# Trek 4500 DISC vs Cannondale Trail SL4 or SL3 or other suggestions?



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

Trek 4500 DISC, Cannondale SL4 or SL3
I'm getting back into biking after a lengthy hiatus. I used to ride constantly with my cheap dept store bike, that got used/abused, broke constantly etc (back in middle school). 

I'm 6ft6 and 200lbs so I need something with an XL frame or perhaps even the "jumbo" frame which is Cannondale's equivelant of XXL I believe. 

Budget <$750

I am not opposed to going used, but finding something that fits me, that I'm comfortable on and in good shape is going to be quite the challenge. As a result, I'm keeping an eye out for something used, but I really feel in my situation I need to try before I buy, rather extensively even. I've visited two LBS's recently, one a Trek rep the other a Cannondale rep. I really liked them both, I need to go back for an extensive ride on each. The Trek store mentioned they expect them to begin going on Sale in July to prepare for "new models". So I will definitely wait to see what happens with that. I liked the store, the salesman etc...

The Cannondale rep is right down the road from me (about 2 miles) and its a smaller family owned joint. It just had a great vibe, very friendly, knowledgeable, worked directly with the owner, etc, just a better overall experience, but the experience with Trek rep was not bad at all. 

I've researched these two bikes fairly extensively and can't really find any direct comparisons. Last night I looked through this portion of the forum looking for a similar comparison and was unable to come up with a direct comparison between these two bikes. 

If there is anything specific I need to be aware of please let me know, from what I can find they are both good entry level bikes. Thoughts between the two brands? Especially given my height? Upgrades, parts replacement etc, I would assume is pretty standard, I would also expect both frames to be solidly built and I shouldn't experience any issues with the frames. 

...to me there's something to be said about buying local...that does weigh a bit on my decision...


----------



## neilthemeal (Apr 17, 2011)

I think those are two pretty good bikes. It's a tough choice and probably a personal one.
For frame quality I'd give the nod to the Cannondale. The Trail SL frame looks nice for an aluminum frame but the Promax brakes and fork I know nothing about.
For components I'd give the nod to the Trek, it's got the 9 speed alivio and shimano hydraulic brakes.

I wonder if you've considered the Spec Rockhopper, comes in a 23", has an XCR fork(higher than the 4500's XCM), Sram X4/5 components and BB5 brakes. Kind of cuts the middle ground of the Cannondale v. Trek.

Maybe it depends on who you are, are you going to run the bike as it is in to the ground, or upgrade components here and there? If your the first type of person, the Trek may be better. If you are going to do more upgrading, the Cannondale frame may be more worth hanging the nicer bits from. This coming from a Trek owner.


----------



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

neilthemeal said:


> I think those are two pretty good bikes. It's a tough choice and probably a personal one.
> For frame quality I'd give the nod to the Cannondale. The Trail SL frame looks nice for an aluminum frame but the Promax brakes and fork I know nothing about.
> For components I'd give the nod to the Trek, it's got the 9 speed alivio and shimano hydraulic brakes.
> 
> ...


I'm kind of a tinkerer/upgrade guy. I am blessed enough to have an excellent job, so in the event I get WAYYY into the sport I can always buy a completely new platform.

I'd also consider the SL3 it has hydraulic discs which seem worth it and the SRAM derailluer which is generally deemed "better". I need to ride the two back to back of course...

So I guess we can throw the SL3 into the mix as snagging one for < 750 shouldn't be a major problem I wouldn't think.


----------



## Adam_B. (Apr 7, 2011)

Check out the gt avalanche 1.0


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

At 6'6", I'd expect you to have trouble getting a Trek 4-series to fit you. You're the only person who needs to be happy with the purchase, though.


----------



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

AndrwSwitch said:


> At 6'6", I'd expect you to have trouble getting a Trek 4-series to fit you. You're the only person who needs to be happy with the purchase, though.


that's two people that have mentioned Trek may not be suitable for someone my height without going up a couple lines. What makes the Cannondale a potential better fit???


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

The way that bike sizes are listed is based on seat tube height. Where, exactly, on the seat tube the height is measured varies, but it's not that important because it's easy to raise and lower the saddle by a really huge amount. So for most riders, it's actually not an important consideration.

What's difficult to change is the horizontal reach from the saddle to the bars. The position of the saddle is pretty much set by a rider's pedal stroke - performance and even knee health start to drop off really quickly as you move away from the sweet spot, which is relatively small. The handlebars on the bike need to have a certain relationship to the saddle or it's murder on your back. But, an odd stem size can really screw up handling. I think 80mm-110mm, give-or-take, is the best-handling range of stem sizes, at least for a cross-country or trail rider, but not everyone even within my class of riders will agree with me. The point is, it's not a lot of adjustment, so the head tube has to be in pretty close to the right spot to begin with, and if the frame's not built that way you're SOL.

