# Trek 1.9



## alfcruz (Apr 21, 2010)

Hi there, this is my first post here.

I am considering the Trek 1.9 2009 aluminum bike, as it is available through a local dealer. I live in Brasil.

Read this review and now I wonder if the reviewer is really saying that this bike does not have its back rigid enough or well designed to cope with the riding effort. 

If you had the opportunity of ride this bike and care to post your thoughts, it may help my decision. I am also considering the Cannondale's Caad9-5.

Thank you.:thumbsup: Best regards.


----------



## alfcruz (Apr 21, 2010)

Please people, there's no Trek users here to give his word about the frames? I've been told that the frames of models 1.5, 1.7 and 1.9 are all the same.

I wonder if it is rigid enough for a 110kg person like me.:blush2:


----------



## WhyRun (Dec 29, 2008)

I believe the frame you're asking about is a Trek frame manufactured and sold outside the United States. (Clearly, given you living in Brasil). In the U.S. Trek sells Aluminum road bikes under the number 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 2.1, 2.3. For the most part, the differences are in the fork and components (my point only being i'm unfamiliar with the specs on the particular bike you as asking about). The Trek aluminum frame is overall outstanding (although there are a varying degree of forks, which can affect the overall ride).

If you're on the heavier side, i think you should pay more attention to the wheels than the frame. The lower end wheels on those bikes may present more of a problem than the frame, which should be fine for you. You might look around for a custom build (which does not mean expensive) wheelset that will stay true and round for a long time, and with those wheels, you will find the trek aluminum frames to perfectly acceptable for your use.


----------



## alfcruz (Apr 21, 2010)

Thanks, WhyRun!

I am worried that the frame could be not so rigid, as the BikeRadar reviewer linked above implied.

By the way, the whell are Bontrager's Race.


----------



## 2ndGen (Oct 10, 2008)

alfcruz said:


> Hi there, this is my first post here.
> 
> I am considering the Trek 1.9 2009 aluminum bike, as it is available through a local dealer. I live in Brasil.
> 
> ...


Olá,

The frames are all aluminum. 
The 1.9 is a Black Series frame (top of the aluminum line as is the 1.5 I ride). 

Personally, I love the 1.9. It's not offered in The U.S. 
I was planning of building up my 1.5 to 1.9 standards, but I'm just going to 
leave it as is and will be sending it to Puerto Rico to keep in my home there. 

It's an excellent bike with excellent components. 

As for the CAAD9 5? 
Another excellent bike. 
Weaker components, but excellent frame. 

Those two are different bikes.
The Trek is a more comfortable bike for longer rides (thought not a comfort bike). 
The Cannondale is a more race inspired bike. While it has excellent ride characteristics,
it's not as comfortable as the Trek for long rides., 

A lot of your decision will have to do with how you ride too. 

I have the Trek 1.5 and just bought a CAAD9 7 because I wanted a more aggressive bike.
The CAAD I will build up for aggressive riding.
The Trek (again) I'm going to leave as is. 

Either bike is great. 
Decide how you ride most of the time and base your decision on that. 
Both have very similar fits, so that shouldn't be a problem.

The CAAD offers a superior frame period. 
The Trek offers a more compliant ride that compares to bikes costing 2 or 3 times more. 

Here is a comparison of the two (different component levels, but identical frames): 

TREK 1.5
Weight: 19.75 lbs 
Bicycling Review
Issue: Jun 2009 
Page: 84

EDITORIAL REVIEW
This year, in choosing our finalists in this category, we tried an experiment: We kept the drivetrain and parts spec similar (same model of derailleur on all bikes, for instance), but expanded the price range to see what a few more bucks would buy. 

We found that, in the case of Trek's 1.5, you get the most compliant ride of the group, with the kind of smoothness and ride tuning we'd expect from a bike that costs more than $1,100. Handling is novice-friendly yet not plodding. It delivers confidence from the start and yet, as your skills grow, the Trek 1.5 will feel more capable as well.

The runners-up trailed close behind. The Cannondale CAAD 9 7's best attributes are its well-balanced handling and screaming value, while the Felt F95 sports a "let's go" attitude and race-bike fit that makes you want to head to the front of the pack. And they're both cheaper than the Trek. 

So why the 1.5? You pay only a little more, and that premium gives you a platform worth building on over the years.


----------



## alfcruz (Apr 21, 2010)

Olá 2ndGen. Muito obrigado (thank you)!:thumbsup:


----------



## 2ndGen (Oct 10, 2008)

alfcruz said:


> Olá 2ndGen. Muito obrigado (thank you)!:thumbsup:


De nada!


----------



## alfcruz (Apr 21, 2010)

Gentlemen, would you say that the 2.1 frame flex under extreme pedaling effort? I understand that the 1.9 year 2009 frame is the same geometry and aluminum that this year's 2.1 or 2.3 frame.

Thank you.:thumbsup:


----------

