Search the site

  

Grab my RSS feed | (What's this?)

Tag cloud...

Sponsored links

Recent Posts

Feeds

Categories

Useful links

Archives

Sponsored links

Latest Posts...

Heaven sent - Trek 1.5

Posted by James on January 21, 2008 11:19 AM | 

trek%2015%20side.jpg
Trek 1.5 gets a massive 'thumbs-up' off Bikenut

AFTER six days of hard graft creating the Universe, the Almighty was at a bit of a loose end and, not wanting to get roped into fixing the hinges on the pearly gates by ‘her indoors’, he quickly set about building something else equally magnificent – the Trek 1.5.

Now, this may seem a little over the top for a review about a simple winter bike, but there is nothing ordinary about the 1.5.

Trek’s range has been massively overhauled and re-organised for 2008, with entry-level road bikes now grouped together within the 1 Series.

First impressions count for a lot and the Trek 1.5 is certainly a head-turner – its red and white styling would not look out of place in an aircraft hangar alongside a RAF Red Arrow.

Trek don’t do things by halves and they must have raided a dark arts book store, employed a few dozen witches, warlocks and goblins to come up with their gravity-defying Alpha Black Aluminium frame.

When you think winter bike, most people think of steel or aluminium frames so heavy they’d send a set of airport scales into meltdown.

Not so with the Trek 1.5. Amazingly, the frame is lightweight – not as lightweight as, say, a carbon frame, but still lighter than any winter bike we’ve ever got our hands on.

The 1.5’s Alpha Black Aluminium frame uses butted 6000 series aluminium alloy that's shaped throughout.

Sleek doesn’t even come close to describing how good it looks and the rounded-triangular top-tube gradually shrinks to half its depth between the head-tube and the seat-tube.

Elsewhere, the down-tube morphs from a teardrop shape up front into an oval profile to firmly hold the bottom bracket shell.

What does all this techno-babble mean? Well, the end result is a strong and solid chassis that's surprisingly lightweight.

Despite the Trek 1.5’s frame not exactly being compact, the slightly-sloping top-tube means it’s semi-compact and the difference in stand-over height isn’t noticeable.

Taking the lead at the front, you get a very tidy and nicely-shaped carbon fork with an alloy steerer. Aha, wait, because there’s a hidden gem.

On the inside of the left fork is a housing for one of Trek’s Speed Trap computer sensors. If you’ve got one of their set-ups, then it means no more messing around with cable-ties.

“What about mudguards,� I hear you scream. Well, both the fork and the frame come with mudguard eyelets – adding to the bike's never-ending versatility.

Handling-wise, the Trek 1.5 is stiffer than a frozen Eskimo and doesn’t flex or misbehave even when you mash the pedals while standing up on a climb.

Braking and gear selection comes courtesy of Shimano's entry-level Sora levers, which have been upgraded from 8-speed to 9-speed for 2008.

But there is no need to groan because they now come with a flight-deck to tell you which chainring and sprocket combo you're in – even though hardened cyclist will sneer at the use of these, preferring instead to ‘do an Obi-Wan’ and feel the ‘Force’.

One slight problem is getting use to the gears. The 1.5 comes in either a 50/39/30T triple or double-compact 53/39T ‘sport’ version, but changing gears on the double-version takes a while to get to grips with.

But, like I said, once you get used to all that, even using those annoying, small thumb-buttons located on the inside of the hoods becomes second nature.

The Tigra rear mech is excellent, providing consistent and effortless shifting in both directions – we had to keep looking back to check the gears had changed because the shifting was so quiet. Meanwhile, the dual pivot brake calipers offer strong enough stopping power for when you’re racing down those hills.

All the other bits and bobs on the bike are from Trek's Bontrager brand. The bars have a comfortable, semi-anatomic shape, while the cranks are nice and stiff.

But another nice little touch is the carbon seat post, which has markings on to help determined your preferred height..

Backside-wise, the seat is comfortable and did not cause any discomfort while we tested the 1.5 out on a three hour training ride. Plus the design allows for a bit more comfort at the base of the spine and absorbs some of the bumps on the road.

Trek's Bontrager SSR wheels, complete with 20 plain gauge spokes up front and 24 at the rear, don't flex too much and performed well during testing.

Last weekend, it was raining heavily and the hubs kept the water, while the cup and cone bearings ran smoothly after minimal fettling.

Weighting only slightly more than three kilos, the SSRs are a reasonable weight for a bike at £600.

