Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

What's the going opinion on the Trek Y-Foil?

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

What's the going opinion on the Trek Y-Foil?

Old 05-23-22, 09:49 AM
  #26  
VegasJen
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Posts: 895
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked 532 Times in 292 Posts
Originally Posted by seypat
You rode it around a parking lot? Wait a minute. Have you already purchased it and this is one of those "Did I get a good deal" threads in disguise?"
Don't read more into it than what I wrote. No, I did not buy the bike. The owner lives in an apartment complex. I rode it there.
Originally Posted by big john
The frame is over 4 pounds. Many modern cf frames are under 2 pounds.
That may be. It's still lighter than my (2006) Roubiax. But in case it hasn't occurred to some people, I'm looking at a 20+ year old bike because it is outside of my means to go and spend $8-10k on a snazzy new CF bike. But if you like throwing around the Benjamins I'm not above accepting donations.
VegasJen is offline  
Old 05-23-22, 10:35 AM
  #27  
Dan333SP
Serious Cyclist
 
Dan333SP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: RVA
Posts: 9,308

Bikes: Emonda SL6

Mentioned: 97 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5721 Post(s)
Liked 261 Times in 99 Posts
Originally Posted by VegasJen
Don't read more into it than what I wrote. No, I did not buy the bike. The owner lives in an apartment complex. I rode it there.

That may be. It's still lighter than my (2006) Roubiax. But in case it hasn't occurred to some people, I'm looking at a 20+ year old bike because it is outside of my means to go and spend $8-10k on a snazzy new CF bike. But if you like throwing around the Benjamins I'm not above accepting donations.
You said you're looking for a bike to use in triathlons and it sounds like you're trying to spend under $1,000, right? You don't have to look at 20 year old bikes to make that work, TT/Tri bikes seem to be a little insulated from the insanity of general used road bike prices. Just poking around some FB groups, I'm seeing things like a Cervelo P3 for $1k in pretty good shape with far newer components, a P2 for $750, etc. No idea what size you're looking at but unless you have a fetish for unusual Treks, you're going to be paying way too much for that thing that will be a compromised solution with parts that may be difficult to replace due to the bike's age.
Dan333SP is offline  
Old 05-23-22, 10:42 AM
  #28  
big john
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,103
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8189 Post(s)
Liked 8,844 Times in 4,392 Posts
Originally Posted by VegasJen
Don't read more into it than what I wrote. No, I did not buy the bike. The owner lives in an apartment complex. I rode it there.

That may be. It's still lighter than my (2006) Roubiax. But in case it hasn't occurred to some people, I'm looking at a 20+ year old bike because it is outside of my means to go and spend $8-10k on a snazzy new CF bike. But if you like throwing around the Benjamins I'm not above accepting donations.
I'm not trying to talk you out of it, nor am I knocking the bike. The frame is not light and your Roubaix frame should be around a pound lighter. This doesn't mean the whole bike isn't lighter than your bike because most of the weight is not in the frame.
big john is online now  
Old 05-23-22, 10:47 AM
  #29  
VegasJen
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Posts: 895
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked 532 Times in 292 Posts
Originally Posted by big john
I'm not trying to talk you out of it, nor am I knocking the bike. The frame is not light and your Roubaix frame should be around a pound lighter. This doesn't mean the whole bike isn't lighter than your bike because most of the weight is not in the frame.
Fair enough. I know the wheels on that bike are quite light and that's a large portion of the weight right there.
VegasJen is offline  
Old 05-23-22, 10:54 AM
  #30  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,501

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3872 Post(s)
Liked 1,920 Times in 1,369 Posts
I've always wanted one ever since I rode near one in an event. I just don't need one, but that's different. It's about the same vintage as a 5200 -5500 which are common and thus cheaper, which probably has nothing to do with anything.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 05-23-22, 10:26 PM
  #31  
tempocyclist
Senior Member
 
tempocyclist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Australia
Posts: 815

Bikes: 2002 Trek 5200 (US POSTAL), 2020 Canyon Aeroad SL

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked 664 Times in 324 Posts
Originally Posted by VegasJen
In what way would you expect it to ride like "garbage"? I rode it very briefly the other day and I was surprised at how compliant it was. Granted, it was just around a very smooth parking lot, but I think the way the seat stem is kind of cantilevered, it absorbs a lot of harshness. Of course, this bike is only slightly older than anything I'm currently on anyway, so there's that.

