New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
-
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 6:43 pm
New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby Arlberg » Thu Jul 03, 2014 12:02 pm
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/arti ... ike-41576/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... nge-128795" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/ro ... ce/emonda/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- g-boaf
- Posts: 21529
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby g-boaf » Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:46 pm
Will people buy these or just lose 2.5kg of their own weight?
-
- Posts: 445
- Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 2:37 pm
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby harmonix1234 » Thu Jul 03, 2014 2:43 pm
Has anyone here ever ridden a super light bike? What's it like?
Is it really that good?
I went from a 12 kilo mountain bike to a 8 kilo road bike and dont really notice much difference.
I'd be keen to ride one but I reckon I'd be over the maximum rider weight limit for that. Does it specify a maximum rider weight?
- flashpixx
- Posts: 746
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:04 pm
- Location: Maylands WA
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby flashpixx » Thu Jul 03, 2014 3:13 pm
From what is on Trek website the weight limit is as per Trek road bikes (Madone and Domane) so 125kg (?)
Riding: Trek Domane SLR 7
- GeoffInBrisbane
- Posts: 704
- Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:31 pm
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby GeoffInBrisbane » Thu Jul 03, 2014 3:26 pm
And how will you lose 2.5kg?g-boaf wrote:At first I wondered if this might be some sort of practical joke. 4.65kg for a 56cm frame!
Will people buy these or just lose 2.5kg of their own weight?
I figure the weight is a bit of a cheat - no pedals is a normal cheat, but it runs tubulars so there is a strong chance owners will want to change to clinchers and add weight that way. Mind you, 5kg ish with clinchers and pedals is still super light.
- g-boaf
- Posts: 21529
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby g-boaf » Thu Jul 03, 2014 3:41 pm
Apparently I can - but I don't want to, or rather can't be bothered.GeoffInBrisbane wrote:And how will you lose 2.5kg?g-boaf wrote:At first I wondered if this might be some sort of practical joke. 4.65kg for a 56cm frame!
Will people buy these or just lose 2.5kg of their own weight?
I figure the weight is a bit of a cheat - no pedals is a normal cheat, but it runs tubulars so there is a strong chance owners will want to change to clinchers and add weight that way. Mind you, 5kg ish with clinchers and pedals is still super light.
- mitchy_
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:15 am
- Contact:
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby mitchy_ » Thu Jul 03, 2014 3:47 pm
i can tell the difference between my 6.9kg and 9.something kg bikes. it might be the wheels however.harmonix1234 wrote:I have done poos bigger than that.
Has anyone here ever ridden a super light bike? What's it like?
Is it really that good?
I went from a 12 kilo mountain bike to a 8 kilo road bike and dont really notice much difference.
I'd be keen to ride one but I reckon I'd be over the maximum rider weight limit for that. Does it specify a maximum rider weight?
trek state all road bikes have a 125kg limit... not sure whether the emonda applies, but there didn't seem to be a note stating otherwise.
it's a 690 gram frame (at 56cm). supposed cheats aside, it's insanely light.GeoffInBrisbane wrote:And how will you lose 2.5kg?g-boaf wrote:At first I wondered if this might be some sort of practical joke. 4.65kg for a 56cm frame!
Will people buy these or just lose 2.5kg of their own weight?
I figure the weight is a bit of a cheat - no pedals is a normal cheat, but it runs tubulars so there is a strong chance owners will want to change to clinchers and add weight that way. Mind you, 5kg ish with clinchers and pedals is still super light.
- g-boaf
- Posts: 21529
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby g-boaf » Thu Jul 03, 2014 3:55 pm
I know I can feel the difference between my Giant (6.8kg) and the Trek I also have (above 8kg)
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby Xplora » Thu Jul 03, 2014 11:47 pm
The 10 is covered in non Trek parts - wheels and saddle are different, and the handlebars only appear stock on the 10. AKA I call shenanigans. Part of going Trek is getting the Bontrager parts all over. To me at least.
