on a bike of that level, a full 105 group isn't going to save you much $$ over mechanical Ultegra, so you might as well go for Ultegra. Where the 105 groups save cash over the ultegra is often by downspeccing other parts, like brakes, cranksets, BB's, cassettes, and the like.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

This is 100% pricing and product strategy. Trek positions the Project One (and the Speed Concept in general) as a premium offering and therefore offers it only at higher price points. They are intentionally electing not to compete at the ~$3K price point associated with 105 bikes.

IMHO, based on my product pricing and strategy experience, this is a mistake. They are essentially giving up the entire new entry marketplace to brands like Felt, Cervelo, Specialized, Giant, etc. But hey, I am not in the product manager's office, so this could be minting money for them.

Thank you for your response & I fully concur (as well as to JasoninHalifax's comment). I've been brand-loyal to Trek to my entire adult life. I'm now starting to think that they are somehow pricing me out b/c I'm not a tri-snob. I mean, I am, but whatever. Brands like Canyon (who have a 105 option) are looking really attractive right now. How can't my beloved American not compete!? My 2019 Emonda (carbon/Ultegra) is a dream ride. But still at a premium price. Just trying to understand the economics behind all this before I really piss my wife off.

At OEM prices, the difference between Ultegra and 105 is about $100.

On a similar note, I was buying my Trek SC in 2015 and the 7.5 was the exact same aero shaping as the 9.0, just a tiny bit heavier since the 9.0 used a fancier grade of carbon. I worked with my bike shop and got the 7.5 but swapped out the stock 105 or whatever shifting for electronic Ultegra Di2. It ended up costing me less than the 9.0 with plain shifting and I couldn't be happier. My point being to talk to your bike shop and maybe they will swap out parts for you when it shows up, but you have to have a good relationship with them already.

In general, bike companies play to consumer perception and demand. If you spec a Dura Ace rear derailleur, but cheap out on the cranks and brakes, you can still say that you are selling a "Dura Ace" bike. Even though a full 105 bike with 105 cranks and direct-mount 105 brakes would actually perform better.

I'm sure the lack of 105 builds also comes down to consumer pull and the bike companies' weighing of inventory risk. Triathlon is a sport for the affluent, and they probably think it's a waste of time to offer lower cost builds. Especially with something like Project One - that's their uber-super high-end program, with bikes often in the range of $10k, $15k, or more. They probably get near zero requests for 105 on those bikes.

There has always been a lack of lower-cost tri bikes, which I agree is a problem, but the reason for this HAS to be economic. If manufacturers could make money selling them, they would.

My personal bike has full 105. It's awesome.

I would not throw the baby out because no 105... you are their target market: a brand loyal consumer who will buy and use the bike because of its performance. If you will own this for a long time like you have your Equinox, then the value of Ultegra over 105 is material. I started with 105 on my TT bike and upgraded to Ultegra mechanical after 18 months of moderate use (5,000 miles/year). Ultegra shifts better than 105 and does not seem to degrade with wear like 105.

Interesting... no price difference between Dura Ace and Ultegra di2. Hmmmmm, this could be a winner after all.

That's an interesting conclusion to reach, based on one manufacturer having a very limited product offering. Cervelo, for example has everything from 105 to DA Di2 and price ranges from $2,900 to $12K+ covered. The only conclusion I'd draw here is that Trek realizes that they're getting their lunch eaten in the tri bike market and can't be bothered to offer a competitive product.

Maybe buy the frame and assemble it as you desire? I personally prefer a 105 front brake, dura ace rear brake, Ultegra RD and Ultegra Cranks. This way I have all my basis covered.

Or perhaps as someone suggested, the reverse, i.e., Trek knows it has a loyal following who are will to pay big Project One bucks. This also might aid the company in utilizing the just-in-time inventory system.

Unless planning on using used/already owned components, it's always way more expensive to assemble a bike as we don't have the bike manufacturers' economies of scale component purchasing power.

That doesn't explain why they haven't updated that frame in 7 years. The Kona bike count speaks volumes.

what do they need to update?

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

You and I could debate endlessly whether these are worthwhile changes, but it's pretty clear that integrated front ends, room for wider tires and disc brakes are where the market is going. There's a valid argument to be made that the bike is still plenty fast and that those changes won't make it faster, but sales number don't lie - people want what people want. There's also the consumer "need" for the latest and greatest, and when Trek's latest and greatest is 7 years old and I can find it on eBay for 20% of new, why would I ever buy a new one? This is all great for folks that like the Speed Concept. It's a great bike and it's relatively cheap. My comments are solely directed at the OP's comment that this is somehow indicative that the tri gear market is dying, when in fact it's merely indicative of Trek not seeing the tri market as a segment it wants to invest resources in.

It looks like Trek has solidly held the #2 spot at Kona since they took it in 2011, and their count did not drop substantially over the past few years like Cervelo's did. I agree that they are probably overdue for a disc brake frame update to follow the market, but it also looks like their Knoa representation is stable. Now Specialized should be a little worried-- their new Shiv didn't seem to help as they fell from 3rd to 4th.

Yep...

Since the brakes are proprietary, and there's only one mechanical shifter option from Shimano (Dura Ace), the differences would be confined to derailleurs, chain, crank, and cassette. At full retail, the difference between Ultegra and 105 of those specific components is $207. At this level of bike, virtually nobody's walking away over not being able to save ~$200 by down-spec'ing the drivetrain. Furthermore, Project 1 is a $500 option before you start swapping in any components. So a 105-optioned Project 1 would theoretically still be ~$300 more than the "base" model with Ultegra.

---

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"

TT bikes aren’t a huge market and we’ve achieved peak aero. What’s left? Storage integration is getting better. Trek kicked things off nicely with the draft box, Specialized integrated hydration. The recent folding base bars are pretty great for travel. The one area nobody has touched yet is comfort. IMO integrating some form of suspension is the next frontier for TT bikes.

Granted, Kona does not represent the entire market, but it is an interesting snapshot...If Cervelo's new lineup causes a jump like it did in 2014. And if Felt & Canyon continue their growth trends (and if Trek does an update), in 2 or 3 years, Specialized will be screwed and sitting far down in 5th place alongside the mongrel masses of BMC, QR, and Ar18.

Agreed. I was just riding around on a new Orbea Alma hardtail mountain bike and the amount of "virtual suspension" they can put in frames is amazing. Looking forward to a more plush ride in the future.

So do you think the Kona bike count truly reflects which bikes are the best or is it a better reflection of marketing success and herd mentality among triathletes? Do you recommend that people avoid the "dog" bikes simply because they don't have a popular following?

That is quite a flex from the context of this branch. I opened with "Kona does not represent the entire market," and the context was marketing and product management effectiveness.

Buy what makes you happiest.