Official Trek FX Thread
#751
Full Member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 289
Bikes: 2013 Trek 4.7 Flatbar Madone, 2018 Giant Roam 2
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
New here, but I've spent quite a few hours reading through the threads on this forum. I thought I was just going to buy a bike, but I have quickly discovered what a science this is. I had hoped to get a bike under $300 (and I am still looking for used ones), but if I do step up, one of the bikes I'm looking at is the Trex FX line.
For now, I ride about 25-30 miles a week on an 2004 Trek Navigator 100. Comfortable ride and great for the unpaved canal path trails, but I need more speed. I'm almost exclusively riding on paved country roads (of varying quality), but we live in a hilly area (only a few miles to the Appalachian Trail).
So, in my budget I'm looking at the FX at ~$355 or the FX 1 at ~$440. I've studied enough to know that there are all sorts of differences between Shimano Tourney or Altus and the different frames, etc. However, I'm not seeing $85 difference between the FX and FX 1 other than the rear derailleur and (maybe?) the rims. What advice do you all have on whether the FX 1 is worth the extra cost? Thanks!
For now, I ride about 25-30 miles a week on an 2004 Trek Navigator 100. Comfortable ride and great for the unpaved canal path trails, but I need more speed. I'm almost exclusively riding on paved country roads (of varying quality), but we live in a hilly area (only a few miles to the Appalachian Trail).
So, in my budget I'm looking at the FX at ~$355 or the FX 1 at ~$440. I've studied enough to know that there are all sorts of differences between Shimano Tourney or Altus and the different frames, etc. However, I'm not seeing $85 difference between the FX and FX 1 other than the rear derailleur and (maybe?) the rims. What advice do you all have on whether the FX 1 is worth the extra cost? Thanks!
- double walled alloy rims
- shimano altus rear derailleur
- alloy stem
The quil stem on the base FX limits adjustability of the handlebar's height/reach compared to regular threadless stems. Current prices on the Trek website show a $60 difference between the two bikes. I would get the FX 1.
Last edited by finch204; 11-02-16 at 02:52 PM.
#752
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39
Bikes: 2005 Trek Navigator 100, 2016 Trek FX 7.3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The FX 1 has:
- double walled alloy rims
- shimano altus rear derailleur
- alloy stem
The quil stem on the base FX limits adjustability of the handlebar's height/reach compared to regular threadless stems. Current prices on the Trek website show a $60 difference between the two bikes. I would get the FX 1.
- double walled alloy rims
- shimano altus rear derailleur
- alloy stem
The quil stem on the base FX limits adjustability of the handlebar's height/reach compared to regular threadless stems. Current prices on the Trek website show a $60 difference between the two bikes. I would get the FX 1.
I was aware of the derailleur difference, but I wasn't sure about the rims. Do I gather correctly that the double walled alloy rims are preferred for stability and durability.
I had not understood about the stem systems at all, so that's helpful to know. I suppose it would depend if I found the FX stem comfortable, but you note that the FX 1 allows for much greater adjustments. That could be important.
Thanks again!
#753
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Vacaville, CA
Posts: 947
Bikes: 2011 Trek FX 7.3 | 2015 Trek FX 7.4 | Lotus Classique
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked 22 Times
in
16 Posts
Not to turn this into a road bike thread, but since you mentioned it, how did you find the comparison between the emonda and the domane? I've read some people commenting that the emonda is surprisingly smooth. My LBS seems to have more emonda inventory. It gets tempting to see the discounts, but those 23s seem awfully narrow for a Clyde like me
I got an amazing deal on the emonda (main reason why i went emonda over domane) but haven't really put a lot of miles on it yet. From the 5-6 mile ride I did when i first got it, the bike is absolutely silent when riding and it is fairly smooth thanks to the carbon frame+fork. My only beef with the emonda is that i haven't owned a road bike in years and prefer the upright positioning of my fx. On the emonda, I have to really dial in the fit. I flipped the stem and that helped but something doesnt feel right... as of right now, I don't think i would be able to ride this thing 30 miles like i can my fx 7.4... my fx is a 22.5" size and the emonda is a 60 which is similar so i am sure it's just a matter of positioning the seat/drop bars just right... i also think that my gut from the added weight adds to the discomfort of riding on drop bars... lol
I agree with you on the 23s... I am 220lbs now and find that 25c is the sweet spot! i have 25c on my 7.4 fx and the bike flies now. i will most likely put on 25's on the emonda at the end of winter/before the spring. i am on a health kick now (trying to walk 15 miles a week and eat right) and my goal is to get back to my prewedding weight of 180lbs from 220 which i am currently. i bought the emonda as motivation. yes, i know, im a little crazy
lastly, the emonda was a couple thousand dollars less than the domane i wanted ( https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/bi.../1450000-2017/ )... maybe if i maintain good health, i will get one of them for my 45th birthday a few years away
Last edited by sh00k; 11-03-16 at 07:07 AM.