It's partly a marketing exercise, I personally don't see the value unless it makes parts cheaper and lighter down the line (which in fairness it has - the Ultegra version with OCLV 700 carbon and regular clinchers is 6.6kgs (EDIT: CORRECTION) I think). I personally want to see more access and development for the Race Domane. That's where they need to move - getting better compliance vertically is where it's at IMO. Riding bikes isn't super comfy, especially on bad roads like I seem to ride on.
-
- Posts: 5470
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:23 pm
- Location: Yangebup
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby Baalzamon » Fri Jul 04, 2014 12:09 am
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby Xplora » Fri Jul 04, 2014 12:44 am
-
- Posts: 5131
- Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:41 pm
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby rkelsen » Fri Jul 04, 2014 9:26 am
Re: the 125kg limit & lifetime warranty: On balance, how many people buying this bike would weigh more than 85kg? My guess would be perhaps 1% to 2% of sales would be to people weighing more than 85kg, with a minimal number to people weighing more than 100kg. They've got a 25% to 35% buffer zone built into their 125kg limit. The ones that will cost them replacement frames under the lifetime warranty are the outliers. The fringe cases. The ones not worth worrying about. You can bet your bottom dollar that they have a line item for "replacement frame costs" in their budgets.
- mitchy_
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:15 am
- Contact:
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby mitchy_ » Fri Jul 04, 2014 9:29 am
of course, that's why it costs $16,000.rkelsen wrote:You can bet your bottom dollar that they have a line item for "replacement frame costs" in their budgets.
-
- Posts: 12228
- Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 3:40 pm
- Location: Brisbane
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby jasonc » Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:03 am
VERY nice looking bit of kit
geoff - you'd be jelly
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby Xplora » Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:17 am
This is the part I can't wrap my head around. Saddle, handlebars, wheels, group. The Red group is the same cash as DA, or less? The integrated handlebars are twice as much as the regular ones, which are rather exxy, but you don't need a stem which is a lot of cashola too. Full carbon saddle is around 800 bucks from Selle SMP.mitchy_ wrote:of course, that's why it costs $16,000.rkelsen wrote:You can bet your bottom dollar that they have a line item for "replacement frame costs" in their budgets.
I can accept there needs to be premium pricing, but a set of Aoelus wheels new off the floor is 2700-3000 bucks. We're trying to say these Tune wheels are 5000? It's pretty crazy mathematics. In fairness, my pricing of the Trek Package on various models comes out quite reasonable (if you're happy to pay for the lifetime warranty, which DOES cost quite a bit), they upgrade multiple things at once over the different levels in the lower end.
A project one Classics Domane (Cancellara team bike) is stock price 15K so maybe this isn't that ridiculous. Assuming you don't think a Classics Domane team bike isn't ridiculously expensive
- biker jk
- Posts: 7016
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby biker jk » Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:38 am
- foo on patrol
- Posts: 9076
- Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 11:12 am
- Location: Sanstone Point QLD
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby foo on patrol » Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:41 am
Short arse! My Track frame is 60cm.g-boaf wrote:56 is a fairly big frame too.
I know I can feel the difference between my Giant (6.8kg) and the Trek I also have (above 8kg)
Foo
Goal 6000km
-
- Posts: 12228
- Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 3:40 pm
- Location: Brisbane
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby jasonc » Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:42 am
+1foo on patrol wrote:Short arse! My Track frame is 60cm.g-boaf wrote:56 is a fairly big frame too.
I know I can feel the difference between my Giant (6.8kg) and the Trek I also have (above 8kg)
Foo
trek call my new frame a 60. top tube is 58.6cm or something
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby Xplora » Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:42 am
The trickle down is significant, they've got Ultegra mechanical without carbon wheels around 6kgs - that is the more impressive feat to me. You can put light wheels on anything, but crappy wheels at 6kgs is nice.
I would assume this will force the Commissaire's hand to bust out the scales more regularly though, if this is the start of a wave of 5.5kg bikes throughout the bunch.
