Understanding that different bikes were built for different purposes I'd like to propose a question to those in the K2 forum and also in the Trek forum. I'm looking at buying one of two frames on the cheap. Either a 2003 K2 Razorback 4.0 with a Fox Float RL shock or a 2002 Trek 90 with a Fox Float Shock. Aside from the rear shocks, all the other componants would be the same.
Here's the questions:
1. What would be the strengths and weaknesses of each bike when compared with each other.
2. What type of riding is the K2 best at, where does it stumble? Same with the Trek 90.
3. Overall, which do you think is the better bike and why?
4. What's the rear travel on the K2 and what's the rear travel on the Trek?
Results 1 to 2 of 2