Many brands, including Trek, make the top tubes shorter on their entry-level bikes. Specialized doesn't - a Hardrock has very similar geometry to a Stumpjumper HT - and Cannondale claims not to, but last I looked I couldn't actually find geometry charts for their entry bikes. The short top tube can be better for someone who's not in very good shape, or who has a short reach relative to his height, but for an athletic rider with average proportions, the more typical XC geometry is better.

A short person can often solve the problem by sizing up. For example, I typically ride a 17.5" or "medium" Hardrock. I'd have to size up one or two sizes to get my preferred top tube length on a 4-series Trek, and I'm only 5'8" - the length change from size to size is smaller than on more typical XC bikes, so it means that a 6'6" rider would have to size up maybe past the range of sizes Trek offers in order to get to the right top tube length.

The Trek 6-series and higher bikes have more typical geometry, and the longest top tube offered is about 30mm longer - actually quite a lot for this part of the bike, especially since it won't come with an insanely tall head tube. But they're also more expensive. I've come to admire Specialized for offering their Hardrock with the right geometry for an athletic rider, because it meant that when I decided I was going to start riding again, I could afford a bike that fit me right. I guess one of my upgrades over the years would have been a new frame instead of something else, but that's a pretty expensive one compared to some of the other things I've done.


----------



## neilthemeal (Apr 17, 2011)

Just to flush out what Andrw said with numbers
Trek 4 series horizontal Top Tube length on 24" is 24.1 inches
Cannondale's top tube lengths on the SL models for Jumbo is 25.1 inches; the X Large is 24.8 inches and the large is 24.2 inches.


----------



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

AndrwSwitch said:


> The way that bike sizes are listed is based on seat tube height. Where, exactly, on the seat tube the height is measured varies, but it's not that important because it's easy to raise and lower the saddle by a really huge amount. So for most riders, it's actually not an important consideration.
> 
> What's difficult to change is the horizontal reach from the saddle to the bars. The position of the saddle is pretty much set by a rider's pedal stroke - performance and even knee health start to drop off really quickly as you move away from the sweet spot, which is relatively small. The handlebars on the bike need to have a certain relationship to the saddle or it's murder on your back. But, an odd stem size can really screw up handling. I think 80mm-110mm, give-or-take, is the best-handling range of stem sizes, at least for a cross-country or trail rider, but not everyone even within my class of riders will agree with me. The point is, it's not a lot of adjustment, so the head tube has to be in pretty close to the right spot to begin with, and if the frame's not built that way you're SOL.
> 
> ...





neilthemeal said:


> Just to flush out what Andrw said with numbers
> Trek 4 series horizontal Top Tube length on 24" is 24.1 inches
> Cannondale's top tube lengths on the SL models for Jumbo is 25.1 inches; the X Large is 24.8 inches and the large is 24.2 inches.


Fantastic posts, thank you both very much.

I'm 6'6 and of probably average proportions for someone my height. I would think top tube length is important given my size. I've read some stuff about bike's being too small and others being too big, but given my size I'm not sure I have to really worry about "too big" seems like a bit of a long shot really. Unless these companies are regularly building bikes for 7 footers (and they're not).

We've got a Specialized dealer down in Tulsa, I may check it out. I like the Cannondales and I like the fact the shop is 2 miles from here.

Do you guys have any thoughts on the difference in components between the SL3 and SL4? Hundred bucks more is doable if its worth it and my LBS will likely give me a pretty good discount based on our conversation the other day...

What else should I be considering with regard to frames, sizing etc?


----------



## Crash Test Dumby (May 3, 2011)

6SpeedTA95 said:


> Do you guys have any thoughts on the difference in components between the SL3 and SL4? Hundred bucks more is doable if its worth it and my LBS will likely give me a pretty good discount based on our conversation the other day...
> 
> What else should I be considering with regard to frames, sizing etc?


Basic rule of thumb is, if you can afford the step up model buy it. If its $100 more, then doing the exact same upgrades later will cost $250-300. The bike builders just get the parts WAY cheeper than we can.


----------



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

Crash Test Dumby said:


> Basic rule of thumb is, if you can afford the step up model buy it. If its $100 more, then doing the exact same upgrades later will cost $250-300. The bike builders just get the parts WAY cheeper than we can.


Yeah this makes sense, my biggest concern is the brakes, if I'm going ot eventually upgrade the brakes anyways...start with the cheaper ones then convert to a good hydro system later. I dunno, just sorta thinking out loud so you guys can provide feedback 

They've got a couple of X and J frames coming in over the next two weeks so I'm gonna have to go ride them when they come in.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

SL 3 vs. SL 4 is off-brand hydraulics vs. off-brand mechanicals.

I'd do some searching around and reading reviews. Neither brake is something anyone would buy aftermarket, but the fact that they're disc brakes gives you a leg-up on an eventual upgrade, should you feel the need. A rim brake bike would usually also require new wheels, which adds quite a lot to the expense.

If you went with the SL 4 you could spend a little more and put Avid BB7s on it without having to replace the brake levers or housings. The Tektro Draco on the SL 3 is a relatively new product, and while I think Tektro's rim brakes are perfectly good, their disc brakes are a little variable. So do your homework.


----------



## pfox90 (Aug 8, 2010)

Newer Tectro Dracos are nice.


----------



## Ice Cold (Aug 20, 2008)

Go for the Trail SL 3 in July MSRP is $880 should be able to walk one out the door for $700 to $650 cash.


----------



## eastcoastrider (Jun 9, 2011)

Are there any brands that 6SpeedTA95 has not mentioned that are known to be particularly accommodating for taller riders? And what about 29ers? I know there's a lot of debate, but generally, will a tall rider benefit the most from larger wheels?


----------



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

AndrwSwitch said:


> SL 3 vs. SL 4 is off-brand hydraulics vs. off-brand mechanicals.
> 
> I'd do some searching around and reading reviews. Neither brake is something anyone would buy aftermarket, but the fact that they're disc brakes gives you a leg-up on an eventual upgrade, should you feel the need. A rim brake bike would usually also require new wheels, which adds quite a lot to the expense.
> 
> If you went with the SL 4 you could spend a little more and put Avid BB7s on it without having to replace the brake levers or housings. The Tektro Draco on the SL 3 is a relatively new product, and while I think Tektro's rim brakes are perfectly good, their disc brakes are a little variable. So do your homework.


Thats kinda what I'm getting at, but I've heard several mixed things...so thats why I'm posting...for clarification and others input 


pfox90 said:


> Newer Tectro Dracos are nice.


Do you have experience with them? Is it the newer Dracos on the SL3?


Ice Cold said:


> Go for the Trail SL 3 in July MSRP is $880 should be able to walk one out the door for $700 to $650 cash.


I was thinking that as well, I guess I'll have to see when my LBS will put them on sale and if they're willing to work with me, I think they will be.


----------



## bnewton (Mar 8, 2011)

I would suggest going up to the Cannondale Trail SL 2 / Shimano Alivio/Deore with Shimano BR-M445 Hydraulic Disc Brakes. I was able to get one for $874 on sale and you may be able to find one around this price, a little more than your price range but I think it is worth it.


----------



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

bnewton said:


> I would suggest going up to the Cannondale Trail SL 2 / Shimano Alivio/Deore with Shimano BR-M445 Hydraulic Disc Brakes. I was able to get one for $874 on sale and you may be able to find one around this price, a little more than your price range but I think it is worth it.


This really turned out to be an excellent thought. I plan to do a lot of test riding starting in about two weeks. This bike is now on the list and the pricing is pretty damn good right now. Thank you for the suggestion, I had ruled it out due to the high MSRP but as of now its barely outside my range and I may be willing to up the budget a bit if this bike is indeed as good as the hype.


----------



## Wyler98 (Apr 25, 2011)

Plus the SL2 has an RS Recon Silver Air fork.

I initially bought a SL2 26er about 2 months ago after my brother bought a Trek Mamba (Gary Fisher) 29er earlier that week. 
The next day we went on our 1st trail ride. He was sailing through the trails and I was bouncing of every rock and root I came to. The next day I went back to the LBS and exchanged my bike for the SL2 29er (same price). 
I love the big wheels!!! Check it out.


----------



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

Wyler98 said:


> Plus the SL2 has an RS Recon Silver Air fork.
> 
> I initially bought a SL2 26er about 2 months ago after my brother bought a Trek Mamba (Gary Fisher) 29er earlier that week.
> The next day we went on our 1st trail ride. He was sailing through the trails and I was bouncing of every rock and root I came to. The next day I went back to the LBS and exchanged my bike for the SL2 29er (same price).
> I love the big wheels!!! Check it out.


If I could get them for the same price I would go 29er. $200 + difference here.


----------



## Wyler98 (Apr 25, 2011)

Interesting. Where are you located?

They have the same list price on Cannondale's website at $1069:


Got mine 2 months ago for $950.


----------



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

Wyler98 said:


> Interesting. Where are you located?
> 
> They have the same list price on Cannondale's website at $1069:
> 
> Got mine 2 months ago for $950.


The discount on the 26's is MUCH better (obviously).


