# Trek Transport Cargo Bike - revealed.



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

I got to try the Trek Transport, Transport + in Vegas and I've now owned the Transport for about a week. Here's some key observations.

$1300 - That is a great value. It comes complete with all the racks and one bag.

Specs - Weight is about 45 lbs. Wheelbase is 49 inches for the medium. Sizing is 17 and 20 inches.

All Aluminum frame - This is key as this bike is relatively light and it seems structurally sound and laterally stiff.

200 lb cargo capacity - 100 lbs on the rear tray and 50 lbs each on the side trays. Maybe another 25 in the front rack.

2x8 speed - gearing is perfect with 28/38 up front. 3 rings up front for a cargo bike is silly.

Disc brake in the front, Vbrake in the rear - Disc/Disc would have been nice but it is upgradeable in the rear and it has not been an issue yet.

Low BB and short cranks - BB is low at 11.4 inches. That's about 1 to 2 inches lower than most mountain bikes. To avoid hitting the cranks on the ground, they've been shortened to 165mm.

Mary-style handlebar and ergo grips - These are cool touches as the cockpit is very comfortable.

BB and rear triangle are extremely stiff. Because of the beefy aluminum construction to support all the rear cargo, the BB area has been reinforced quite a bit. The result is acceleration and responsiveness that is really surprising!! Handling is awesome too.

My research:
------------

This is the golden age of cargo bikes. As health, energy and environment issues arise, people are looking to bike more. The cargo bike is one solution to many of life's errands and To do list trips. It is a possible car replacement solution.

But all is not well. The cargo bike solutions are very immature and the current setups and pricing are just a hint of what they need to be. Here are some of the things I looked into:

*Surly Big Dummy* - about $2500 for a bike and $800 for a frame msrp. Xtracycle compatible and it seems that this is not usually a complete bike but a building block for an enthusiast or build kit ready system depending on the store you purchase from. Cargo capability is about 200 lbs assuming a 200lb rider.
Sizes: s, m, l, xl
frame weight: 12.6 lbs
wheelbase: 57.4 inches for medium









*Xtracycle Radish* - $1200, 45 lb complete chromoly bike. Load ability seems light at <100 lbs. Available in 2011. Pre-order only. Seems built for city and short trips.
wheelbase: around 54 inches
sizes: one available









*Xtracycle Freeradical BigStoker* - around $630 add on kits are available for normal mountain bikes. This connects to any old mountain bike and has a rear tray and two side bags. Many other configurations are available









*Kona Ute* - Built with an aluminum frame and 29er wheels. $1050 with bags. Wheelbase is a little shorter. Big tire options are limited for pavement
Wheelbase: 50 inches
sizes: M, L









*Yuba Mundo* - $1250 complete bike without bags. This is an extremely heavy bike with 400 lb cargo capacity. This bike is suited for flat city riding as a minivan replacement
wheelbase: 59.5 inches
sizes: one available









So that's the landscape as I understood it. Please comment and give me feedback as I'm starting to write an article on cargo bikes.

*My experience:
*Here's some of my photos. They will show what a blast I'm having with the Trek Transport. My biggest revelation is how fun it is to ride and how easy it is to pedal.

The bottom bracket is extemely stiff and low at 11.4 inches. So it's easy to get on and power really transfers to the ground. It takes a bit to get it going but it keeps its speed well.

Handling is truly incredible. Because it's laterally stiff and low to the ground, it feels like a stretch limo sports car. It's very predictable on corners and really easy to maneuver. Surprisingly, despite an aluminium frame and small tires, it is very, very comfortable. The long wheelbase seems to smooth everything out.

*Weaknesses:*
- there's a lot of rattling in the back from the folding side trays and locking pin
- the stem is way too short because of the mary style bars
- the bag needs better compartments and the straps can use some improvement.

Photos:

UPS cannot deliver a box this big!!

From 2010-12-03

hope it's all here:

From 2010-12-03

all done

From 2010-12-03

Nice bag and kickstand. Notice it's standing even though not balanced

From 2010-12-03

massive yoke

From 2010-12-03

mighty chainstay

From 2010-12-03

roast pig tray

From 2010-12-03

art shot

From 2010-12-03

loaded with dog and baseball gear

From 2010-12-03

We call this the happy bike

From 2010-12-03

it's strong and easy to handle

From 2010-12-03

150 lb rider plus 180 lbs in passengers

From 2010-12-03

1000 foot mtb climb

From 2010-12-03

fc


----------



## XDEEDUBBX (Oct 18, 2010)

thats tight!! Nice man


----------



## rgonzalo (Oct 21, 2008)

I got my Xtracycle Freeradical back in June 2007 and have no regrets converting my old mountain bike to a long tail. The bike has so many uses from hauling people/kids to groceries.