#754
Full Member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 289
Bikes: 2013 Trek 4.7 Flatbar Madone, 2018 Giant Roam 2
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
That was a fast response! Thank you.
I was aware of the derailleur difference, but I wasn't sure about the rims. Do I gather correctly that the double walled alloy rims are preferred for stability and durability.
I had not understood about the stem systems at all, so that's helpful to know. I suppose it would depend if I found the FX stem comfortable, but you note that the FX 1 allows for much greater adjustments. That could be important.
Thanks again!
I was aware of the derailleur difference, but I wasn't sure about the rims. Do I gather correctly that the double walled alloy rims are preferred for stability and durability.
I had not understood about the stem systems at all, so that's helpful to know. I suppose it would depend if I found the FX stem comfortable, but you note that the FX 1 allows for much greater adjustments. That could be important.
Thanks again!
If you try the FX and like how the bike fits you, you don't really need to adjust anything as far as bike fit is concerned, and so having a quil stem should be fine. I would ask the salesperson at your LBS to show you the difference between a quil stem and threadless stem, just so you can understand your options better before buying.
#755
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39
Bikes: 2005 Trek Navigator 100, 2016 Trek FX 7.3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Double walled alloys rims are stronger and will hold up better especially on rough roads.
If you try the FX and like how the bike fits you, you don't really need to adjust anything as far as bike fit is concerned, and so having a quil stem should be fine. I would ask the salesperson at your LBS to show you the difference between a quil stem and threadless stem, just so you can understand your options better before buying.
If you try the FX and like how the bike fits you, you don't really need to adjust anything as far as bike fit is concerned, and so having a quil stem should be fine. I would ask the salesperson at your LBS to show you the difference between a quil stem and threadless stem, just so you can understand your options better before buying.
#756
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
So... I am a new cyclist, and just got my first bike in 15 years. I ordered a Trek Fx3 from my LBS, (After months of research). First ride was yesterday and it is much faster than I remember bikes being! Only problem is my butt really hurts.
#757
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Vacaville, CA
Posts: 947
Bikes: 2011 Trek FX 7.3 | 2015 Trek FX 7.4 | Lotus Classique
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked 22 Times
in
16 Posts
Hope this helps.
#758
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Posts: 29,549
Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r, Marin Muirwoods 29er, Trek FX Alpha 7.0
Mentioned: 112 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5224 Post(s)
Liked 3,581 Times
in
2,342 Posts
oops bought a bike. it's an older 7.0 & kinda big but I got it for a steal. I clear the top tube but not by 2 fingers. the shifters are nice & snappy. based on what the original owner told me this bike has less than 500 miles on it. no rust anywhere & tires look new except for some dust
Last edited by rumrunn6; 11-06-16 at 03:55 PM.
#759
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
I actually never got to test ride a domane but i want to hopefully this month... My old fx 7.7 had the isozone monostay which is similar to function of the domane's decoiupler(s) which is why i want a domane! my only requirements for a road bike were 1) entirely carbon frame and 2) ultegra or higher components. i had a full 105 group on my fx 7.7 and i loved how it felt while shifting.