Probably quite flexy. A lot of those early Treks were (my early 2000's Trek 5200 is certainly not as stiff as my modern bike). Handling from the geometry may not be as polished. Might be sketchy at high speeds. I do not know though as I haven't ridden one, I just wouldn't expect a bike of that era to match that of a modern bike. It may not be bad as such, just, not as good. Then again, it might be bad.

I'd still hands down buy one, just because it looks HOT!
tempocyclist is offline  
Old 05-24-22, 01:40 AM
  #32  
HTupolev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,261
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1971 Post(s)
Liked 1,297 Times in 629 Posts
Originally Posted by VegasJen
I've been shopping for triathlon bikes a lot lately, and I know this isn't one, but it might be a very good compromise with some clamp on aero bars.
You wouldn't be the first person to strap aero bars on them, but they don't have a TT/Tri-oriented geometry. Depending on your required fit, it may be challenging or impossible to get the saddle far enough forward and the aerobars in an ideal position. Even if you achieve an appropriate fit, your weight distribution may feel awkwardly forward because of the bike's relatively short front-center.

Some folks make road-to-TT/Tri conversions work, but unless you have a well-founded plan, I wouldn't go in with high confidence that optimal results will ensue. People often end up just configuring the bike as "road posture but with aerobars"; this is fine for some purposes, but if you're putting together a serious race fit, it tends to leave a good chunk of the aerobars' aerodynamic gains on the table.

Originally Posted by Iride01
Your Roubaix must be from the previous century too if it weighs 22 lbs.
​​​​​The OP said 2006, but I'm not sure that 22lbs would be that strange for even a current Roubaix. I haven't seen published weights for the base model, but the 105-equipped Sport is reported to run a little over 19lbs out of the box. If we're talking about weight as the bicycle sits in someone's garage ready-to-ride, that could easily climb to over 20lbs once we've added pedals, cages, toolkit. Since the base model has Tiagra instead of 105, and comes stock with lower-end wheels and tires, 22lbs doesn't seem like a stretch.

Originally Posted by tempocyclist
Handling from the geometry may not be as polished. Might be sketchy at high speeds. I do not know though as I haven't ridden one, I just wouldn't expect a bike of that era to match that of a modern bike.
According to Trek's catalogs, the Y-Foil road bikes had pretty conventional handling geometry. A 54cm Y-Foil from 1999 has very similar handling geo to a 54cm Emonda today: same head angle with a 2mm difference in fork offset, same chainstay length with a 2mm difference in total wheelbase, and nominally a bottom bracket height difference of a few millimeters.

Heck, these numbers aren't dramatically difference from my 1983 Miyata. Its 73-degree head angle, 45mm fork offset, 74-degree seat angle, and 415mm chainstays would all look pretty normal on a road bicycle launched today; its front-center is a bit longer than the current norm, but not wildly.

The handling geometry of typical performance road bikes hasn't seen major shifts in a very long time.

Probably quite flexy. A lot of those early Treks were (my early 2000's Trek 5200 is certainly not as stiff as my modern bike).
I have no experience riding Y-Foils, but I'd question whether a 5200 is a good predictor of how a Y-Foil will feel. These are very different ways of constructing a frame.

Even if it is flexy, this may or may not be a problem. The notion that stiffness about the bottom bracket correlates perfectly with a frame's pedaling quality is popular, but I'm not sure that my experience supports the simple narrative. For instance, my '79 Fuji feels a lot flexier than my Emonda, but I don't mind because it feels like it rolls with my pedal stroke instead of fighting against it. I've also ridden very stiff bikes that my legs didn't seem to get along with, where my impression was more "kicking a brick wall" than "rocket ship."

Last edited by HTupolev; 05-24-22 at 01:52 AM.
HTupolev is offline  
Likes For HTupolev:
Old 05-24-22, 07:36 AM
  #33  
delbiker1 
Mother Nature's Son
 
delbiker1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Sussex County, Delaware
Posts: 3,111

Bikes: 2014 Orbea Avant MD30, 2004 Airborne Zeppelin TI, 2003 Lemond Poprad, 2001 Lemond Tourmalet, 2014? Soma Smoothie

