General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
2012-09-04 6:17 PM

User image

Veteran
251
1001002525
Louisville
Subject: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?
I just fell into some money (yay!) and am looking at bikes. My budget is $1000 and one of the local bike shops here has a few older Trek models for sale for around $699. I will be going to get fitted and hopefully one of those models will be comfy and usable for me. Just wanted to know if anyone knew anything about the brand/models and what thoughts you might have about them. I'm a bike noob (obviously) and just did my first sprint tri and am looking to move into Olys next year. I have an everyday cheap little bike I did the sprint in but it was pretty uncomfortable after the 10 miles so I really want something better so I can start upping the distance. Any thoughts? Thanks!


2012-09-04 7:34 PM
in reply to: #4395302

User image

Veteran
257
1001002525
Texas
Subject: RE: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?
I bought my first road bike a year ago.  It's a Lexa and I've been very pleased with it.  I'm stlll a newb, so take it for what it's worth.
2012-09-05 7:30 AM
in reply to: #4395302

User image

Master
2500
2000500
Crab Cake City
Subject: RE: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?
I rented a trek 1.1 for my first race in 2010. I liked it and when I took it back to the bike shop I asked them if I could buy it and I got it at a cheaper price. I still use it and dont plan on buying a new bike for a long time. Good entry level bike IMO
2012-09-05 7:43 AM
in reply to: #4395302


15

Subject: RE: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?

The two bikes are roughly equivalent in terms of component level and build.  The Lexa however is a womens specific design where the 1.1 is not.  The Womens specific design is more comfortable for most but definitely not all women.  In terms of these two bikes, go with what feels best.

The one recommendation I would have is to upgrade to the Lexa S or 1.2 if they are available.  They are both still inside of your $1000 price range at full list according to Trek's website.  This upgrade gets you a carbon fork that absorbs bumps better and 9 speed vs 8 speed components for more gear options.

Finally, given the option and unless you live in a very hilly area, go with a compact crank instead of a triple.  You do not loose much in terms of gearing, but you do get much better shifting front and rear from the easier angles on the chain.

2012-09-05 8:00 AM
in reply to: #4395302

Extreme Veteran
406
100100100100
Subject: RE: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?
x2 on the trek 1.2.  Small price upgrade for a pretty big comfort increase.  I have been riding mine for 3 years now.  Love it.
2012-09-05 8:17 AM
in reply to: #4395302

User image

Extreme Veteran
845
50010010010025
Subject: RE: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?

My wife just bought her first bike and got a 2012 Lexa for $499.  I've taken it for a spin and it's a nice ride.  She loves it! (We looked at a 1.1, too, but she liked the color of the Lexa better)



2012-09-05 7:11 PM
in reply to: #4395302

User image

Member
169
1002525
Subject: RE: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?
LUV my LEXA! Named her G.R for "great ride".
2012-09-05 7:54 PM
in reply to: #4395302

User image

Member
560
5002525
Utah
Subject: RE: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?
I bought the Lexa  in February...love her!  I call her "my chariot"...for an entry level bike...she kicks arse!
2012-09-06 12:52 AM
in reply to: #4395302

User image

Veteran
732
50010010025
Pittsburgh, PA
Subject: RE: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?

If they are older models, I assume it's not just a Lexa C they're selling for $699?  Trek 1.1 or Lexa C new on the Trek website are $669.

That said I agree with the other posters that the next level up (looks like a Lexa S) will be better in the long run- carbon fork and actual Shimano components.  There are lots of threads that will tell you to go for nothing less than Shimano 105, but FWIW I've had a road bike with Tiagra and a road bike with 105 and didn't really have a problem with either.  

Some people hate the shifters on Sora but honestly if you're moving up from a mountain bike, and not putting 500 miles a month on your bike, I think they'll be fine.  

Ride the Lexa and the unisex model and see which feels better.  FWIW I'm bike shopping now and really looking at WSDs.  I think I fit them better but I really like the more ergonomic handlebars and shifters that come on most WSD frames.

Another thing to think about is whether you want a compact crank or a triple- the Lexas come with either.  If you live/ race where it's really flat, go for a compact crank.  If not, there are tons of threads debating the merits of triples- read them and decide for yourself!

2012-09-06 8:08 AM
in reply to: #4395302

User image

Master
8249
50002000100010010025
Eugene, Oregon
Bronze member
Subject: RE: Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa?
X3 on the Trek 1.2. Mine cost about $1000 new in Singapore, and one always pays a markup there. Should be about $800 in the US. I have the WSD, size 54. It's super-light (carbon fork), durable, and, at least in my case, very comfortable to ride. I've never had trouble with gears or shifting (well, except for the time I got gravel and mud stuck in them). Maybe not the fastest bike around, but in my case there's so much more to do with position and training that it's kind of beside the point. I just put aerobars on it and it's still very comfortable and handles well.

Edited by Hot Runner 2012-09-06 8:10 AM
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Trek 1.1 or Trek Lexa? Rss Feed