I got an amazing deal on the emonda (main reason why i went emonda over domane) but haven't really put a lot of miles on it yet. From the 5-6 mile ride I did when i first got it, the bike is absolutely silent when riding and it is fairly smooth thanks to the carbon frame+fork. My only beef with the emonda is that i haven't owned a road bike in years and prefer the upright positioning of my fx. On the emonda, I have to really dial in the fit. I flipped the stem and that helped but something doesnt feel right... as of right now, I don't think i would be able to ride this thing 30 miles like i can my fx 7.4... my fx is a 22.5" size and the emonda is a 60 which is similar so i am sure it's just a matter of positioning the seat/drop bars just right... i also think that my gut from the added weight adds to the discomfort of riding on drop bars... lol
I agree with you on the 23s... I am 220lbs now and find that 25c is the sweet spot! i have 25c on my 7.4 fx and the bike flies now. i will most likely put on 25's on the emonda at the end of winter/before the spring. i am on a health kick now (trying to walk 15 miles a week and eat right) and my goal is to get back to my prewedding weight of 180lbs from 220 which i am currently. i bought the emonda as motivation. yes, i know, im a little crazy
lastly, the emonda was a couple thousand dollars less than the domane i wanted ( Domane SL 8 | Trek Bikes )... maybe if i maintain good health, i will get one of them for my 45th birthday a few years away
I got an amazing deal on the emonda (main reason why i went emonda over domane) but haven't really put a lot of miles on it yet. From the 5-6 mile ride I did when i first got it, the bike is absolutely silent when riding and it is fairly smooth thanks to the carbon frame+fork. My only beef with the emonda is that i haven't owned a road bike in years and prefer the upright positioning of my fx. On the emonda, I have to really dial in the fit. I flipped the stem and that helped but something doesnt feel right... as of right now, I don't think i would be able to ride this thing 30 miles like i can my fx 7.4... my fx is a 22.5" size and the emonda is a 60 which is similar so i am sure it's just a matter of positioning the seat/drop bars just right... i also think that my gut from the added weight adds to the discomfort of riding on drop bars... lol
I agree with you on the 23s... I am 220lbs now and find that 25c is the sweet spot! i have 25c on my 7.4 fx and the bike flies now. i will most likely put on 25's on the emonda at the end of winter/before the spring. i am on a health kick now (trying to walk 15 miles a week and eat right) and my goal is to get back to my prewedding weight of 180lbs from 220 which i am currently. i bought the emonda as motivation. yes, i know, im a little crazy
lastly, the emonda was a couple thousand dollars less than the domane i wanted ( Domane SL 8 | Trek Bikes )... maybe if i maintain good health, i will get one of them for my 45th birthday a few years away
#760
Senior Rider
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 118
Bikes: 2017 Trek FX 3 Hybrid
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
New here, but I've spent quite a few hours reading through the threads on this forum. I thought I was just going to buy a bike, but I have quickly discovered what a science this is. I had hoped to get a bike under $300 (and I am still looking for used ones), but if I do step up, one of the bikes I'm looking at is the Trex FX line.
For now, I ride about 25-30 miles a week on an 2004 Trek Navigator 100. Comfortable ride and great for the unpaved canal path trails, but I need more speed. I'm almost exclusively riding on paved country roads (of varying quality), but we live in a hilly area (only a few miles to the Appalachian Trail).
So, in my budget I'm looking at the FX at ~$355 or the FX 1 at ~$440. I've studied enough to know that there are all sorts of differences between Shimano Tourney or Altus and the different frames, etc. However, I'm not seeing $85 difference between the FX and FX 1 other than the rear derailleur and (maybe?) the rims. What advice do you all have on whether the FX 1 is worth the extra cost? Thanks!
For now, I ride about 25-30 miles a week on an 2004 Trek Navigator 100. Comfortable ride and great for the unpaved canal path trails, but I need more speed. I'm almost exclusively riding on paved country roads (of varying quality), but we live in a hilly area (only a few miles to the Appalachian Trail).
So, in my budget I'm looking at the FX at ~$355 or the FX 1 at ~$440. I've studied enough to know that there are all sorts of differences between Shimano Tourney or Altus and the different frames, etc. However, I'm not seeing $85 difference between the FX and FX 1 other than the rear derailleur and (maybe?) the rims. What advice do you all have on whether the FX 1 is worth the extra cost? Thanks!
