Okay here’s the deal. Trek releases a new bike that’s super light… but who cares? Why do the get so much attention for having the second lightest bike? I don’t understand? Cervelo released a lighter bike with the RCA lilke 4 years ago. Maybe Trek is just that far behind. It took them for years just to make a new bike… that’s still heavier thanthe RCA . Is anyone else in agreement here? Trek, go big or go home. In this case, just get out.
There are several threads already on this. But the bike is just stupid for trek in my opinion, but whatever. Also the funny part is that their SL frame for a size 52 comes in around 1050 grams, my caad10 in a 52 is the exact same weight. Their SLR has a claimed weight of 690g but others have measured it around 750 which is light but we are talking 100-150g from most other nice bikes out there. That is it. And the frame shape looks exactly like many options from China for 400 bucks.
Thank you! I agree completely. Who knows what they were trying to prove with this. The need to fire their product developer and hire us 
Thank you! I agree completely. Who knows what they were trying to prove with this. The need to fire their product developer and hire us
I will admit that they have sold quite a few of them as i see them now more often than the Madone, though most people riding them appear to be more of the causal type. Light weight sells for the average bike consumer, but i think we are seeing a slow shift among most manufactures between the aero/stiffness/handling balance. Everybody now has a dedicated aero road bike out except for Trek and Cannondale, will be interesting to see what these two companies do the next two years.
Here is a weight weenies thread on the frame http://weightweenies.starbike.com/...hp?f=10&t=126444
Edit: Also i am not saying a light weight frame is not nice, just irrelevant for any UCI rider as they are all at the limit anyways and most non professional racers need to or could loose a few pounds anyways.
Is that an actual weight that you took, because I recall seeing a 54cm caad10 on the scale at 1248g stripped down. It would be weird to have such a variation between such close sizes.
Anyways, the emonda is a weird release. The Madone was so close in weight, more aero, only a little more expensive, and people seemed to like the subjective ride qualities. What the emonda brings to the plate, I still don’t know.
Its a Scott CR1 update… from 10 years ago…
Round light conventional… yawn…
The still make the madone right? Or did they do away with it
Mostly done away with. The 7 and 2(alloy) series remain. The 5, which was the heart of the lineup is gone in terms of value and performance is discontinued.
No shit? Wow. Never would have guessed that
Mostly done away with. The 7 and 2(alloy) series remain. The 5, which was the heart of the lineup is gone in terms of value and performance is discontinued.
According to the Trek importers I talked to this week, the official line on the Madone is “Wait for 2016”. He said they’re clear that light weight doesn’t make it faster, but “Light sells. I can lift a bike and impress a customer, but I can’t blow wind on the frame to impress them” - and that the new Madone will probably be a properly aero bike unlike the current excuse. Apparently they wanted a “regular” bike in the lineup before radicalizing the Madone (which might turn off the weight-weenie crowd).
According to the Trek importers I talked to this week, the official line on the Madone is “Wait for 2016”. He said they’re clear that light weight doesn’t make it faster, but “Light sells. I can lift a bike and impress a customer, but I can’t blow wind on the frame to impress them” - and that the new Madone will probably be a properly aero bike unlike the current excuse. Apparently they wanted a “regular” bike in the lineup before radicalizing the Madone (which might turn off the weight-weenie crowd).
I can understand that they didn’t want to leave themselves without an all round race bike during the transition to making the Madone a full aero. But I still don’t see why they’ve done it this way.
Why not keep the Madone as the all rounder that it is, and introduce a new aero line under a new name?
That way they wouldn’t be in this weird in-between phase.
Also, the weight vs aero as a selling point quote is a bit patronising to many customers if you ask me.
I would think that the average customer willing to spend £2k+ would have an understanding of the weight vs aero debate
You would be terribly surprised, even well above $10k you are not experiencing significantly educated customers on Aero vs Weight even now. Especially down in that 2k-3k range the buyers are making their purchase because of some emotion that a bike elicits, not because their bike is marginally more aero.
I can understand that they didn’t want to leave themselves without an all round race bike during the transition to making the Madone a full aero. But I still don’t see why they’ve done it this way.
Why not keep the Madone as the all rounder that it is, and introduce a new aero line under a new name?
That way they wouldn’t be in this weird in-between phase.
Also, the weight vs aero as a selling point quote is a bit patronising to many customers if you ask me.
I would think that the average customer willing to spend £2k+ would have an understanding of the weight vs aero debate
Patronizing, sure - but that isn’t an official line, that’s just a two-person conversation between the importer and an aero-weenie. Carl (from Trek), Dave (from Felt) and Damon (ex-Cervelo) said as much all over this forum. That line - “Light is easy to sell” - is not unique to Trek. The entire industry admits it, otherwise the new Slice wouldn’t exist.
