What's the going opinion on the Trek Y-Foil?
#26
Senior Member
Thread Starter
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.
#27
Serious Cyclist
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
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.
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.
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,302
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8287 Post(s)
Liked 9,061 Times
in
4,483 Posts
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.
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.
#29
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Fair enough. I know the wheels on that bike are quite light and that's a large portion of the weight right there.
#30
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,538
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3890 Post(s)
Liked 1,939 Times
in
1,384 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
Results matter
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Australia
Posts: 824
Bikes: 2002 Trek 5200 (US POSTAL), 2020 Canyon Aeroad SL
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 314 Post(s)
Liked 683 Times
in
328 Posts
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!
#32
Senior Member
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.
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).
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.
Likes For HTupolev:
#33
Mother Nature's Son
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Sussex County, Delaware
Posts: 3,118
Bikes: 2014 Orbea Avant MD30, 2004 Airborne Zeppelin TI, 2003 Lemond Poprad, 2001 Lemond Tourmalet, 2014? Soma Smoothie
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 853 Post(s)
Liked 1,437 Times
in
819 Posts
Out of curiosity, I would like to ride one. I have no desire or itch to own one.
#34
OM boy
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,369
Bikes: a bunch
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 517 Post(s)
Liked 646 Times
in
438 Posts
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
#35
serious cyclist
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
Likes For Bah Humbug:
#36
Maricopa404
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.
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.
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: The banks of the River Charles
Posts: 2,029
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: 696 Post(s)
Liked 910 Times
in
487 Posts
Rad piece of 90’s awesomeness.
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3241 Post(s)
Liked 2,512 Times
in
1,510 Posts
I think it's been reborn as the 2023 Madone.
Likes For VegasJen:
#42
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.
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.
Likes For guythatbrews:
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Australia
Posts: 824
Bikes: 2002 Trek 5200 (US POSTAL), 2020 Canyon Aeroad SL
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 314 Post(s)
Liked 683 Times
in
328 Posts
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!
#44
OM boy
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,369
Bikes: a bunch
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 517 Post(s)
Liked 646 Times
in
438 Posts
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!
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!
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.
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'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
#46
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,210
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2762 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,433 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.
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.
#47
Rhapsodic Laviathan
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.
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
Posts: 5,395
Bikes: Too many to list
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1765 Post(s)
Liked 1,124 Times
in
746 Posts
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
#50
Over the hill
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24,376
Bikes: Giant Defy, Giant Revolt
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 998 Post(s)
Liked 1,206 Times
in
692 Posts
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
It's like riding a bicycle