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked 1,414 Times in 801 Posts
Out of curiosity, I would like to ride one. I have no desire or itch to own one.
delbiker1 is offline  
Old 07-05-22, 03:36 PM
  #34  
cyclezen
OM boy
 
cyclezen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,340

Bikes: a bunch

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 502 Post(s)
Liked 623 Times in 425 Posts
Originally Posted by tempocyclist
Probably rides like garbage compared to any modern bike, but I would buy one in a heartbeat if I could find a good one!!! 😍
what you don;t know, you don't know.
The Trek Y-foil is a very nice bike - rides incredibly well. Exceptional aero (not as aero as a ZIPP...
Weight is a bit more than more current frames - Carbon in the 90's and around Y2K were over built. That along with the science of CF and the layup tech was progressing in great leaps every season or so.
But as this one goes, you have the additional structural stress of the 'Beam' (holding the saddle) AND the unsupported bending moment on the Downtube, stress at the BB, and lever arm of the chainstays to wheels.
So both the Beam and the DT/BB'Chainstays assembly need to be structurally much stiffer than a diamond frame.
AS NOTED: The UCI banned this and any design not using a Diamond Structure - setting back bike advancement beyond all measure.
Reality is IF this restriction wasn;t in place - ALL Current UCI approved TT bikes would quickly become obsolete, because ALL winning bikes would be in this design style.
TRI did not go or follow UCI, a good thing. Allowing design freedom to work.
Of course, UCI being an 800 lb gorilla, bike companies are not gonna design bikes just for TRI, and not be able to be part of the whole traditional TT marketplace.
But if you're doin TRI or just local non-sanctioned TTs, then bring THIS bike.
If you look at new TT bike options, most weigh more than their equivalent priced roadie models, by a lot. Here's a used 2018 BMC Time Machine for $4300 - 19.5 lbs.
Jen - this would be a great TRI bike - only needs TT/bullhorn bars, shifters and brake levers. The Brifters (if you don;t foresee a need for them) would sell easily in ebay for $120 + (assuming they're 9 spd, if they're 10spd, even higher...)
Current Rolf wheels would be great, and you could prolly get a cheap CF seatpost and 'cut it to your size, to eliminate the exposed underhang tube.
For TRI or TT, you won't need more than 9 spd anyway. and with a double chainring, you'll be able to run a small cassette range - saving sig. weight.
If you can get the bike for $1K or less, that would be a good deal - if you really want a TRI/TT bike.
A new era bike with modern CF and layup, like this ZIPP, would be a serious TT machine!

ZIPP 2001 TT / TRI

Ride On
Yuri
cyclezen is offline  
Old 07-05-22, 05:27 PM
  #35  
Bah Humbug
serious cyclist
 
Bah Humbug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Austin
Posts: 21,147

Bikes: S1, R2, P2

Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9334 Post(s)
Liked 3,679 Times in 2,026 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclezen
Of course, UCI being an 800 lb gorilla, bike companies are not gonna design bikes just for TRI, and not be able to be part of the whole traditional TT marketplace.





Last edited by Bah Humbug; 07-05-22 at 05:30 PM.
Bah Humbug is offline  
Likes For Bah Humbug:
Old 07-08-22, 11:03 PM
  #36  
Maricopa404
Maricopa404
 
Join Date: Jul 2022
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
1999 Trek Y-Foil Seventy-Seven

[QUOTE=VegasJen;22515034]I know these are older bikes, but I looked at a Y-Foil 77 today that was literally like new. Ultegra hardware all around. The guy had upgraded to Rolf wheels and the tires still had casting flash on them. As far as the frame, there was one chip in the paint. That's all I found on this bike that's almost 25 years old. I mean seriously, if it weren't for that one chip, this thing could be sold as new. Guy is asking $1200. I wouldn't give that much for it even if I could afford to, but I might consider $800-900. Don't know if he would go that low though.

Pretty radical design, very aggressive angle. Almost seems like what I imagine a triathlon bike to feel like. This frame is maybe a little tall for me but the hip/leg geometry was fine when we lowered the seat a bit. There was still about 2 inches of down travel on the seat tube but it was pretty good right where we stopped. The thing I noticed was how low the bars were, even after dropping the seat. He did have them set at a pretty aggressive angle, but even rotating them up a bit, they're still pretty low.

Last edited by Maricopa404; 09-06-22 at 01:41 PM.
Maricopa404 is offline  
Likes For Maricopa404:
Old 07-09-22, 12:13 AM
  #37  
VegasJen
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Posts: 895
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked 532 Times in 292 Posts
Is that the same bike from Vegas?
VegasJen is offline  
Old 07-09-22, 02:29 AM
  #38  
DonkeyShow
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 195 Post(s)
Liked 234 Times in 141 Posts
Damn somebody else scooped it. Haha amazing thread.
DonkeyShow is offline  
Old 07-09-22, 10:46 AM
  #39  
Ghazmh
Senior Member
 
Ghazmh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: The banks of the River Charles
Posts: 2,020

