Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5

    Help: '10 Cannondale RZ One Forty 5 and '11 Trek Fuel EX 5

    I am in the market for a new bike, entry level full suspension.

    I've test ridden both of these bikes and have narrowed it down to one or the other. From a tech spec perspective, the Cannondale seems to be better, although I could be wrong. It has better components, better fork, etc. My biggest concern is that I can't find ANY reviews for this online. Can anyone advise? Links for the two are below.

    The Cannondale is the more expensive bike at a retail of about 2000, but my LBC is selling for 1500 with some other perks. The Trek is selling for 1550

    2010 Cannondale
    http://www.cannondale.com/usa/usaeng...Z-One-Forty-5]

    2011 Trek
    http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes...el_ex/fuelex5/
    Last edited by md32903; 01-11-2011 at 09:02 AM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: arcticrobot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    174
    I went with cannondale. Just got the RZ 140 Three frame and building my ultimate bike around it with Lefty strut. So with Cannondale you have an option to run Lefty with no adapters needed, if you decide so. Also you have BB30 crank option(shimano bb adapter can be removed, correct me if I'm wrong. I have truvativ GXP BB and it can be removed). Also this is one of the last made in usa Cannondale frames and I really like this fact. Trek claims that their top end frames are made in usa as well, but I'm not sure about Fuel EX 5.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5
    Hey thanks for the reply. With a look at the links and specs, what's the better bike. Keeping in mind that I'm not looking to upgrade parts at the moment

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: arcticrobot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by md32903
    Hey thanks for the reply. With a look at the links and specs, what's the better bike. Keeping in mind that I'm not looking to upgrade parts at the moment
    I didn't go through the specs, and, anyways, I'm not familiar with most parts on this two bikes to say what's better. Their drivetrain should be pretty closely specced. The most important part is that RZ 140 has 140 mm of travel vs 120 mm on Trek. With this travel RZ 140 is kind of do-it-all light duty AM / heavy duty XC crossover and Trek is more of an XC bike.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5
    My main concern with the bike is the rear shock. The x fusion versus the fox. Any word on that?? Thanks.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: arcticrobot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    174
    Also, Jerome Clementz has won 2010 enduro Megavalanche event riding RZ 140, that thing alone sold me on this bike - should be very potent rig with some skill applied.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: arcticrobot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by md32903
    My main concern with the bike is the rear shock. The x fusion versus the fox. Any word on that?? Thanks.
    I would go with Fox, even though mtbr average reviews on these two shocks are almost identical with Fox winning by slight margin. But rear shock alone would never be decision maker for me, so I don't know. I would consider frame/geometry/travel - the rest is expendable.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    813
    I just got a 2010 RZ120-3 a couple months ago. I know it is not the140 you are looking at, but the components are better and it only weighs 27lbs. DLR Lefty, Monarch 3.3 Rear. It can handle just about anything I throw at it, and light enough to climb like a mountain goat. Not trying to sway you into a 120, but for the money it is definitely worth it (paid2k). I also noticed that with the right setup, the travel feels like more. Dirt Rag did a great review on it too, and one of the last U.S. Made C-Dales. If C-Dale still has some left you can get them for at least 7 or 8 hundred less than original retail.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5
    Hey thanks for the reply. My budget is only about 1500 dollars. I'm a rather poor college student with an insatiable desire for mountain biking, so I really can't spend much more. My LBS is selling this bike for 1500 and it originally retails for over 1900. I'm attracted to this bike as I feel like I'm getting a heckuva deal. I will however ask about the 2010 C-Dale 120, but I asked about 2010 stock and they said they never have much.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nauc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,506
    Trek.. better fork, shox, brakes and rep
    2010 GT Avalanche Expert

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    77
    I agree I would go trek. I have the ex5 2010 model that I have done some upgrades to. I bought mine for 1050 and I love it. I changed the fork to a reba rlt ti and the bars and stem to a 80mm. I just bought some pure xcr wheels and down the road I will change the drivetrain. But for the most part the bikes are almost the same as componets go. I like the rockshox fork with the fox rear shock compared to the rst and xfusion on the cannondale. Your money your choice

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    863
    Quote Originally Posted by md32903
    Hey thanks for the reply. My budget is only about 1500 dollars. I'm a rather poor college student with an insatiable desire for mountain biking, so I really can't spend much more. My LBS is selling this bike for 1500 and it originally retails for over 1900. I'm attracted to this bike as I feel like I'm getting a heckuva deal. I will however ask about the 2010 C-Dale 120, but I asked about 2010 stock and they said they never have much.
    BUY USED...E BAY ALWAYS HAD DEAL ON BOTH BIKES....

  13. #13
    T.W.O
    Reputation: pfox90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,729
    The Trek has a better fork and rear shock, as well as a good track record as a bike company.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    416
    I think the trek is a much better looking bike than the cdale

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    57
    BOth good, for me C a bit better as I like AM stuff.
    To call the the T more XC, hmmm not my thinking, they are both light Am for me.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2
    RZ 140 rider, love it...

  17. #17
    My spelling is atroshus
    Reputation: RBowles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    812
    I too love my RZ.

  18. #18
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,981
    I really like my Rize same bike as rz140 trademark issues

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •