the website were '09's, he assumed they were. 

If you've followed the Madone line at all, you would have known that all of the Madones now up on the website are '09's - mostly because of color changes. The 4.5 is an '09 as well, but the 4.7 is (as you now know) an '08.

I don't see where Trek is misrepresenting their product, but I do see where the LBS assumed something they shouldn't have. Beyond that, all prices except for the 4.7 have gone up a fair amount. This should have served to tip off your LBS that it wasn't an 09.

All water under the bridge, as they say. But I would think that the LBS should share some of the burden here and swap out the Ultegra components for SL - at a nominal fee. My 2 cents.


----------



## qwer

That 4.7 might be an 08 model. Same color as '09 4.7, but Ultegra instead of Ultegra SL. I'd check that again with your LBS.

MSRP difference between 2009 4.5 and 4.7 according to their website = $ 330. Considering the actual sale price in the stores it will be less. You won't get an Ultegra Crank, Brakeset, F/R Derailleur etc for that price, not taking in account the labor cost to mount the suff if you can't do it yourself.


----------



## brentley

Hmmm
The 2008 4.7 shows up in the bike archive as full Ultegra. the 2009 shows for me as Ultegra SL
Maybe you got the very tail end of the 2008 line and not a 2009? 

I can understand why you are a bit upset, but regular ultegra is pretty good stuff.


----------



## jsedlak

What did you end up paying? At first you mentioned $2600, but now you mention $2800. What did you pay on the bike pre-tax? After you know that, ask your LBS what year the bike is. If they say it is an 09 and you paid an 09 price, you MUST get 09 specs. You will have to take it into your own hands to confirm the specs. A site can be wrong, it is possible that they included the wrong specs. If they say it is an 09 but you paid an 08 price, you may have just gotten an 08. You should tell them they are wrong, tell them where to shove it, take the bike home and enjoy it.

I say that as long as you got what you paid for (and it isn't cleared what you paid for and the amount you paid), you should be happy.


----------



## jpryor

Just got a call from the LBS. They contacted the LBS owner and he will make things right. I can see where he should have checked with his Trek rep and/or checked his dealer Trek website. I have an '09 Madone; that's what the LBS owner pitched to me and noted that the 4.7 prices didn't jump like the other madone models...and he told me I was buying a 2009 madone with Ultegra SL.

At any rate, I'm more impressed with the LBS owner and his stand behind his customers than I am with Trek. Hats off to Rockford Bicycle Company and their superb service. As for Trek...well, they just need to get their act together.

In all, with Ultegra or Ultegra SL, the Madone 4.7 is a great bike and rides even better.


----------



## jpryor

*Final Outcome - Trek is a Zero*

Well, Trek is an absolute ZERO for customer service. They basically did nothing to make the situation right. I can tell you now, I will never buy another Trek because of their complete disregard for the customer. They have since updated their website to reflect the Ultegra (not Ultegra SL) components on the 4.7 and simply washed their hands of any responsibility as a manufacturer. Perhaps this is why Trek is rarely considered as a serious bike manufacturer.

The LBS went out of their way to help. Rockford Bicycle Company in Rockford, IL actually tried to make things right by upgrading the pedals to Ultegra pedals and adding a carbon cage for no extra charge. I just got fitted on the bike last night. I did take it out Saturday for 60 miles and the bike rides very well.

I received a couple PMs for pics, so I'll try to snap some shots and upload photos this week. Let me know if there are any close-ups you have your heart set on.


----------



## zac

jpryor said:


> *Well, Trek is an absolute ZERO for customer service.* They basically did nothing to make the situation right. I can tell you now, I will never buy another Trek because of their complete disregard for the customer. They have since updated their website to reflect the Ultegra (not Ultegra SL) components on the 4.7 and simply washed their hands of any responsibility as a manufacturer. *Perhaps this is why Trek is rarely considered as a serious bike manufacturer.*


Are you kidding me? Trek has one of the best reputations of all bike companies, large and small, with respect to customer service. It is often the primary reason behind a sale to someone who would not otherwise consider a Trek, simply because their customer service is that good. This is the model they built through their network of LBS's. They enjoy many long time customers, and are also considered to be a great place to work too, FWIW.

As to your second comment: Why, may I ask, did you even initially consider purchasing a $2600 bike from a company that is "rarely considered as a serious bike manufacturer?" This just doesn't make any sense

Please, you are emotional because of a perceived injustice. The outfits on any bike are subject to change, and as you state there is almost no difference between Ultegra and SL other than a few grams and color. Sounds like you got taken care of by your LBS, which is the way it is supposed to happen. That is Trek's front end.


----------



## jpryor

No, I'm not kidding. To answer your second question, because I can get it serviced and supported by a LBS instead of ordering online.

Bottom line is that it was Trek's mistake and they did nothing about it; I'll continue to tell my story.


----------



## jsedlak

jpryor said:


> No, I'm not kidding. To answer your second question, because I can get it serviced and supported by a LBS instead of ordering online.
> 
> Bottom line is that it was Trek's mistake and they did nothing about it; I'll continue to tell my story.


You are right, it was Trek's mistake but they did do something about it. They updated their site. In this case, Trek owes you nothing. They sold you the correct bike with the correct components. I suggest you brush up on common website policies, you can start here: http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/general/terms_of_use/

It is up to the dealer to know the catalog and speak of it. The actual error was made here in that they sold you a bike without knowing the true specifications. In this case since they made the mistake, the attempted to make it right. You cannot simply demand what is shown on the website, an unreliable source of information.


----------



## PJ352

jsedlak said:


> You are right, it was Trek's mistake but they did do something about it. They updated their site. In this case, Trek owes you nothing. They sold you the correct bike with the correct components. I suggest you brush up on common website policies, you can start here: http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/general/terms_of_use/
> 
> It is up to the dealer to know the catalog and speak of it. The actual error was made here in that they sold you a bike without knowing the true specifications. In this case since they made the mistake, the attempted to make it right. You cannot simply demand what is shown on the website, an unreliable source of information.


You can't possibly be serious. Your 'argument' is based on terms of use written in lawyer speak that basically say "read these terms and if you agree, then use our site, but BTW check back often, because our terms change without notice". It's nothing more than a disclaimer. 

I agree with (most of) your second paragraph and have posted a similar view 5 days ago, but in real world terms you have to recognize that in our current environment a consumers best sources of info are dealers and manufacturers websites. That given, IMO we have a reasonable expectation that websites and information provided by them will be accurate. My two cents.


----------



## jsedlak

PJ352 said:


> You can't possibly be serious. Your 'argument' is based on terms of use written in lawyer speak that basically say "read these terms and if you agree, then use our site, but BTW check back often, because our terms change without notice". It's nothing more than a disclaimer.


The simple fact is that the website is not garunteed to be accurate and that is all that matters. The lawyer speak simply backs that idea. Having read several licenses and created many more, the terminology is plain and simple to me. You cannot go by what the website says.

Ever hear of those mistakes where you can buy a really expensive item for dirt cheap all of a sudden on a site like amazon.com? Generally your order will be canceled or you will be charged the correct amount for the product. This is because you do not have the right to claim the price on the website. This, of course, excludes a bait and switch.


----------



## the sky above tar below

So according to your logic, jsedlak, if jpryor had ended up with a heavy steel frame Trek with 105 components, despite what the website said, that would be okay with you? Because, "websites are subject to change?"


----------



## jsedlak

the sky above said:


> So according to your logic, jsedlak, if jpryor had ended up with a heavy steel frame Trek with 105 components, despite what the website said, that would be okay with you? Because, "websites are subject to change?"


No, because that isn't what a 4.7 has. It sounds to me that Trek has been contacted a few times about the 4.7 and they have confirmed it being Ultegra, not Ultegra SL. He got a 4.7 with Ultegra, the correct components. Had he gotten anything less than what Trek specifies for the bike, then it would not be okay.

All I am saying is the he bought based on what the website said, not what Trek said.


----------



## jgt_madone_newb

I've been watching this drama unfold for the last couple of days, and the part I can't figure out - Who exactly held a gun to the OP's head, and forced him to complete the transaction?

He ordered it, it came in, there was a discrepancy. He hadn't been fitted for the bike, hadn't ridden it, basically hadn't accepted it. He also admitted he wouldn't be able to tell the difference between Ultegra and SL if his lifw depended on it, other than the cost difference. He was offered some compensatory perks by the LBS, and he accepted. The deal is done. He should go happily ride his beautiful new bike. If that wasn't good enough, cancel the deal and go buy a Specialized, a Scott, a Cannondale.

If he was THAT unhappy with Trek, and has no respect for Trek, and Trek is, to paraphrase "not taken seriously as a bike manufacturer", why did he want it in the first place? If he's got that much angst going in, how can he ever be happy with it? If I had that much acid reflux over my bike before i even rode it, I'd go completely balistic every time the rear deralier needed adjusting, or God forbid, it got a flat tire.


----------



## the sky above tar below

Well to answer your question, I think the OP's disillusion began after he bought the bike; it didn't exist going in.

I believe also that jpryor, the OP, paid for the bike before he ordered it. 

According to some members, it is the consumer's responsibility to not only check the specs on the Trek website, but to also confirm that the specs have not changed in any way.

I'm glad that jpryor's situation was made right. I feel he did his research by going over the specs on the Trek website, before making his purchase.


