I suspect that the truly educated first response to this question is to ride all three and see which one fits the best (I have been reading this forum for too long). Myself, I would go with the Kestrel. I have riden the KM40 in several races although I do not own one (I do own a Talon and love it). It is a truly comfortable bike with a proven frame. Can't talk for the Softride of the Trek. But if I went tomorrow to buy a not Kestrel bike, I would look at the Softride before the Trek. My two cents.

Daniel

"Our bodies are our gardens - our wills are our gardeners" -William Shakespeare

Intended purpose would have a lot do with decision. Fit would follow close behind. If its going to be a tri-bike and you've got reasonable flexability and reasonably proportioned I don't see the 5200 in the picture unless you want a very slack ST angle -- just repeating what you might find on this site with a search...try DE's articel on tri-bike fit. I had a 5200 converted it to relatively steep angled bike for awhile, sold it and now I'm on a SR R1. It's heavier than a Rocket, 3lbs?, but durability of the beam-frame is not an issue. KM-40 two sizes....its got to fit. Nice dilemma to have.

I have been riding a Trek 5200 (2001 Model) for the last 1.5 years and it is a fantistic ROAD bike...I converted it to a forward position bike for a while, but the ride of the bike dramaticaly changed. I lost all the great road handling of the bike, being so far forward. Couldn't really get a good TT or Tri position...So, I just moved to a Felt S22 Tri bike. Haven't raced on it yet, but first experiments tell me I'm going to be faster on the bike and faster on the run afterwards...Mainly because the bike geometry is designed for TT'ing. Hope that helps.

You're comparing apples to oranges to bananas.

What are you trying to achieve with these bikes? The 5900 is a road bike, the KM40 is a couple of sizes fits some frame, and the Rocket TT is a hard-to-set-up bike that will fit many with proper installation and adjustment of the beam.

I prefer the traditional beam as it is much more mechanically simple. I rode a 5900 for quite a few years. I have never ridden the KM40.

Decide what you want to achieve, get fit, then make your decision.

Boy, you really pickeds three different bikes. Right after fit, or maybe before, riding purpose should come into play. Where are you going to ride it? The 5200 will be very light and nimble for climbing and technical courses, but less aero. The KM40 will be more aero and more comfortable in the aero position than the 5200, but it will way a little more and you'll lose a little bit of climbing or out of aerobar handling. The Softride will be the most aero and the most comfortable of any of them, but it willl weigh considerably more. I would strongly discourage it if you ride and train on serious hills or mountains. I hope this helps.

-

---

I don't work here, I just live here

The Softride is ANY bike - and will do damn near anything. Want a Tri ride? Slide that seat down the bean and raise it up...touring bike? Slide that seat up the beam and fix the height. Want a 55cm? 55.1? 55.2? 55.3? 55.4? not a problem. Want to let your buddy who really rides a 59cm to try out your bike? Not a problem...



The Softride is hands down the most versitile bike on the market today. It is quite simple to size up and fit properly (if you know what you are doing). And I think that the way the Softride guys made the adjustment is just short of brilliant.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Don't let the weight argument scare you off a softride. It is the most comfy TT bike I have ever owned. It is fast even on hilly courses. I've ridden past many a person on lighter TT bikes going up hill. I have no problem outsplitting people on my 22.5 lb softride. In fact I bought a second one to replace my 9 yr old qualifier. You won't find a faster, more comfy, more adjustable TT bike than a softride.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta