Trek 7500FX or 1000C?

08-02-2004, 02:55 PM

Greetings,

I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.

I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
components, and should be more immune to abuse.

Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?

Thank you.

-John

08-02-2004, 04:30 PM

>Subject: Trek 7500FX or 1000C?
>From: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (John)
>Date: 8/2/2004 5:55 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>
>Greetings,
>
>I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
>almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
>the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
>relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
>myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.
>
>I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
>ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
>I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
>offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
>mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
>the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
>road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
>The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
>components, and should be more immune to abuse.
>
>Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
>hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-John
>

Whichever one you will USE will be the one to get. I am picking up a 7700 FX
this weekend, you might want to look at it also

08-02-2004, 04:30 PM

>Subject: Trek 7500FX or 1000C?
>From: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (John)
>Date: 8/2/2004 5:55 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>
>Greetings,
>
>I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
>almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
>the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
>relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
>myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.
>
>I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
>ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
>I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
>offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
>mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
>the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
>road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
>The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
>components, and should be more immune to abuse.
>
>Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
>hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-John
>

Whichever one you will USE will be the one to get. I am picking up a 7700 FX
this weekend, you might want to look at it also

08-02-2004, 04:30 PM

>Subject: Trek 7500FX or 1000C?
>From: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (John)
>Date: 8/2/2004 5:55 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>
>Greetings,
>
>I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
>almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
>the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
>relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
>myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.
>
>I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
>ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
>I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
>offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
>mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
>the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
>road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
>The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
>components, and should be more immune to abuse.
>
>Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
>hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-John
>

Whichever one you will USE will be the one to get. I am picking up a 7700 FX
this weekend, you might want to look at it also

08-02-2004, 04:30 PM

>Subject: Trek 7500FX or 1000C?
>From: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (John)
>Date: 8/2/2004 5:55 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>
>Greetings,
>
>I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
>almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
>the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
>relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
>myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.
>
>I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
>ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
>I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
>offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
>mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
>the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
>road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
>The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
>components, and should be more immune to abuse.
>
>Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
>hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-John
>

Whichever one you will USE will be the one to get. I am picking up a 7700 FX
this weekend, you might want to look at it also

08-02-2004, 04:30 PM

>Subject: Trek 7500FX or 1000C?
>From: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (John)
>Date: 8/2/2004 5:55 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>
>Greetings,
>
>I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
>almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
>the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
>relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
>myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.
>
>I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
>ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
>I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
>offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
>mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
>the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
>road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
>The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
>components, and should be more immune to abuse.
>
>Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
>hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-John
>

Whichever one you will USE will be the one to get. I am picking up a 7700 FX
this weekend, you might want to look at it also

08-02-2004, 05:10 PM

On 2 Aug 2004 15:55:27 -0700, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (John) wrote:

>Greetings,
>
>I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
>almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
>the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
>relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
>myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.
>
>I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
>ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
>I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
>offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
>mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
>the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
>road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
>The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
>components, and should be more immune to abuse.
>
>Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
>hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-John

I've ridden both and like them both. You might consider the next step up
and look at the 1200C. It's got the 9-speed tiagra componentry (vs the
8-speed sora). Depending on your area, you should be able to get it at
about $750. More than worth the extra $150 over the 1000C, IMO.

Replace the heavy and unnecessary suspension seat post and you've got a
nice bike, with mild h'bar to seat angle.

Be sure and try the best model of any type as well as the one you're
planning to buy, just so you have a good sample.

For your needs, you might even do well on the 7300FX, so I'd try that as
well as the 7700FX. My brother got the 7200FX and loves it. I have the
7500FX.

As far as aerobics, it would be difficult for a person used to running the
distances you do to get sufficient aerobic conditioning on a bike unless
you do a lot of hills - it may take you about 4-6 months to discover this,
but IMO, you'd be better off getting the 1200C (or the 1000C). Having drop
bars is pretty important when doing a fair amt of hill climbing, again, my
opinion.

Good luck.

-B

08-02-2004, 05:10 PM

On 2 Aug 2004 15:55:27 -0700, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (John) wrote:

>Greetings,
>
>I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
>almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
>the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
>relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
>myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.
>
>I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
>ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
>I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
>offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
>mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
>the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
>road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
>The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
>components, and should be more immune to abuse.
>
>Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
>hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-John

I've ridden both and like them both. You might consider the next step up
and look at the 1200C. It's got the 9-speed tiagra componentry (vs the
8-speed sora). Depending on your area, you should be able to get it at
about $750. More than worth the extra $150 over the 1000C, IMO.

