New Adventure Bike...from Trek!

[TwoWheeledExplorer]

Stop the presses! Holy Hot Wheels, Batman! I may have to become a Trekkie again! Just introduced at the Trekworld Trek dealers gathering, the new 2015 Trek 920 Adventure Bike. Those of you who know me know until I got the Volcanic, all of my MTBs were from Trek, and I still ride one at work. Been thinking of upgrading the Volpe, and this may be the ticket! Looks very interesting, to say the least.



Ride safe,
 
Hans

[jsieber]

Nice looking bike. Similar in some ways to the Salsa Fargo, at least in appearance.

[PeteJack]

A couple of years ago I swear I saw a Trek 520 with disk brakes at Gregg's Cycles in Seattle. At the time I didn't pay much attention thinking it was an evolution of the 520 (my bike) but I've since been told by a Trek distributor I must have been dreaming. I wonder if it was an early version of this bike? As I recollect it was the same color as the one in the picture.

[TwoWheeledExplorer]

Trek is offering a 520 Disc version starting later this model year. I still have not been able to find out a release date for the 920 and 720. The 520 Disc is on the Trek website already.

[TwoWheeledExplorer]

Nice looking bike. Similar in some ways to the Salsa Fargo, at least in appearance.

My guess, without talking to anyone at Trek...yet...is that the potential Fargo (or Co-Motion Divide) buyer is the market they are going for. I have always liked Trek MTBs; their geometry fits me well. This bike is at the top of my list for my bucket list super trip on the Lewis and Clark Bicycle Trail.

Ride safe,
Hans

[TwoWheeledExplorer]

From talking with the Trek rep at the Chequamegon Fat Tire Festival MTB race (Trek is a long-time sponsor) the 920 will be available starting in February.

Ride safe,
Hans

[Huli]

Oh man!
My wife is gonna kill me...

Unless I buy her one too!

[sanuk]

I get the general idea of this Trek touring bike, but where are the mud-guards (fenders) and why oh why drop handle bars? Unless you're into down hill racing or fancy yourself in the Tour de France, no one on a long distance bike ride needs drop bars - IMHO.  And unless you enjoy a wet ass, fenders are a great invention.  It looks like Trek are just jumping - belatedly - on the rising popularity of bike touring but are still stuck in mountain bike mode.  Otherwise, not a bad bike.

[Pat Lamb]

I agree with the fenders, but I surely do enjoy drop bars on long rides.  Multiple hand positions so I can keep my hands from getting numb, and those drops are wonderful when you're facing a headwind.

[PeteJack]

I get the general idea of this Trek touring bike, but where are the mud-guards (fenders) and why oh why drop handle bars? Unless you're into down hill racing or fancy yourself in the Tour de France, no one on a long distance bike ride needs drop bars - IMHO.  And unless you enjoy a wet ass, fenders are a great invention.  It looks like Trek are just jumping - belatedly - on the rising popularity of bike touring but are still stuck in mountain bike mode.  Otherwise, not a bad bike.

I like the variety of hand positions you get with drops (my 520 has 50K on it so far) As for fenders I'm agnostic: they are a nuisance when you take the front wheel off to fix a flat, if you are touring with somebody you like it's nice for them to have a rear fender with a mud flap (aka buddy flap), they are a bit of added weight, mine are SKS and Trek might balk at the cost. That said in most cases a back rack and its contents acts like a fender to keep your bum dry but does nothing for your wife behind you.

I like the idea of disk brakes, the Single Digit SD-7s that came with mine were utter rubbish. Braking on a steep hill was like planning for retirement, you had to plan it so far ahead. And they were very noisy, toe-in and all kinds of pads notwithstanding. I replaced the front SD-7 with a Single Digit Ultimate and it's like night and day i.e. it works and is silent. The SD-7 is adequate for the back. As you can see it wasn't cheap.

[DaveB]

why oh why drop handle bars? Unless you're into down hill racing or fancy yourself in the Tour de France, no one on a long distance bike ride needs drop bars - IMHO. 

I couldn't disagree with you more.  Having ridden flat bars a bit I wouldn't ever use them for  anything more than local and short distances.  Drop bars are far more versatile in the number of hand positions and riding positions they permit.  There is a good reason almost all touring bikes and most tourists use them.

[RonK]

I get the general idea of this Trek touring bike, but where are the mud-guards (fenders) and why oh why drop handle bars?

No you don't. This is an adventure bike, not a conventional tourer.
As others have said, it's in the same vein as the Salsa Fargo, the market-leading backroads bikepacking bike.

[sanuk]

OK, I get the point.  This may be a genre of bike - and of cycling - I haven't encountered before. Not sure about the degrees of difference between 'Adventure bike' or tourer. Isn't it all an adventure?  As for drop bars, it's like a lot of things, everyone has their favorites.  For me the stretch down and forwards seems unnatural and likely to cause more strain on your lower back.  As for various holding positions it seems there's only two with a drop bar: either hands on top or bent full forward face down - which is also the position you need to be in to brake with drop bars.  With a flat bar - actualy a 'riser bar' in my case - with bar ends and ergonomic hand grips I get quite a few more options and my brakes and gear shifters are always at hand.  I also have a sufficient forward sitting angle to prevent spinal stress on bumps.   Nevertheless, after several hours on the road I still get numbness in one hand.  Not sure how to cure that. 

[Pat Lamb]

Most of the touring (and brevet) bikes I see have the bars set roughly the same height as the saddle.  The ones you've ridden may have been set too low and/or too far forward for comfort during long days in the saddle.

I've got more than two hand positions: (1) on the tops; (2) at the corners; (3) just forward of the top bend; (4) at the brifters (where I can access the brakes); (5) in the bends (another, more powerful brake position, which I don't need very often); and (6), down in the drops.  My upper body is at a roughly 45 degree angle when I'm on the tops, higher and more to the rear than many of the racing drop bar setups I see.

[TwoWheeledExplorer]

In reply to what are the differences between "touring" and "adventure", I would answer that while all bicycle travel is an adventure, I believe what Trek, Salsa and Co-Motion (among others) have in mind is primarily "off-pavement" or "gravel-grinding". Adventure-themed bikes have heavier frames, wider tires, and more MTB-like gearing than touring standards, but also have the drop bars, long wheel-base and frame geometry for long-distance travel. In Europe they have called them "trekking" bikes for years. The Co-Motion Pangea and Divide and the original pre-2010 Novara Safari were the first American bikes to enter this niche of the market, followed by the Fargo from Salsa.

I see that for 2015, Novara has brought back the disk brakes and 1.9 inch (48mm) x 700 tires on the Safari, making it a new (or re-new) entry in the adventure bike niche, and although it is now just over $1000, it is still half the price of the Trek 920 or Salsa Fargo. BTW, it still retains the signature "butterfly" handlebars, too. Clearly a bike to consider if you are looking for an-entry level bike for "adventure".

I like, actually love, that the 920 has SRAM gearing. Although I have bikes with Shimano and SRAM, and one has a mix of both, I have always been a SRAM guy, but it is a matter of personal preference. I am going to wait until one shows up at a nearby Penn Cycle to make a more defined judgment, but the Trek 920 still tops my list for the bike to take the place of my venerable '06 Bianchi Volpe.

My big trip this year will be on my Cogburn CB4 fat-bike, across the western Adirondacks, where I grew up and where I was a licensed guide in the 1980s before we moved to MN.

Ride safe,
Hans