veganbikes

It is rare but the shop is really cool. Say what you want about the guy he built a very neat bike shop. The shop also sold Cannondale at one point I don't know if they still do. I don't love Trek or Trek stores generally but he had a pretty shop with some cool stuff around and good staff. I haven't been back in years but have been a few times and really neat place but I love bike shops in general so L.A. or not I would probably enjoy it.

bampilot06

BMC as well, And I think one other. I havnt been in there in a month. Will try and go back this week.

bruce19

Other than the adolescent "twisted Knickers" comment, I agree with you. As for my bikes....a GURU Photon, GURU Sidero, Cannondale CAAD 12, and a Canyon Aeroad. Oh, and a Colnago World Cup CX.

Eric F 

Those are the bikes you are currently considering buying? Interesting mix.

bruce19

Nope. They are the ones I already own. I'm not considering buying any more. Although, I've said that before.

Atlas Shrugged

So you start a thread stating why you will never buy a Trek, but you have no plans on buying another bike? This triggers a rehash of issues from almost 20 years ago.

Trakhak

Brand Spotlight: Trek Bicycle Cements Its Position As Most Trusted Bicycle Brand

Eric F 

Hmmm...I'm not seeing where you stated that before. Maybe it was in another thread that I missed. It seems that stating "I'll never buy a Trek" when you don't plan on buying ANY bike is just stomping your feet to get attention.

chaadster

You keep saying that, but it is not true.

They'd been doing anti-doping testing of riders at the TdF since the 1960s. When Lance won in '99 and every subsequent year, doping was illegal and he was using illegal substances. His being stripped of the wins was not a retroactive application of new rules or new morality: he broke the rules as they were each time he won.

As far as what your twisted excuses are apologizing for, I really don't know, but it's something. It could be for Lance, it could be Trek, it could be for some family or friend of yours who was involved, it could be a gnawing sense of resentment knowing people out there might look down on you for riding a Trek even though you spent a lot of money on it...I dunno. What I do know is that whatever you're on about is irrelevant to my position, because I dislike Trek for what they did to Lemond.

bruce19

My comment was to the effect that I never plan to buy a bike. I always think I have too many. Then I end up buying another. So, really, who knows?

70sSanO

Yeah. If some impediment was built 800 years ago the current state of things might look a bit different.

John

Eric F 

The reality was that a large majority of the peloton was doping. It was pretty much considered standard operating procedure at the time, and it's been well documented. Was Lance on something that others weren't? Probably. Anyone believing that everyone else was clean is just willful ignorance, at this point. If you hate Lance for his doping use, that's fine. Personally, I have less issue with that aspect than I do with how he treated those around him during that time (including his influence in the Trek-Lemond situation). That said, during those years, I sure liked watching him race bicycles. I was quite disappointed to find out what an @$$hole he really was.

seypat

I can't get over the speech he made to Peter Le Fleur in Dodgeball. That crossed the line.

chaadster

Man, people can’t help but talk about Lance! Even when we’re not talking about Lance, they still want to talk about Lance. It’s like a homoerotic fetish cult. Maybe that’s another reason I don’t like Trek.

PeteHski

Yeah I agree the doping was almost mandatory in that era and that wasn’t LA’s fault. But his arrogance and conceit was on another level. I guess that was what eventually led to his downfall too. Looking back I would blame the dodgy team owners and their docs for what the sport became. Not the young riders who just did what they thought was necessary.

Eric F 

Not even Lance rides a Trek any more. Look at that. You're just like Lance!

bruce19

I actually don't have some vendetta wish towards Lance because of his cheating. He cheated. He got caught. He was held accountable. I do though despise his actions of reprisal toward people like LeMond, the Andreu's, the team masseuse, the reporter who outed him and many others. He went out to destroy them personally and financially. For that he is scum IMO. But, that wasn't the point of my post. TREK ignored his fraud and went after anyone who threatened their bottom line, regardless of the truth. They did what corporate America does to us every day. When a corporation works against my interests, I do not support them. I posted that LeMond video because it was new to me and offered some additional insights about the incident. Not all corporations are the same. Do you remember when Specialized went after the Roubaix bike shop in Montreal? They sued the local mom and pop bike shop for using "their" Roubaix name. Ignoring, of course, the fact that they "stole" the name from the actual Roubaix town and Paris-Roubaix race. When confronted publicly, the Specialized CEO dropped the suit and apologized. I would have no problem buying a Specialized. But, that's just me. I have no prescription for anyone's behavior. You get to do whatever you think is right. Obviously.