#761
Full Member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 289
Bikes: 2013 Trek 4.7 Flatbar Madone, 2018 Giant Roam 2
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
For what it's worth, I have a 2016 Trek FX 7.1 (15") bike I'm fixing to sell for $325.00. It's about 5 months old and has a new rear tire, 2 spare tubes and a new chain. I keep it well lubed and only ride pavement and concrete. I'm 5'-6", 61 yrs. old so I don't have a high stand-over. According to Trek, I'm at the top height for this bike. I'm fixing to buy a Trek FX 7.3.
#762
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39
Bikes: 2005 Trek Navigator 100, 2016 Trek FX 7.3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
For what it's worth, I have a 2016 Trek FX 7.1 (15") bike I'm fixing to sell for $325.00. It's about 5 months old and has a new rear tire, 2 spare tubes and a new chain. I keep it well lubed and only ride pavement and concrete. I'm 5'-6", 61 yrs. old so I don't have a high stand-over. According to Trek, I'm at the top height for this bike. I'm fixing to buy a Trek FX 7.3.
There are enough improvements from the FX 7.0 to the 7.2 to make it a worthwhile upgrade to me.
#763
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39
Bikes: 2005 Trek Navigator 100, 2016 Trek FX 7.3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm down to the finish on buying a bike. I've decided I like the Trek FX line. Feels good and will serve the kind of riding I anticipate.
The LBS advertised a 2016 FX 7.2 for $450. I've seen online prices in other bike stores for $390, but they won't ship them. So, I was hoping to get it for around $400 or so. Went to the LBS, and the ad was wrong, and they don't have any of them. They do have the 2017 FX 2 that he said he would sell me for $450. Unfortunately, the 2017 FX 2 (< that's the new naming; they dropped the 7. part) is a downgrade in terms of tires and front derailleur (and shifters?). The MRSP for the FX 2 is $519, so I suppose $450 is an okay price... He did have a 2016 FX 7.3 in my size. Last 2016 FX in the store, and the 2017 FX 3 is available. That 2016 lists at $599, and he said he would sell for $540. (The new 2017 FX 3 has jumped to $699, partly because it now has a carbon fork. So, basically Trek downgraded the 7.2 > 2 and raised the price by $20 and upgraded 7.3 > 3 and raised the price by $100.)
Now I had started out with a $300 budget, so I'm already overreaching, but:
2017 FX 2 for $450 or 2016 FX 7.3 for $540?
The LBS advertised a 2016 FX 7.2 for $450. I've seen online prices in other bike stores for $390, but they won't ship them. So, I was hoping to get it for around $400 or so. Went to the LBS, and the ad was wrong, and they don't have any of them. They do have the 2017 FX 2 that he said he would sell me for $450. Unfortunately, the 2017 FX 2 (< that's the new naming; they dropped the 7. part) is a downgrade in terms of tires and front derailleur (and shifters?). The MRSP for the FX 2 is $519, so I suppose $450 is an okay price... He did have a 2016 FX 7.3 in my size. Last 2016 FX in the store, and the 2017 FX 3 is available. That 2016 lists at $599, and he said he would sell for $540. (The new 2017 FX 3 has jumped to $699, partly because it now has a carbon fork. So, basically Trek downgraded the 7.2 > 2 and raised the price by $20 and upgraded 7.3 > 3 and raised the price by $100.)
Now I had started out with a $300 budget, so I'm already overreaching, but:
2017 FX 2 for $450 or 2016 FX 7.3 for $540?
#764
Senior Rider
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 118
Bikes: 2017 Trek FX 3 Hybrid
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I bought the new 2017 Trek FX 3 last Friday and should be in any day now. I got it in white. I bought the better (I hope) Bontrager Trip 300/DuoTrap S Combo computer for an additional $99.99 and will have the bike store put it on. I'm thinking about getting the Bontrager Ion 700 R front light and the Bontrager Flare 1 tail light.
#765
BF's Resident Dumbass
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Posts: 1,566
Bikes: 1990 Raleigh Flyer (size 21"); 2014 Trek 7.6 FX (size 15"); 2014 Trek 7.6 FX (size 17.5"); 2019 Dahon Mu D9; 2020 Dahon Hemingway D9
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 792 Post(s)
Liked 1,494 Times
in
496 Posts
Take the 7.3. I have one that I picked up after having tried several 2016s and 2017s, both lower- and higher-level, so trust me when I tell you that you'll thank yourself soon enough.