All in all, you couldn’t go wrong and it's a decent mix if you were looking for a good winter or starter for around the £600 mark.

FINAL VERDICT: Trek have really pulled a rabbit out of the hat on this one. Although it’s not the top end of the market and hasn’t got flashy parts on that would impress keen club cyclists, it’s a decent mix for a fantastic price and, let’s face it, everyone wants a Trek. 8/10

trek%2015%20fork%20sensor.jpg
Trek 1.5's secret weapon - housing for the Speed Trap computer sensor


trek%2015%20brakes.jpg
The Trek 1.5's unbranded brakes


trej%2015%20chainring.jpg
Bikenut reviews the 53/39T 'sport' version of the Trek 1.5

trek%2015%20rear%20mech.jpg
The 1.5's rear Tigra mech provides effortless transition between gears

DSCF0734.jpg
Your backside need not suffer this winter on the Trek 1.5

trek%2015%20front.jpg
Bikenut gave the Trek 1.5 8/10

Comments (8)

st wrote...

Is that photo taken on the top of cleaves hill ?

Posted by: st  | January 27, 2008 7:58 PM

James Maloney wrote...

Yup, it is. Thought it would be a nice stop to stop and snap a few pics.

Posted by: James Maloney  | January 28, 2008 11:00 AM

Martin wrote...

I am looking for a 1st road bike, i do lots of off roading but am looking at finding a group local to me to ride with and am considering the trek 1.5 - 1.7 and 1.9. are the difference on the 1.7 and 1.9 really worth the extra for someone in my shoes?

Thanks

Posted by: Martin  | April 2, 2008 4:58 PM

James Maloney wrote...

Martin,
To be fair, all the Trek bikes you listed are fantastic starter bikes and there is not much difference between them except for the price and a few better components.
But which one you buy depends on what you're looking to get out of road cycling.
Like mountain biking, road cycling falls into the old saying 'you get what you pay for'.
If you're willing to make a sizeable investment in a bike then you're better off going for something like the Trek Madone 5.5 (also reviewed on Bikenut) - it really is like fresh air. believe me, just go to you local bike shop and pick one up.
But if you just want to have a go at road cycling, see if you like it and then maybe invest a bit more in a new bike, then you can't go wrong with the Trek 1.5.
It's a bloody good bike for just £600, super-light for an aluminum frame and, if you do decide to buy a better, more expensive bike, then it would make a perfect winter bike.

Posted by: James Maloney  | April 2, 2008 5:08 PM

bob mee wrote...

I saw this bike today at Chevin Cycles in Otley.Along with a few other Treks.The 1.2,1.7 and 1.9.Price ranging from 400,600,800 and 1,000.I was allowed to sit on them and move them around.What bikes,compared to my Galaxy.But with having a limited budget.does the 200 quid difference justify the parts between the 1.5 and 1.7.

Posted by: bob mee  | June 23, 2008 7:31 PM

James Maloney wrote...

Bob,
To be honest, there is only a slight difference between the two.
Tigra isn't that much different performance wise than 105, but at the end of the day it all depends on what you like.
If you can afford the extra cash and like the look of the more expensive model, then get it - because you'll enjoy it more.
James

Posted by: James Maloney  | June 24, 2008 11:55 AM

Magnus Liljeqwist wrote...

I bought a 1.7 as a 1st road bike. I was planning to buy the 1.5 from the beginning but I took the 1.7 instead because of the 10 speed for upgrading reasons. Since I see this bike to be useful for years to come it's easier to upgrade this one without any major modifications.

Posted by: Magnus Liljeqwist  | June 25, 2008 5:46 PM

Graham Townshend wrote...

Hi i bought the 1.9 version in February 2008. I can't knock anything about the bike at all. It is very light, 8.7kg, very fast - my average speed went up by 2 mph over the folowing 2 weeks. The bontrager race wheels have been solid and remain perfectly true after 2500 miles of Britains potholed roads and poor cycle paths. The Ultegra groupset are still as smooth, quiet and precise as the day i got the bike. Saddle has been very comfortable for the couple of century rides i've done.
Now my experience and fitness have grown i would prefer to have a second bike with a closer ratio rear block and 53/39 chainring. Notice i said second bike, there is nothing i would change about my 1.9 it's very versatile. I've used it for time trails, sportives, fast training rides and touring days. Anybody that buys one of these will not be disapointed.

Posted by: Graham Townshend  | August 3, 2008 9:25 AM

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)