Bikes: 2022 Salsa Beargrease, 2020 Seven Evergreen, 2019 Honey Allroads Ti, 2018 Seven Redsky XX, 2017 Trek Boon 7, 2014 Trek 520

Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 693 Post(s)
Liked 903 Times in 486 Posts
Rad piece of 90’s awesomeness.
Ghazmh is offline  
Old 07-09-22, 12:18 PM
  #40  
seypat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,755
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3190 Post(s)
Liked 2,460 Times in 1,489 Posts
I think it's been reborn as the 2023 Madone.
seypat is offline  
Old 07-09-22, 04:03 PM
  #41  
VegasJen
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Posts: 895
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked 532 Times in 292 Posts
Glad I could help I guess.
VegasJen is offline  
Likes For VegasJen:
Old 09-01-22, 01:58 PM
  #42  
guythatbrews
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: KC, MO
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
I was goofing around seeing how much my '98 yfoil 66 was worth and found this thread. I'm the only owner of this bike thought I'd add a few things.

Mine is 56cm and it's not the lightest bike out there. With the current junk I've got on ot it weighs 21.7 lbs. It might have been 21 out of the box (with pedals) but not much less.

Although the crankset is 2x9 dura ace the rest is ultegra. As pointed out some parts getting hard to find. I understand the 9 speed brifters are not the best and I've had to replace the right one.

I like the ride. Around here roads are crummy and it evens out the bumps. Hi speed cornering not a problem at all. My gut feeling is the aero part is way better than a double diamond frame. I seem to pull away from those on downhills.

It does get noticed. Folks that aren't into bikes much think it is the brand new hot stuff out there. And for sure it is a love it or hate it thing. But everybody loves the blue iced ink color.

Although I enjoy riding it, all things equal if it was 98 again I'd probably buy a conventional frame bike. Not sure why that is but that's the way I feel.
guythatbrews is offline  
Likes For guythatbrews:
Old 09-01-22, 03:24 PM
  #43  
tempocyclist
Senior Member
 
tempocyclist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Australia
Posts: 815

Bikes: 2002 Trek 5200 (US POSTAL), 2020 Canyon Aeroad SL

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked 664 Times in 324 Posts
Originally Posted by Maricopa404
Yes. Bought it to add to my collection of older bikes. Some knock it while others love it. I just bought it out of curiosity. I think it’s an interesting bike. Amazing how well kept it is considering it is 23 years old. Looks new.
Awesome!

I always keep my eyes peeled for one of these and hopefully one day I'll snag one. So rare in good condition now. That one you got in full original Dura Ace looks amazing!
tempocyclist is offline  
Old 09-01-22, 03:50 PM
  #44  
cyclezen
OM boy
 
cyclezen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,340

Bikes: a bunch

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 502 Post(s)
Liked 623 Times in 425 Posts
Originally Posted by Maricopa404
Yes. Bought it to add to my collection of older bikes. Some knock it while others love it. I just bought it out of curiosity. I think it’s an interesting bike. Amazing how well kept it is considering it is 23 years old. Looks new.
I know you’ll find a more modern tri specific bike that’ll fit your needs which may be lighter and will actually have more water bottle holders than just the one which this Y foil has. Tri bikes have come a long way and tri bikes tend to sell less than their strictly road bike counterparts. Good luck!
Originally Posted by guythatbrews
I was goofing around seeing how much my '98 yfoil 66 was worth and found this thread. I'm the only owner of this bike thought I'd add a few things.
Mine is 56cm and it's not the lightest bike out there. With the current junk I've got on ot it weighs 21.7 lbs. It might have been 21 out of the box (with pedals) but not much less.
Although the crankset is 2x9 dura ace the rest is ultegra. As pointed out some parts getting hard to find. I understand the 9 speed brifters are not the best and I've had to replace the right one.
I like the ride. Around here roads are crummy and it evens out the bumps. Hi speed cornering not a problem at all. My gut feeling is the aero part is way better than a double diamond frame. I seem to pull away from those on downhills.
It does get noticed. Folks that aren't into bikes much think it is the brand new hot stuff out there. And for sure it is a love it or hate it thing. But everybody loves the blue iced ink color.
Although I enjoy riding it, all things equal if it was 98 again I'd probably buy a conventional frame bike. Not sure why that is but that's the way I feel.
I thiink it's an awesome bike, overbuilt, as were most early CF bikes, but awesome.
I'd be all over a 56...
21 ish lbs is not THAT heavy... would be negligible for rolling terrain (is there even such a thing as 'flat' ?). Compared to the Softride frame/bike I had built for me in '93 - at 24.5 lbs... The 'beam' is a solid chunk of CF... LOL!
But for riding on 'heavy' roads - like we have out here - there's nothing like these bikes. Even the latest 'suspension' type designs like 'FutureShock' can't touch these.
You can just motor, full power, over the worst of roads, like belgian block or washboard chip seal.
Awesome bike ! Keep it in good shape...
Ride On
Yuri
Seriously though
cyclezen is offline  
Old 09-01-22, 04:49 PM
  #45  
tempocyclist
Senior Member
 
tempocyclist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Australia
Posts: 815