Like you, I have a blast riding it and the kids as well. I find that the free loader design is very useful as you can see from my pictures on how I use them.

http://picasaweb.google.com/rgonzalo59/XtraCycle?feat=directlink


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

Nice! I like the concept of the fold up side trays, but the rattling would drive me bonkers.


----------



## superjohnny (Aug 5, 2005)

Cool, I like the low top tube & front rack.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

superjohnny said:


> Cool, I like the low top tube & front rack.


Yes, that front rack is a bonus. Nobody else seems to have that in stock configuration.

The super low top tube allows for 'female' style bike entry. I'm trying to get used to that. It's convenient to avoid hitting your knee on the rear rack or when there's something big back there.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

baker said:


> Nice! I like the concept of the fold up side trays, but the rattling would drive me bonkers.


It rattles a bit on trails and where's no bags. I think I've figured it out by putting ample spacers on the moving pivots of the side trays. Now it's pretty tight and they stay in the location you leave them even without the locking pin.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

rgonzalo said:


> I got my Xtracycle Freeradical back in June 2007 and have no regrets converting my old mountain bike to a long tail. The bike has so many uses from hauling people/kids to groceries.
> 
> Like you, I have a blast riding it and the kids as well. I find that the free loader design is very useful as you can see from my pictures on how I use them.
> 
> http://picasaweb.google.com/rgonzalo59/XtraCycle?feat=directlink


Awesome! I've always wanted to learn about that system. How is it mounted to the bike and how does it stay laterally stiff? Is it just mounted on the dropouts? Are disc brakes possible?


----------



## rgonzalo (Oct 21, 2008)

There are 3 mount points 1 in front just behind the bottom bracket and the 2 rear dropouts. The free radical I got has the disc brake option in the rear. They designed the free loaders buckle system so you can use them as straps over the top to tie down things like the dog carrier.

I like the fold down trays that the Trek has. Xtracycle has them as well as an option called wide loaders I think but they don't fold up like the Trek ones. I put on the footsie pad instead for the back passengers and added a stoker bar for them to hold on to.

The nice about the conversion, is that its completely reversible.


----------



## Pigtire (Jan 13, 2004)

Cool ride, Francois. It's great it comes stock with the front rack and loving the lechon sized rear platform. I wished my Dummy had that sized rear rack. I'm glad there are more cargo bike options out there now.:thumbsup:


----------



## Leopold Porkstacker (Apr 21, 2010)

francois said:


> Yes, that front rack is a bonus. Nobody else seems to have that in stock configuration.
> 
> The super low top tube allows for 'female' style bike entry. I'm trying to get used to that. It's convenient to avoid hitting your knee on the rear rack or when there's something big back there.
> 
> fc


I've accidentally kicked my kid in the ribs twice getting on the Big Dummy with the PeaPod LT installed, swinging my leg over the top of the seat. (see photo) I have since become accustomed to mounting more "chick-style", such that the wellbeing of my son's ribs is taken into consideration.


----------



## superjohnny (Aug 5, 2005)

Leopold Porkstacker said:


> I've accidentally kicked my kid in the ribs twice getting on the Big Dummy with the PeaPod LT installed, swinging my leg over the top of the seat. (see photo) I have since become accustomed to mounting more "chick-style", such that the wellbeing of my son's ribs is taken into consideration.


hehehehe totally.


----------



## lawfarm (May 14, 2010)

Yeah, I've done the kid kick too, with the peapod. Takes some getting used to.

I'd be curious to ride my Dummy and the Transport back to back...this is one instance where I suspect rider comfort on the steel bike would be significantly greater.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

lawfarm said:


> Yeah, I've done the kid kick too, with the peapod. Takes some getting used to.
> 
> I'd be curious to ride my Dummy and the Transport back to back...this is one instance where I suspect rider comfort on the steel bike would be significantly greater.


I've yet to try a Big Dummy but I will soon since my neighbor has one.

I would say that I ride a lot of bikes working for mtbr. The Trek Transport is one of the most comfortable rides I've ridden mostly because of the long wheelbase. I've taken it on three significant trail rides too. It is a limo in comfort but it is way easier to manuever than my trailer bike setups.

So it'll probably be smoother with steel, or with 29er wheels but there is really no need. This bike is really smooth and that's just with the stock 1 inch tires at 45 psi.

I'll report back after I try the big dummy.

fc


----------



## GregB406 (Dec 19, 2005)

The Trek bike looks well thought out. However it has a city look to it. Different people will gravitate to the different choices for their individual needs or prefences.

I have a Big Dummy and completely enjoy it. It has a triple chain ring, which I do use. When hauling gear into the mountains the granny ring is very necessary. When going to the store, it is a useless apendage. 