Replace the heavy and unnecessary suspension seat post and you've got a
nice bike, with mild h'bar to seat angle.

Be sure and try the best model of any type as well as the one you're
planning to buy, just so you have a good sample.

For your needs, you might even do well on the 7300FX, so I'd try that as
well as the 7700FX. My brother got the 7200FX and loves it. I have the
7500FX.

As far as aerobics, it would be difficult for a person used to running the
distances you do to get sufficient aerobic conditioning on a bike unless
you do a lot of hills - it may take you about 4-6 months to discover this,
but IMO, you'd be better off getting the 1200C (or the 1000C). Having drop
bars is pretty important when doing a fair amt of hill climbing, again, my
opinion.

Good luck.

-B

08-02-2004, 05:10 PM

On 2 Aug 2004 15:55:27 -0700, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (John) wrote:

>Greetings,
>
>I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
>almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
>the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
>relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
>myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.
>
>I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
>ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
>I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
>offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
>mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
>the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
>road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
>The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
>components, and should be more immune to abuse.
>
>Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
>hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-John

I've ridden both and like them both. You might consider the next step up
and look at the 1200C. It's got the 9-speed tiagra componentry (vs the
8-speed sora). Depending on your area, you should be able to get it at
about $750. More than worth the extra $150 over the 1000C, IMO.

Replace the heavy and unnecessary suspension seat post and you've got a
nice bike, with mild h'bar to seat angle.

Be sure and try the best model of any type as well as the one you're
planning to buy, just so you have a good sample.

For your needs, you might even do well on the 7300FX, so I'd try that as
well as the 7700FX. My brother got the 7200FX and loves it. I have the
7500FX.

As far as aerobics, it would be difficult for a person used to running the
distances you do to get sufficient aerobic conditioning on a bike unless
you do a lot of hills - it may take you about 4-6 months to discover this,
but IMO, you'd be better off getting the 1200C (or the 1000C). Having drop
bars is pretty important when doing a fair amt of hill climbing, again, my
opinion.

Good luck.

-B

08-02-2004, 05:10 PM

On 2 Aug 2004 15:55:27 -0700, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (John) wrote:

>Greetings,
>
>I am trying to pick up cycling as a substitue of running. I run
>almost daily between 30 and 60 minutes. I think running stresses
>the cariovascular system efficiently, producing enough stimuli in
>relatively short periods -- I use a heart rate monitor and push
>myself. I would like cycling to do the same and add variety.
>
>I am not sure which bike will work better for me. I think I will
>ride on pavement and ruled out mountain bikes. On the other hand,
>I do not want to spend that much on a purebred road bike. Trek
>offers a modified road bike 1000C (C for comfort) and a modified
>mountain (hybrid) bike 7500FX (FX for fitness/exercise) at about
>the same price. The 1000C comes with a dropped handle bar, Shimano
>road bike components and narrower tires, and I suppose, is faster.
>The 7500FX is equipped with a flat handle bar, mountain bike
>components, and should be more immune to abuse.
>
>Which do you think will be a better choice for aerobics under one
>hour? What differentiates the 1000C and 7500FX?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-John

I've ridden both and like them both. You might consider the next step up
and look at the 1200C. It's got the 9-speed tiagra componentry (vs the
8-speed sora). Depending on your area, you should be able to get it at
about $750. More than worth the extra $150 over the 1000C, IMO.

Replace the heavy and unnecessary suspension seat post and you've got a
nice bike, with mild h'bar to seat angle.

Be sure and try the best model of any type as well as the one you're
planning to buy, just so you have a good sample.

For your needs, you might even do well on the 7300FX, so I'd try that as
well as the 7700FX. My brother got the 7200FX and loves it. I have the
7500FX.

As far as aerobics, it would be difficult for a person used to running the
distances you do to get sufficient aerobic conditioning on a bike unless
you do a lot of hills - it may take you about 4-6 months to discover this,
but IMO, you'd be better off getting the 1200C (or the 1000C). Having drop
bars is pretty important when doing a fair amt of hill climbing, again, my
opinion.

Good luck.

-B