Leeism wrote:I like the di2 that comes with the 5.9 but the 6.2 has a US made frame and is lighter from what I have been told.
I can get the 6.2 for $250 more than the 5.9
What I want to know is everyone's opinions on both of these bikes. It would be used for commuting and endurance rides.
If you are doing endurance rides, here's what most of the experienced enduro guys I know carry:
two larger water bottles 2000g (fluid and bottle weight)
extra electrolyte powder 50g
food for 3-4 hours 600g (including several planned stops for top ups)
3 tubes 250g
1 tire patch 10g
2 CO2 cylinders and chuck 40g
1 mini pump 100g
maybe a spare tire 200g
sunscreen 60g
multi-tool 150g
mobile phone and water proofing 150g
bike computer 60g
wind/rain vest 80g
total = 3750 grams
further, when barreling down a rough country road at 70+kph, and bashing into the occasional pothole, it may dawn on you your 1518gram Bontrager Race Light wheels with 18 spokes on the front and alloy nipples are not up to the task, especially if you weigh over 75kg. So, then you might be inclined to start thinking about 32 spoke heavier duty rimmed and hubbed wheels at around 1700g.
If I was buying a new bike, I'd buy Di2 with its 133gram weight penalty because I'd value dropping chains and jamming gears less often, and believe me, on long tiring rough country road rides where your bike is having the c4@p vibrated out of it, $hlt like this happens more often than you imagine sitting in your comfy suburban lounge chair.
But how about we also consider the majority of cyclists are not sub 10% bodyfat, and the majority could well afford to lose 5000g.
Now, considering Trek don't publish weights, what was that bike weight difference you were considering so seriously?
Fav Ride : Pottsville, Byron, Bangalow, Eureka, Dunoon, Nimbin, Uki, Mooball, Pottsville 200km 3000m