davethelefty

I have a Cannondale Topstone 6 gravel bike. The Cannondale has a longer wheelbase, but I'm not sure I could tell you how it feels different from the Canyon, from a geometry perspective. I do benefit (in comfort, not speed) from running lower tire pressures -- around 50 psi, vs. 80 psi on the Canyon's 700x28 tires. The Cannondale is about a pound heavier, and not that this matters but I'm about 1 mph slower on the Cannondale. The Canyon was light and and fast and responsive.

What I found after more than a year of tracking every ride was that I rode the Canyon only about 15% of the time, everything else was on the Cannondale. Why? Who knows? Probably multiple factors in play.

Cagatay

How do you find the 1x10 setup for the 2023 FX 3 ? Do you think it's suitable for mixed roads?

tenrec

I find the gearing on this bike adequate. The lowest gear lets me climb the hills I need to without much difficulty, and I haven't encountered a downhill yet that required a higher gear than the setup gives me. However, I'm not crazy about the 1x10 setup -- I find that if I'm using any cog too far off the center of the cassette, there is increased drivetrain noise, and presumably increased wear. I'd rather have had a 2x10.

LadyMuMu

I've joined your ranks with my FX 3 in the garage. Thanks to all who have posted here. I wasn't originally thinking of a Trek for my next bike, but after a test ride and reading this site, I had a lot more confidence in my choice.

I know I'm still in the honeymoon phase, but, holy buckets, is this bike zippy!

Daveshark

Newbie on this forum, but have been mtn biking and road biking for ~40 years.

I have been taking a good long look at the Trek FX Sport 5 and 6. Have read a lot of good comments on here.... generally positive, I think. Except for the tires (GR1 team issue) which received rather poor testing results at the bicycle rolling resistance site.

A few observations / concerns:

1. As the FX Sport line-up has evolved over the years, it now seems to be more gravel-oriented. I'm generally OK with this. I was originally thinking more of a flat-bar road bike, but some of the roads around my area are really not good in terms of the road surface. Also, due to traffic, it is sometimes better to pop up onto the sidewalk. And, I may want to ride some dirt / gravel roads. If it was anything more "off-road" than that then I would ride my Trek Superfly mtn bike w/ full suspension anyway.

2. Regarding the tires, these can obviously be replaced with something better, either for a more road-oriented (and faster) set-up, or a better overall gravel set-up. It's a pity that the Bontrager tires are not any better, despite the "team issue" designation. I've had good experience with Bontrager tires on my mtn bike.

3. I was initially looking at the FX Sport 5, as I didn't think the carbon wheels on the FX S 6 would be worth the added cost. However, more recently, I've learned that Trek / Bontrager has a good warranty on the wheels. Anyone have any direct experience on repairing or replacing the carbon wheels ?

4. Both my road bike and mtn bike are set up with a 2x10 drive train. It seems that a lot of mtn bikes are going to 1x set-ups. The 1x11 on the FX S 5 or 6 seems ok, as I don't plan on racing. Would be interested to hear any opinions pro or con....

Thanks,
Dave

Barry2 

Welcome to Bike Forums.
Wife has a carbon FX4 that uses Thru Axels, This allowed me to install any replacement wheel I wanted.
I had a set of Reserve Carbon wheels sitting unused and installed those with GP5000 S TR tires.
Wife was amazed at the difference.

Now the FX series no longer uses industry standard Thru Axels, I believe wheel choice will be more limited.

Barry

DorkDisk

Thru skew uses conventional 100/135 QR hubs, and isn't a true thru axle.

raymellott

If I understand things right, that 'isozone' bar has some filling in it that might dampen some vibration... I'm a bit skeptical, think it's a gimmick, and I'd have no problem, if it were me, replacing or modifying it if it isn't doing what I want it to do. What kind of riding are you doing with your FX? Are you on pavement or on trails? Because what whatever cockpit mods you'd make would depend on just that. I don't ride in the dirt, or gravel. I ride on pavement; and if that is you, and if you want to improve your speed, the best thing you can do is get your arms out of the wind. And, you do that by cutting the handlebars down (my bars are cut down to a total width of about 430mm), moving your shifters in as far as you like. You can also extend the stem and slam it as far down as you are comfortable with; in order to reduce your torso's angle. The race lite bar you refer to is slightly swept but doesn't have a rise to it. Which of course, also would, all other things being equal, also reduce your torso's angle. That said, cutting the bar down will result in your bike being a bit 'twitchier'... meaning that small moves with your hands on the bar makes a larger change than if the bar were longer.. You'd want that longer bar if you were riding on a twistie trail in the dirt and all that Hope this helps.

Daveshark

Yeah, I was wondering about that....

It's a quick release hub, but then they use a skewer which requires a 5mm hex to remove/install the front wheel....

Why not use a thru-axle with a quick release lever ? That's what is on my Trek mtn bike.

Barry2 

Oh I think you already know the answer to that question.
Proprietary parts mean limited sources to BUY from.

Barry

Daveshark

Yeah, I get that.... But this isn't really a super expensive part....... a replacement thru-skewer is $7.99 on the Trek website.

I would be happy to pay a bit more for a thru-axle with a lever. I regularly remove the front wheel of my 29-er mtn bike to carry the bike in my short-bed pickup (front fork attached to a mount with the thru-axle).

A friend told me that most gravel bikes are using the skewer set up.... not sure.

Dave

Barry2 

Daveshark
It's not the skewer.... it's the wheel.

Barry

DorkDisk

Because thru axles cost more?

Thru-skew solves a few issues for the manufacturer while keeping the engineering bills low.

Issues like proper wheel installation and disk brake alignment are resolved with a few frame bits without resorting to pricier thru axle systems.

As it uses standard 100/135 QR hubs and a modified skewer, it's cheap to implement.

Daveshark

Thanks DorkDisk, that is helpful info.

I rode an FX Sport 6 yesterday (size large) at the local shop. Fast and light. Not sure I like the handlebar ends, but they may be OK. If I bought it, I might put on a slightly wider handlebar.

Also, the brakes weren't as "strong" as I expected. Maybe they were not broken-in / seated. I really like the Deore XT on my mtn. bike (w/ metallic pads). According to the specs, the brakes on the FX S 6 are for resin-pads only. Not sure how much of a difference that makes.

Barry2 

The Resin Only limitation may be due to the disc itself and not the caliper.

Barry

t2p

the resin only limitation does refer to the rotor - but with a Shimano brake system the pads and caliper are matched to the rotor … a resin pad only type rotor (with very few exceptions) is typically a ‘wide track’ rotor - as opposed to the higher end Shimano brake systems that accept resin and metal pads and use a ‘narrow track’ rotor

Daveshark

Yeah, I was curious about that. The Shimano site says the UR300 caliper is “resin-pad only”. The page for the rotor does not mention pads at all.

For some reason, the UR300 rotor shows up on the Shimano Europe site but not the US site…..??

I’ve read through the other thread on here where the OP swapped out the brakes and several other items on the bike. Not sure I would go that far, but maybe that’s a good option. Or buy the frame set and then build it up.

D