#766
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39
Bikes: 2005 Trek Navigator 100, 2016 Trek FX 7.3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I ended up getting the 2016 FX 7.3. Went for a quick 8 mile spin and averaged 1.2mph faster than I ever did with my old Trek Navigator 100.
Something's funky w/ the bike though... Some clicking sound in the rear wheel. It's not the brakes. It speeds up/down in relation to wheel speed, but it happens whether I'm pedaling or coasting. It only happens when I'm actually riding it, so somehow weight is a factor. (It doesn't make the sound when just spinning the wheel.) A friend who knows about bikes couldn't figure it out either. Back to the shop, I guess...
Something's funky w/ the bike though... Some clicking sound in the rear wheel. It's not the brakes. It speeds up/down in relation to wheel speed, but it happens whether I'm pedaling or coasting. It only happens when I'm actually riding it, so somehow weight is a factor. (It doesn't make the sound when just spinning the wheel.) A friend who knows about bikes couldn't figure it out either. Back to the shop, I guess...
#767
BF's Resident Dumbass
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Posts: 1,566
Bikes: 1990 Raleigh Flyer (size 21"); 2014 Trek 7.6 FX (size 15"); 2014 Trek 7.6 FX (size 17.5"); 2019 Dahon Mu D9; 2020 Dahon Hemingway D9
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 792 Post(s)
Liked 1,494 Times
in
496 Posts
Had that happen on the front wheel of my Dahon Speed D8 soon after I bought it; showed up only while I was on the bike and only when turning right. Turned out to be a pair of spokes have gone loose as the rim settled into shape as I rode. A quarter of a turn on each of their nipples and Bob was my uncle. Give it a couple of days more and check for loose spokes.
#768
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39
Bikes: 2005 Trek Navigator 100, 2016 Trek FX 7.3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Had that happen on the front wheel of my Dahon Speed D8 soon after I bought it; showed up only while I was on the bike and only when turning right. Turned out to be a pair of spokes have gone loose as the rim settled into shape as I rode. A quarter of a turn on each of their nipples and Bob was my uncle. Give it a couple of days more and check for loose spokes.
#769
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39
Bikes: 2005 Trek Navigator 100, 2016 Trek FX 7.3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Report #2 w/ my new Trek FX 7.3:
Yes, it seems that a few spokes are loose. I'll bring it back to the shop next week.
Did a 7 mile loop on the 7.3 that I did 3 days ago with the old Trek Navigator 100. I was interested to see what kind of improvement the new bike provides. Not much wind either day, about 630' of elevation gain.
With the Navigator, I averaged 12.4 mph and hit a top speed of 33.5 mph. (I think the fastest I've ever gotten on this bike is 35.1 mph.)
With the FX 7.3, I averaged 14.1 mph and hit a top speed of 35.9 mph.
The FX 7.3 is certainly more nimble and feels like it has lots more zip!
Yes, it seems that a few spokes are loose. I'll bring it back to the shop next week.
Did a 7 mile loop on the 7.3 that I did 3 days ago with the old Trek Navigator 100. I was interested to see what kind of improvement the new bike provides. Not much wind either day, about 630' of elevation gain.
With the Navigator, I averaged 12.4 mph and hit a top speed of 33.5 mph. (I think the fastest I've ever gotten on this bike is 35.1 mph.)
With the FX 7.3, I averaged 14.1 mph and hit a top speed of 35.9 mph.
The FX 7.3 is certainly more nimble and feels like it has lots more zip!
#770
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Vacaville, CA
Posts: 947
Bikes: 2011 Trek FX 7.3 | 2015 Trek FX 7.4 | Lotus Classique
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked 22 Times
in
16 Posts
Report #2 w/ my new Trek FX 7.3:
Yes, it seems that a few spokes are loose. I'll bring it back to the shop next week.