- mitchy_
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:15 am
- Contact:
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby mitchy_ » Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:52 am
and that is still a $13,500 affair... and over half a kilo heavier.biker jk wrote:Sounds like marketing hype. The Cannonball Super Six Evo Black frame weighs 655 grams. Without resorting to non-custom parts it built up to a 5.2kg bike.
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby Xplora » Fri Jul 04, 2014 11:07 am
And this is the difficulty... if we want a p*ssing contest, then the Trek wins. If it's a matter of cost, well the Mclaren Venge is 18000.mitchy_ wrote:and that is still a $13,500 affair... and over half a kilo heavier.biker jk wrote:Sounds like marketing hype. The Cannonball Super Six Evo Black frame weighs 655 grams. Without resorting to non-custom parts it built up to a 5.2kg bike.
I don't think p&ssing contests are very useful here, because there is no real value for a bike that is so far below the UCI limit unless the rules change (maybe Trek knows something we don't) - assuming we are sensible people who left high school quite some time ago, which I know we all are. Who has the lightest bike? Who cares. The true test is the fastest bike, which is limited by 6.8kgs right now. Get the boys climbing on Aeolus 9s, I will certainly be impressed then
- g-boaf
- Posts: 21529
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby g-boaf » Fri Jul 04, 2014 11:10 am
That's gigantic then - compared with someone I know who has a tiny size Giant TCR Advanced SL.foo on patrol wrote:Short arse! My Track frame is 60cm.g-boaf wrote:56 is a fairly big frame too.
I know I can feel the difference between my Giant (6.8kg) and the Trek I also have (above 8kg)
Foo
It's becoming excessive especially give the mandated racing weight limits. I'm happy enough with what I have being a reasonable weight without resorting to extremely exotic special components.
- mitchy_
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:15 am
- Contact:
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby mitchy_ » Fri Jul 04, 2014 11:13 am
of course it's a pissing contest. it's similar the Zonda R... you cant actually use it anywhere legally, nor race it in any category. i'd sure as hell own one (car and bike) if i had the cash though.Xplora wrote:And this is the difficulty... if we want a p*ssing contest, then the Trek wins. If it's a matter of cost, well the Mclaren Venge is 18000.mitchy_ wrote:and that is still a $13,500 affair... and over half a kilo heavier.biker jk wrote:Sounds like marketing hype. The Cannonball Super Six Evo Black frame weighs 655 grams. Without resorting to non-custom parts it built up to a 5.2kg bike.
I don't think p&ssing contests are very useful here, because there is no real value for a bike that is so far below the UCI limit unless the rules change (maybe Trek knows something we don't) - assuming we are sensible people who left high school quite some time ago, which I know we all are. Who has the lightest bike? Who cares. The true test is the fastest bike, which is limited by 6.8kgs right now. Get the boys climbing on Aeolus 9s, I will certainly be impressed then
- biker jk
- Posts: 7016
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby biker jk » Fri Jul 04, 2014 11:39 am
My point is that Trek are crowing about building a light bike when the Cannonball frame is lighter than the Trek frame. Looks more like Trek catching up to the competition on weight weenie frames than being at the forefront of innovation.mitchy_ wrote:and that is still a $13,500 affair... and over half a kilo heavier.biker jk wrote:Sounds like marketing hype. The Cannonball Super Six Evo Black frame weighs 655 grams. Without resorting to non-custom parts it built up to a 5.2kg bike.
- mitchy_
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:15 am
- Contact:
Re: New Trek Emonda SLR 10. 4.6kg!
Postby mitchy_ » Fri Jul 04, 2014 12:27 pm
what size frame is the 655 grams though? trek announce theirs is 690g vs 710 for the cannondale in 56cmbiker jk wrote:My point is that Trek are crowing about building a light bike when the Cannonball frame is lighter than the Trek frame. Looks more like Trek catching up to the competition on weight weenie frames than being at the forefront of innovation.mitchy_ wrote:and that is still a $13,500 affair... and over half a kilo heavier.biker jk wrote:Sounds like marketing hype. The Cannonball Super Six Evo Black frame weighs 655 grams. Without resorting to non-custom parts it built up to a 5.2kg bike.
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.