RiceAWay

Also it should be noted that using drugs was totally normal from the start of professional bicycle racing. The only thing that Armstrong did was improve the science so that it wouldn't kill you like it did
Pantani.

Jughed

The problem is, from a business , from Trek’s standpoint, it was a billion dollar business vs speculative words from people.

There were no positive tests, there was no proof.

It was words from a rider completely disconnected from the situation, offering pure speculation. And from general people that had no proof.

I always ask this question- should Trek and Lance just have up and said - yep, they got me?

Was Lance a dick - sure. But there was no way in hell he, or probably anyone in the sport, would have just simply said - yep the masseuse was right, y’all got me.

79pmooney

My gripe with LA is not that he doped but that he was quite willing to go after those who told the truth in court (often successfully), with verbal threats (often by telephone to women; the calls made by others) and other actions. (Anyone remember him chasing down that Italian who had spoken under subpoena and under oath of doping to kill that rider's chance of a stage victory and a pocketful of change.) Calls to Armstrong's wife, LA's masseuse (who he had carry EPO through customs; ie break international law). Discovery/Postal would pass on to UCI that so-and-so was doping (usually a rider who was pushing Lance on the GC at that year's Tour) but conveniently had some insider at UCI call ahead when a drug tester was coming so Lance could get his blood diluted to pass the test. (UCI was also in on this. A couple of times, LA's teammates left that tester outdoors for over a half hour while LA did this work. Automatic doping violation, not test needed unless your name was LA. You had 10 minutes as I recall to open that door and present your rider.)

And above all, LA lied. Not once or twice but for over a decade all the time. To pretend that Trek and other insiders did not know? That what LA told Greg Lemond, his wife and others from his hospital during his cancer never came back to Trek? The Amgen sponsorship and partnership, Amgen being the major producer of EPO and the Postal/Discovery team the most sophisticated used of EPO was coincidence? Was Trek really that naive or blind? (When GL spoke up, I never sensed that Trek said "Huh! Maybe he's on to something. Let's look further." No, it was "Stuff this as fast as possible!"

NumbersGuy

So, the owners of this local bike chain decided to sell to Trek, likely due to the business not being all that profitable to them (you know, the purpose of being in business). They happily taking took the money from Trek and moved on. Perhaps they could have sold to a local and kept i from going corporate, maybe there were no other buyers or Trek offered a much larger sum. You continue to hold them in high esteem.

Trek purchased a chain of bike shops and has shifted the focus to Trek products and not products made by their competition to turn the business into something profitable enough to remain viable moving forward. You hold them in low esteem.

I'm not a big fan of Trek's approach to bike shops, but I'd rather there be a Trek bike store than no bike store at all. Trek and Specialized aren't forcing these independent shop owners out. The owners are struggling and looking for a way out of the business. They're happy to get paid for their business by the big evil corporations but get presented as victims by the cycling population.

The shareholders of big corporations (including all of us with any sort of retirement or investment accounts) demand increased revenue and profits so the value of our shares increase and we get more dividends so we can retire sooner, buy more things, etc. This causes the big corporate bike brands to transition the stores they buy to focus on selling their goods so they can meet those demands.

Why is it that nearly nobody acknowledges that we the citizens are demanding conflicting things for our own benefits. Corporate greed is just another variation on the individual greed that permeates our society. We want it all and want someone or everyone else to be willing to give up something so that we can have more of what we want.

End of rant...

Koyote

These shops will only work on Trek bikes? No other brand? And they only stock proprietary parts labelled "Trek" and "Bontrager"?

Mojo31

There is one by me, and they don't.

I've had them work on my Specialized bike, and there was no reluctance.

79pmooney

My last several visits I have gone out empty handed. Each time REI has what I needed. REI had a mechanic who understood what I was looking for, knew where the box of those parts was, brought it out and I picked out exactly what I needed. The Trek showroom? "We got rid of all that stuff."

genejockey 

What, never?
No,never!
What, NEVER?
Well...hardly ever!
He's ll hardly ever sick at sea buy a Trek!

I can't GUARANTEE I'll never buy a Trek, but I don't think it's likely. Nothing against the company, I just don't have room!