----------



## BigWorms (Sep 7, 2010)

AndrwSwitch said:


> The way that bike sizes are listed is based on seat tube height. Where, exactly, on the seat tube the height is measured varies, but it's not that important because it's easy to raise and lower the saddle by a really huge amount. So for most riders, it's actually not an important consideration.
> 
> What's difficult to change is the horizontal reach from the saddle to the bars. The position of the saddle is pretty much set by a rider's pedal stroke - performance and even knee health start to drop off really quickly as you move away from the sweet spot, which is relatively small. The handlebars on the bike need to have a certain relationship to the saddle or it's murder on your back. But, an odd stem size can really screw up handling. I think 80mm-110mm, give-or-take, is the best-handling range of stem sizes, at least for a cross-country or trail rider, but not everyone even within my class of riders will agree with me. The point is, it's not a lot of adjustment, so the head tube has to be in pretty close to the right spot to begin with, and if the frame's not built that way you're SOL.
> 
> ...


I am a little lost on this. I am looking at these 2 bikes also and I am thinking of throwing in the Specialized Rockhopper. I am only 5'-5" so it seems small is what I need. I am trying to read the geometry specs on their sites and don't really follow the difference.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Don't worry about the charts for now.

Ride both bikes, buy your favorite. The point is that there is a difference, for many riders it's fairly significant, and many riders will find they have a strong preference one way or the other.


----------



## BigWorms (Sep 7, 2010)

Gotcha...thanks.

Yes my plan was to ride all 3 this weekend. One that throws me off is the Rockhopper has mechanical brakes. It seems like hydraulic brakes are better at stopping, at least the bikes I have tried before.

Update on this. I ended up buying the Cannodale SL3. Got a good price. Really nice bike.


----------



## -=Clinton=- (Aug 29, 2009)

I am a little late on this thread but wanted to add something. First there was a really interesting bit in Mountain Bike action about upgrading later, and someone mentioned it here. Spend as much as you can to get the better components now, essentially your buying the frame and getting the components free. But to upgrade later gets pretty expensive. Second, when you ride the bike, you'll know within 100 yards if it' for you. Get something that "fits" then adjust it to fit you. Adjust the seat front and back, move the brake levers in and down, rotate the bars, whatever, my point is if it fits, it fits if it doesn't you can't make it. Believe me I tried. I bought a Blue carbon XC2 from the classifieds here and build it up and no matter what I tried I just couldn't get it to fit, the top tube was to short and I couldn't keep the wheel down going up hills. Very frustrating. I went to the LBS and was going to trade it on a Flash 2 Lefty 29er Didn't fit. Knew it and so Instead I went with the trail SL2 29er. because it fits well, rides good and I got a good price because I go to the same guy for everything. Which brings me to the third and final point. Buy a bike from the guy down the street. Go in there and hang out, and develop a relationship with him. The LBS I deal with had two stores and the one 5 minutes from me closed due to the economy so I drive 25 minutes to the other shop because it's the same guys and they know me by name. The guys I traded my carbon bike to let me keep the thompson elite seatpost, the fizik saddle and the noir cranks and swapped them to the SL2 for me so we both got "the same deal". You don't get that service when you walk in off the street the first time. Oh and I'm 6'3" weigh about 235, 

Good luck,


----------



## 6SpeedTA95 (Jun 10, 2011)

-=Clinton=- said:


> I am a little late on this thread but wanted to add something. First there was a really interesting bit in Mountain Bike action about upgrading later, and someone mentioned it here. Spend as much as you can to get the better components now, essentially your buying the frame and getting the components free. But to upgrade later gets pretty expensive. Second, when you ride the bike, you'll know within 100 yards if it' for you. Get something that "fits" then adjust it to fit you. Adjust the seat front and back, move the brake levers in and down, rotate the bars, whatever, my point is if it fits, it fits if it doesn't you can't make it. Believe me I tried. I bought a Blue carbon XC2 from the classifieds here and build it up and no matter what I tried I just couldn't get it to fit, the top tube was to short and I couldn't keep the wheel down going up hills. Very frustrating. I went to the LBS and was going to trade it on a Flash 2 Lefty 29er Didn't fit. Knew it and so Instead I went with the trail SL2 29er. because it fits well, rides good and I got a good price because I go to the same guy for everything. Which brings me to the third and final point. Buy a bike from the guy down the street. Go in there and hang out, and develop a relationship with him. The LBS I deal with had two stores and the one 5 minutes from me closed due to the economy so I drive 25 minutes to the other shop because it's the same guys and they know me by name. The guys I traded my carbon bike to let me keep the thompson elite seatpost, the fizik saddle and the noir cranks and swapped them to the SL2 for me so we both got "the same deal". You don't get that service when you walk in off the street the first time. Oh and I'm 6'3" weigh about 235,
> 
> Good luck,


I'm going to hit two local joints tomorrow. One by where I work about 12 miles from here, the other about 2 miles from here. I'm going to ride several bikes at each place and then likely make a purchase in the next couple weeks.


----------