----------



## jgt_madone_newb

Point taken, but it sure seems like you're putting yourself in an awkward position, when you say this:



jpryor said:


> Well, Trek is an absolute ZERO for customer service. They basically did nothing to make the situation right. I can tell you now, I will never buy another Trek because of their complete disregard for the customer. They have since updated their website to reflect the Ultegra (not Ultegra SL) components on the 4.7 and simply washed their hands of any responsibility as a manufacturer. Perhaps this is why Trek is rarely considered as a serious bike manufacturer.
> 
> The LBS went out of their way to help. Rockford Bicycle Company in Rockford, IL actually tried to make things right by upgrading the pedals to Ultegra pedals and adding a carbon cage for no extra charge. I just got fitted on the bike last night. I did take it out Saturday for 60 miles and the bike rides very well.
> 
> I received a couple PMs for pics, so I'll try to snap some shots and upload photos this week. Let me know if there are any close-ups you have your heart set on.


And then two posts later, say you're going to continue to tell your story, about how gawdawful Trek is.

Mental image - you pedal up to the Wednesday night group ride, tell all your friends how terrible Trek is, how their customer service is absolutely zero, and you'll never buy anything from them again, and they're not taken seriously as a manufacturer of high end bikes.....butttttttt.....How you do like my expensive new Trek?

Seems a little incongruent, thats all. Glad he got it, glad they threw in some stuff, hope he rides the snot out of it and loves every minute. Trek makes some great bikes.


----------



## PJ352

jsedlak said:


> *The simple fact is that the website is not garunteed to be accurate and that is all that matters. *The lawyer speak simply backs that idea. Having read several licenses and created many more, the terminology is plain and simple to me. You cannot go by what the website says.
> 
> Ever hear of those mistakes where you can buy a really expensive item for dirt cheap all of a sudden on a site like amazon.com? Generally your order will be canceled or you will be charged the correct amount for the product. This is because you do not have the right to claim the price on the website. This, of course, excludes a bait and switch.


I don't think anyone was looking for guaranteed accuracy, they were looking for Trek to step up and act reasonably. In my response to you I said "*IMO we have a reasonable expectation that websites and information provided by them will be accurate"*. That, to me, is middle ground between guaranteed accuracy and a near total disclaimer.

Now, you say "_You cannot go by what the website says_". So me being a fairly intelligent consumer says "then why in the world would I waste my time visiting your site! To get misinformation??

The adage _be careful what you wish for, you might just get it _comes to mind..


----------



## jsedlak

PJ - I agreed with your second paragraph. The site is there for information, but it may not be 100% accurate. Unfortunately, most consumers are not aware of that.

Btw, it isn't the consumer's responsibility to know the specs of the bike they are buying and verify that with what they get. However it can't hurt. In this case, the dealer relied on the specs on the website rather than knowing the catalog. IMO, it is their responsibility to know what the bike will ship with.


----------



## jpryor

I think this is the final episode in this saga:
I was able to get in touch with Trek directly and I was promptly emailed a response with 2 subsequent follow-up phone calls. After talking about the issue, Trek was more than happy to make everything right. I think perhaps the LBS was dealing with the wrong person and/or the whole story was getting mixed up a bit. The guy I talked to at Trek was extremely helpful and eager to help me out.

I hate dealing with situations like this (because I hate customer complaints as much as anyone) and hope I never have to again. But after all the drama and discussion, I can honestly say that Trek does stand behind their customers with outstanding customer support. Also, my LBS (Rockford Bicycle Company) was very helpful. I all, I'm glad I was able to keep the bike and have the backing/support of a LBS for tune-ups. Kudos to Chris at Trek and RBC. FWIW, the bike already has 160 miles on it and runs great.


----------



## PJ352

We are in agreement.


----------



## PJ352

Trek and your LBS deserve some credit, but so do you for pursuing this. It may not have worked out this way had you not pushed the issue. Glad it all worked out for you. Now go enjoy your bike! :thumbsup:


----------



## TleahciM

When I was looking around online before I upgraded my Trek 2300 to the '08 Madone 4.5, I noticed this on Cervelo's website:

"Specs may change without notice."

Maybe this is a sign that pryor's situation isn't all too uncommon? I know that Cervelo says that it tries to maintain the specs listed but can't account for local dealers - whatever that means. My own experience with an LBS was almost as bad. Not only was I sized incorrectly but the bike sat in the LBS for over 3 weeks before it was put together even though I called multiple times to see if it was in yet. Buyer beware I suppose.


----------



## jdeane4

I weigh in at 225lb and getting lighter. I have come across a really good deal on the 09 4.7 Madone. What are the reviews regarding heavier riders on the 4.5 or 4.7 Madone (flex and stiffness)? Also, what is everyone's thoughts of the bontrager wheels?


----------



## brentley

Don't ride the bonty's get some decent clydesdale wheels (open pro, deep V) with 32 spokes.


----------



## tiflow_21

No offense, but if you do research on the madone line you'd know that the 4.7 came spec'd with ultegra in '08. The 5.2 was always their ultegra sl deal.

I can understand your frustration with not getting what the bike shop told you, but imo they dropped the ball by not knowing that the 4.7 was normally ultegra. They should have called trek to confirm the price/spec, knowing that in the past that the 4.7 wasn't spec'd with ultegra sl.

If a deal looks too good to be true then it probably is... as you probably know.


----------

