Trek FX 2 Disc 2020 v Pinnacle Neon 3 2020

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
Rach_R
Posts: 2
Joined: 5 Jan 2020, 4:00pm

Trek FX 2 Disc 2020 v Pinnacle Neon 3 2020

Postby Rach_R » 5 Jan 2020, 5:42pm

Hi,

I was wondering whether anyone has any views on these hybrids and which (if there is anything in it) would be more suited to me.

I'm a complete cycling novice and am looking for something that will be suitable for gravel cycle paths/leisure rides as well as roads. I have entered a Try-a-tri and need to be able to ride it in that (not looking to be too competitive, would just like to get around).

I went into Evans today and narrowed it down to these two which I understand are at the 'road'ier end of their hybrids (no suspension, thin tyres, carbon forks).

I haven't been on a test ride yet as they need to order both in, so I thought I'd ask for some opinions before I need to decide!

Thanks :D

gbnz
Posts: 1662
Joined: 13 Sep 2008, 10:38am

Re: Trek FX 2 Disc 2020 v Pinnacle Neon 3 2020

Postby gbnz » 5 Jan 2020, 7:21pm

Rach_R wrote:Hi,

I was wondering whether anyone has any views on these hybrids and which (if there is anything in it) would be more suited to me.

I'm a complete cycling novice and am looking for something that will be suitable for gravel cycle paths/leisure rides as well as roads. I have entered a Try-a-tri and need to be able to ride it in that (not looking to be too competitive, would just like to get around).

I went into Evans today and narrowed it down to these two which I understand are at the 'road'ier end of their hybrids (no suspension, thin tyres, carbon forks).

I haven't been on a test ride yet as they need to order both in, so I thought I'd ask for some opinions before I need to decide!

Thanks :D


Suppose it's down to personal choice, both bikes seem suitable though personally I prefer the Trek! (Nb. A quick look seem's to suggest it has a preferable 24 gear range, rather than 18 on the Pinnacle - apologies haven't had more than a quick scan, so could be wrong!).

But having said that, my gut reaction would be to go for one of the less expensive versions such as the FX1. It's a personal view, but whilst it's worthwhile paying for a decent bike from a reputable manufacturer, higher specifications invariably increase costs, the number & complexity of parts which can fail and an increased level of cost in keeping the bike on the road on a long term basis, whilst offering little in the way of advantages to the typical cyclist

slowster
Posts: 1138
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: Trek FX 2 Disc 2020 v Pinnacle Neon 3 2020

Postby slowster » 5 Jan 2020, 9:08pm

The Pinnacle is better value for money. It generally has higher specification components (e.g. Shimano's Sora range is better quality than its Altus and Tourney ranges used on the Trek), and carbon forks with an aluminium steerer as opposed to an all aluminium fork. That is not surprising since Pinnacle is Evans' own in-house brand and you will inevitably be paying a bit extra for the Trek brand name (and I suspect that the Pinnacle offerings at this price point are at least as good if not even superior to their Trek equivalents).

Whilst I like triple chainsets, in this case I would prefer 2 x 9 speed Sora components over a lower quality 3 x 8 speed set up. A visual representation and comparison of the two bikes' gear ranges is here - as it shows you get a lower bottom gear with the Trek, but I would not be concerned about that unless you were riding in very hilly areas or carrying camping kit. The top gears are pretty much irrelevant: it's unlikely you would ever need to use the 11 tooth sprocket unless you were sprinting downhill.

The Pinnacle comes with 28mm tyres, which is a reasonable size for riding on reasonable quality roads (and probably ideal for your triathlon), but you would probably find wider tyres more comfortable for poor road surfaces and especially for towpaths, bridleways and gravel tracks. According to Evans' website the Pinnancle has clearances for up to 40mm tyres, but it does not say if that is with mudguards (so I suspect with mudguards there might be clearance for 35mm tyres). Both 35mm and 40mm would be better for light off road riding than 28mm. If I were buying the Pinnacle, I would ask Evans if they would fit mudguards as part of the deal if I bought the mudguards at the same time, and I would ask them to fit the widest mudguards the frame would take (i.e. I would not want narrow mudguards which were only suitable for the 28mm tyres the bike comes with; I would want mudguards suitable for at least a 35mm tyre, even if I kept the 28mm stock tyres on the bike to begin with/until they wore out).

However, the most important thing is that whatever bike you choose fits you and feels right/comfortable. It's like buying shoes: it doesn't matter how low the price is, how good the quality is or how good they look, if they don't fit and hurt your feet.

User avatar
TrevA
Posts: 2264
Joined: 1 Jun 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: Trek FX 2 Disc 2020 v Pinnacle Neon 3 2020

Postby TrevA » 6 Jan 2020, 6:20pm

My wife has the 2019 Trek FX2 Disc. I must say it’s a bit of a heavy beast, but she likes it. The tyres that came with it were a bit puncture prone and I’ve swapped them for some Vittoria Randonneurs. It’s a great bike for riding around town and we also do rides on local canal towpaths and bridleways She’s even used it on some technical trails at our local Forest MTB park.

It wouldn’t be my first choice for doing the bike section of a triathlon, but as a general runabout it’s a great bike.
A cart horse trapped in the body of a man.
http://www.jogler2009.blogspot.com

Rach_R
Posts: 2
Joined: 5 Jan 2020, 4:00pm

Re: Trek FX 2 Disc 2020 v Pinnacle Neon 3 2020

Postby Rach_R » 4 Feb 2020, 11:25pm

:D Thankyou all so much for your very helpful and detailed replies, I really appreciate it! I ended up going for the Pinnacle as I felt I was getting better value for money in terms of the spec, and I am very happy with it :D Thanks again.