| Re: Trek 820 or 3500
On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 10:28:16 -0500, VBadJuJu <none@> wrote:
>nightowls627@aol.comnojunk (Greg Doughty) wrote:
>
>>Good morning. I am 5'8 and 220 pounds. Looking for a cheap, well-built
>>mountain bike to ride on boardwalk and trails with a cannondale trailer with
>>daughter in tow. I was at one time an avid hard core mtn biker (rode Snowshoe
>>and asudry other places) and had a cannondale and trek. Well, time and babies
>>have caught up to me and I can't spend the coin I used to when I was single. I
>>looked at the schwinn at target but I know better than that. I also know I get
>>what I pay for but I think sticking with name brand is relatively safe. The
>>820 seems heavy and don't like the cheesy shock, but the layout on the 3500
>>looks more like easy riding. I will want to go offroad I am sure in the future
>
>One of the critical factors is how much you are going to ride it. The
>chain, cassette and wheels on the 820, 3500, 3700 and 4100 wont hold
>up to your weight for more than 1500 miles or so (more for the
>rims...maybe). For purely weekend rides, that might be 2 years, but
>could be as little as a few months if you ride more (and depending on
>the stress added by the trailer).
>
>>when I drop some pounds. Are there any other decent bikes in the 220-250 price
>>range?
>
>You get what you pay for.
>
>OTOH, the 4300 is 'only' about $90 more than the 3500. Additionally,
>the 2005 models should be popping up in 2-3 weeks which could lead to
>some nifty sales and used bike opportunities.
>
>>Thanks
>>73
>>Greg
>>ki4bbl@arrl.net
What about the 4300 will make it last longer? Looks like it has a
suspension fork. Maybe the OP should get a cro-moly frame and alloy wheels?
Just askin'.
-B
|