Bikes: 2002 Trek 5200 (US POSTAL), 2020 Canyon Aeroad SL

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked 664 Times in 324 Posts
Originally Posted by Maricopa404
I do have it listed on EBay for a stupid amount.
I did spy that. 😉 A bit far from me and also not my size unfortunately. 😁
tempocyclist is offline  
Old 09-06-22, 01:30 PM
  #46  
Kapusta
Advanced Slacker
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,187

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt

Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked 2,516 Times in 1,422 Posts
I rode Y-Foil 66 for about 8 years. A family friend practically gave it to me in 2000. In think it was a 1997 model. Threaded headset. Ultegra 9 speed. I think the blue with silver decals/lettering looked really good.

I liked it, though the fit was a little off, so with the high, shortish stem, it lost a bit of its looks.

The seat mast did what it was supposed to do and it was a smooth ride from a butt’s perspective. Fork was not as compliant as some nicer CF forks I’ve tried since. BB and stays seemed stiff under pedaling.

I have read that the fork is on the long side (thus hard to upgrade) because trek had plans to offer a short travel suspension fork with it. I never measured my fork to confirm this.

Ultimately, it was not the type of bike that I wanted (race bike). I wanted something that could take bigger tires, more water bottles, and a rack.

Seemed like a good experiment, but with the UCI banning it from road races, it was doomed.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 09-06-22, 07:53 PM
  #47  
Jax Rhapsody
Rhapsodic Laviathan
 
Jax Rhapsody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 1,003

Bikes: Rideable; 83 Schwinn High Sierra. Two cruiser, bmx bike, one other mtb, three road frames, one citybike.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 222 Post(s)
Liked 123 Times in 91 Posts
Originally Posted by tyrion
The Pacer wasn't designed for performance driving, it was for attracting the babes.


It was an economy car. As far as performance goes; it and the Gremlin were road raced, fitted with AMCs big v8, versus their typical straight six. The Gremlin was essentially a Matador, so it worked.
Jax Rhapsody is offline  
Old 09-07-22, 03:03 PM
  #48  
DMC707
Senior Member
 
DMC707's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
Posts: 5,390

Bikes: Too many to list

Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1764 Post(s)
Liked 1,119 Times in 743 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01
I wish I'd known that when I got my Gremlin back circa the mid 70's.

I must admit -- even though my tastes swing more traditional (my "toy" currently is a '71 big block Super Cheyenne -- and have had Harleys, Corvettes etc etc --- typical over caffeinated ****** bag male stuff)

But i would roll in that machine with pride !

Kinda' funny that things i didnt like in high school are now cool to me when i see a well preserved or restored example
DMC707 is offline  
Old 09-07-22, 03:06 PM
  #49  
DMC707
Senior Member
 
DMC707's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
Posts: 5,390

Bikes: Too many to list

Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1764 Post(s)
Liked 1,119 Times in 743 Posts
Originally Posted by N2deep
Wow, , like seeing a plump goddess in a string bikini, .


Uh -------- yes , and please
DMC707 is offline  
Old 09-08-22, 12:14 AM
  #50  
urbanknight
Over the hill
 
urbanknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24,340

Bikes: Giant Defy, Giant Revolt

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 987 Post(s)
Liked 1,186 Times in 681 Posts
Originally Posted by VegasJen
Fair enough. I know the wheels on that bike are quite light and that's a large portion of the weight right there.
Yes, that probably makes it apples and oranges. A stock Y-Foil lists as just under 19lb while the more standard Trek 5000 series with the same components lists at about 18lb. Those weights were decent for the time.

I'm quite sure you can get a tri bike for around that same cost. Weight wouldn't be my main concern in a triathlon or time trial bike. Get the right geometry (the Y Foil has a more laid back seat tube angle than you'd usually want on a tri bike, for example) and make it as aero as you can. 105 or even Tiagra are fine working components, and there are budget aero wheels out there that work great for a couple hundred grams more.
__________________
It's like riding a bicycle
urbanknight is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.