And you’d be surprised how little knowledge on aero there is, outside ST circles (and even here). Even among triathletes, especially the slightly older generation who grew up with '90s cycling mindsets, weight is king. My step-father is one of those, and you can’t convince him a disc cover is faster than his sub-kilo tubulars. I know Continental and ex-ProTour racers who still think shaving 100g is a noble cause but an aero frame or wheel will hurt their climbing.
My assumption is that once they went semi-aero with the Madone they couldn’t backtrack and return the brakes to the standard position - that would be “admitting defeat”. They had to “kill” the Madone’s lower-end to establish the Emonda as the de-facto standard bike (after 15 years of Madones being a household name), to prepare the ground for a reintroduction of the Madone lineup as an all-out aero bike.
“I would think that the average customer willing to spend £2k+ would have an understanding of the weight vs aero debate”
And pretty much anyone that works in a boutique bike shop would know that you’re wrong. Light weight sells bikes for roadies. Ability to spend big bucks on a bike has no correlation to understanding the physics. Even if they are aware of the physics many spend the big bucks on light weight anyway. You can be sure that the emphasis on light weight in the roadie bike industry would disappear in an instant if it didn’t sell.
Remember, this is a tri site, not a roadie site. The prevailing wisdom on this site is quite different.
As for the “so what” about the Emonda, it’s a “halo” bike, designed to raise the brand reputation of the Trek line as a whole. I noticed it was on the cover of Velo and their bike of the year, so it’s hard to fault Trek on this one from a business standpoint, that’s tremendously valuable exposure. The whole idea is to move Trek away from perception as a boring mass market brand to a prestige brand.
Don’t go so aeroweenie that you just hate light bikes, now.
I have one. It’s our 2015 team bike. I could have gone with a madone or domane, but went with the one that I thought looked the nicest. It’s a great bike for sure. The Trek H1 geometry works pretty well for me. On a cervelo RCA, with a 130mm -17 stem, my stack height would be 3cm too tall. I came from as standard mod Supersix Evo. The Evo absorbed more chatter than the Emonda, but the Emonda feels more aggressive. The SLR has a short wheelbase, which unfortunately means lots of toe overlap, but it feels really easy to toss around.
I’m sure the RCA is a great bike - i would love to ride one, but the Emonda SLR is a better fit for me.
FWIW, I wrote a quick blog post about the bike the other day: http://robbellracing.blogspot.com/2015/01/day-29-trek-emonda-slr-review.html
The Bontrager Speed Stop direct mount brakes are fantastic.
I’ll post hear as well As an owner. To me the decision was easy.
I feel like a got a good deal on the bike, I love the look of a traditional bike and I am not racing it. It is just a training bike, so I give zero crap about aero for a training bike. I have the sl6 with some upgrades and while it may not be as light as a competitor in the same category, it was a good buy. The series is built on giving you a full groupset of a particular level. Thay is pretty rare for some brands as they will down spec brakes, chain, cranks to lower costs. The emonda series (at least sl6 and up) don’t do this.
Plus, the ride is fantastic. It really does perform well and it is a great, fun bike to ride. They did a good job with the bike, but just because it doesn’ meet the expectations for an all aero crowd, it must be crap.
Also, I had considered the s2/s3. Great bikes, but I wasn’t getting the same value as the emonda and the aero aspect wasn’t one of my critical critera for this bike.
According to the Trek importers I talked to this week, the official line on the Madone is “Wait for 2016”. He said they’re clear that light weight doesn’t make it faster, but “Light sells. I can lift a bike and impress a customer, but I can’t blow wind on the frame to impress them” - and that the new Madone will probably be a properly aero bike unlike the current excuse. Apparently they wanted a “regular” bike in the lineup before radicalizing the Madone (which might turn off the weight-weenie crowd).
I’d completely agree only because it makes so much sense. The S5 is basically a TT bike with drop bars. So the new Madone or whatever will also be a TT bike with drop bars. For those that don’t want a full aero bike they can stick with the Emonda.
I think the spec on the SLR 10 is stupid, but other than that it is a really cool bike.
An SLR built up with 9000 or 9070, normal headset, normal bars, normal wheels and normal saddle would be really cool.
I like the fact that you can put bigger tires on this bike.
About time.
As a bike, I’m sure it’s amazing. As a race bike, the logic behind it is 10-15 years too late.
On the other hand, the Emonda S and SL are also a replacement for the Madone 3 and 4, which weren’t exactly aero either.
Disclaimer: I ride a round-tubed Trek when I’m not racing. It’s alu, and it’s the most perfect training bike I could ask for. Just this weekend I chucked it into the storage space of a bus and went for a weekend away, knowing full well that it’ll survive the journey.