Did a 7 mile loop on the 7.3 that I did 3 days ago with the old Trek Navigator 100. I was interested to see what kind of improvement the new bike provides. Not much wind either day, about 630' of elevation gain.
With the Navigator, I averaged 12.4 mph and hit a top speed of 33.5 mph. (I think the fastest I've ever gotten on this bike is 35.1 mph.)
With the FX 7.3, I averaged 14.1 mph and hit a top speed of 35.9 mph.
The FX 7.3 is certainly more nimble and feels like it has lots more zip!
Yes, it seems that a few spokes are loose. I'll bring it back to the shop next week.
Did a 7 mile loop on the 7.3 that I did 3 days ago with the old Trek Navigator 100. I was interested to see what kind of improvement the new bike provides. Not much wind either day, about 630' of elevation gain.
With the Navigator, I averaged 12.4 mph and hit a top speed of 33.5 mph. (I think the fastest I've ever gotten on this bike is 35.1 mph.)
With the FX 7.3, I averaged 14.1 mph and hit a top speed of 35.9 mph.
The FX 7.3 is certainly more nimble and feels like it has lots more zip!
#771
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: NY, NY
Posts: 245
Bikes: Dahon Speed P16 (Upgraded P8)/ 2014 Dahon Vybe c7a / 2015 Trek 7.2fx / 26" Schwinn Ranger
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Did my first Century on my 2016 Trek 7.2fx, alterations include changing the stock triple crank to a Tiagra 50/34 crank and the handlebar grips to Ergon grips (Without the bar ends, not sure what exact model). Only complain that I have is, even with some cheap amazon padded gloves my hands went numb from road vibrations (bumpy paved trail). Thighs are a little bit sore 2 days after but it is still tolerable. Maybe I'll invest with a better pair of padded gloves and grips with bar ends on them (I like the look better than just having separate bar ends on my bike). Tibett/Putam trail from Bronx - Brewster,NY is 50mile one-way with an elevation gain of about 3,000 feet completed time about 12hours, with a lunch break and flat brakes for one of our riders constantly pumping his tire every 5 or so miles.
#772
Senior Rider
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 118
Bikes: 2017 Trek FX 3 Hybrid
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Just got my new 2017 FX 3 and it's great, I got the best Bontrager computer (wireless) and the best Bontrager headlight (800 lumens) and the store's best tail light (65 lumens) The headlight is absolutely unbelievable. I average about 1 to 1-1/2 mph faster than the FX 7.1. This bike has the new lightweight aluminum frame and carbon fork. It's about 3 lbs. lighter that the 7.1 bike.
#773
Banned.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Vegemite Island
Posts: 4,130
Bikes: 2017 Surly Troll with XT Drive Train, 2017 Merida Big Nine XT Edition, 2016 Giant Toughroad SLR 2, 1995 Trek 830
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1916 Post(s)
Liked 310 Times
in
218 Posts
Just got my new 2017 FX 3 and it's great, I got the best Bontrager computer (wireless) and the best Bontrager headlight (800 lumens) and the store's best tail light (65 lumens) The headlight is absolutely unbelievable. I average about 1 to 1-1/2 mph faster than the FX 7.1. This bike has the new lightweight aluminum frame and carbon fork. It's about 3 lbs. lighter that the 7.1 bike.
#774
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 57
Bikes: 80/90's Specialized Crossroads (3), '91 Miyata Triplecross, '91 Bianchi Boardwalk, 2002 Schwinn Frontier, 2002 Gary Fisher Tarpon, 2009 Trek FX 7.2, 2014 Motobecane 400 HT
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Quill stems are easier to raise and lower than threadless. To adjust reach, both styles have to be replaced.
#775
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 57
Bikes: 80/90's Specialized Crossroads (3), '91 Miyata Triplecross, '91 Bianchi Boardwalk, 2002 Schwinn Frontier, 2002 Gary Fisher Tarpon, 2009 Trek FX 7.2, 2014 Motobecane 400 HT
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I found the FX2, my first aluminum-framed bike, to be too rigid. My first 20 mile trip rattled my teeth out. But I found comfort once I replaced the grips (Ergon GP2), pedals (wide flats), seat (web spring), and tires (Kenda Kwest 40's).