Trek Pilot 5.2 vs 5000
Right now I have a Trek 1400. I need a triple. I can't afford a new bike. I have found these two used bikes; have not had a chance to ride either yet. I think I'd like the 5000 better but it is more expensive and may be a touch small. My 1400 is 56cm, the 5000 is 54. I'm 5'10. The pilot is 56.
I used to ride club rides and centuries but haven't done more than 40 miles in one day in five years.
Thanks for any opinions.
Compared to the 5.2 pilot, the 5000 is:
1.) Older. I think it was 2005 that Trek went from the 5*** numbering to the 5.* numbering. (2004 had booth as that is when they produced the 5*** series and introduced the Madone.)
2.) 5000 typically had 105 components and Race wheels vs. Ultegra and Race Lite for the 5.2
3.) The standard 5000 frame is a race geometry vs. more of a comfort geometry for the Pilot. Both frames should be OCLV 120.
The pilot will tend to give you a more upright position. Although that can be adjusted with fitting.
The 5.2 should actually have better components and wheelset than the 5000.
If you are happy with your 56 frame, do not go down to a 54.
I have to agree with Blue cheesehead. The 5000 isn't just older, but it has lower level components. Both frames are OCLV 120. Also, the frame geometries are different. The 5000 has the traditional horizontal top tube while the 5.2 Pilot has a compact geometry with sloped top tube. Regardless, the 5.2 is the better bike. It is newer and has better components.