While people keep debating about what is better, 26 or 29 inch wheels, a friend of mine built his Big Dummy with a 29 inch front wheel. He loves it. So the Dummy can be convertible that way, something that I'd like to try myself.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

GregB406 said:


> The Trek bike looks well thought out. However it has a city look to it. Different people will gravitate to the different choices for their individual needs or prefences.
> 
> I have a Big Dummy and completely enjoy it. It has a triple chain ring, which I do use. When hauling gear into the mountains the granny ring is very necessary. When going to the store, it is a useless apendage.
> 
> While people keep debating about what is better, 26 or 29 inch wheels, a friend of mine built his Big Dummy with a 29 inch front wheel. He loves it. So the Dummy can be convertible that way, something that I'd like to try myself.


Good input!!

On the chainring issue, my claim is the big ring is not necessary for most cases. Most people put a 42 or 44 big ring by default but I think it not needed. Who can turn that gear on level ground? On downhill, you don't really want to pedal.

The downside of a big ring is it's just a menace that can injure you or stain your pants. It also makes your chain longer.

A 26/38 front ring is much better as default. The 26 can be made smaller if there are big hills and the 38 can be enlarged if needed. There is a chainring guard by default which is good.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Here's my video review:






fc


----------



## Mr Pink57 (Jul 30, 2009)

What is the consensus on drop bars for cargo bikes? I do see a lot of mary style bars usually on these types of bikes but not much else. Or maybe a MTN drop like a gary?

I saw the video and what is that spring on the down tube near the front tire for? I assume it's for the fenders.


----------



## GregB406 (Dec 19, 2005)

good video. Well presented.

I like the handlebars and the upcoming electric option.

I have 3 x 8 gearing. I use my 44T big ring all the time in town. Usually ride in 5th and 6th gears. With a downhill or wind blowing behind I can cruise over 15 mph in 7th and 8th gears. Riding with a full load of groceries I have to start off in 3rd. This is all with the big ring on mostly level pavement. I think the big ring is fine. 

I don't get to use the middle ring much. However I wouldn't say it isnt needed though. There may be a time someday when I'll love it.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Mr Pink57 said:


> What is the consensus on drop bars for cargo bikes? I do see a lot of mary style bars usually on these types of bikes but not much else. Or maybe a MTN drop like a gary?
> 
> I saw the video and what is that spring on the down tube near the front tire for? I assume it's for the fenders.


Good question. The spring attaches to the fork with an L bracket and tensions the fork to help 'auto-center' it. It keeps the handlebar straight when the bike is on the kickstand. What happens is the steering will fall to one side and the front rack will collide with the frame.

The other purpose is it's supposed to help the steering of the bike when the front rack is loaded.

This is just theory and I've yet to test it. Anyone have experience with it? I imagine it will adversely affect handling of the bike when the front rack is not loaded.

For drop bars, it would take away from the upright riding position and will make this bike less ideal for going through the city and short trips. The advantage would be a more aerodynamic position and one will be able to put a little more power down to the pedals. This is probably a good configuration if the bike is used for long commutes and touring.

fc


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

francois said:


> Good question. The spring attaches to the fork with an L bracket and tensions the fork to help 'auto-center' it. It keeps the handlebar straight when the bike is on the kickstand. What happens is the steering will fall to one side and the front rack will collide with the frame.
> 
> The other purpose is it's supposed to help the steering of the bike when the front rack is loaded.
> 
> This is just theory and I've yet to test it. Anyone have experience with it? I imagine it will adversely affect handling of the bike when the front rack is not loaded.


Sounds like the steering stabilizer that I have on my Mundo. Keeps the front wheel from flopping around, mostly when sitting on the kickstand. Reduces the chance of the bike falling over. Personally, I didn't notice any difference in steering when I added mine.

Like here: http://clevercycles.com/p/?prod-code=Hebie+steering+stabilizer+695#Hebie-steering-stabilizer-695


----------



## anotherbrian (Mar 18, 2005)

francois said:


> Good input!!
> 
> On the chainring issue, my claim is the big ring is not necessary for most cases. Most people put a 42 or 44 big ring by default but I think it not needed. Who can turn that gear on level ground? On downhill, you don't really want to pedal.
> 
> ...


I use my 48 (on a 26/36/48 triple) all the time. If I were riding in the dirt, maybe I'd give it up, but on paved level ground, I think it is useful. I can't imagine having a 38 on the top in my neighborhood ... I'd be coasting or soft-peddling half the time.

As far as bars go, I started with a Nitto North Road bar to get a super upright position (I'm using an uncut fork steerer with a cheap but really high-rise stem), but was continually banging my knees in low speed turns. I switched to a set of Mary bars, and while I like the sweep (I'm a long-time user of them on geared MTBs), after awhile they feel too wide. I've considered getting a Titec H-bar to get the hand position on the extension (which I really like) but I'm worried they won't work well with the gripshifts I already have. Devo says gripshifts work on it, though I'm not convinced having never had luck with them on my Jones H-bar.


----------



## anotherbrian (Mar 18, 2005)

baker said:


> Sounds like the steering stabilizer that I have on my Mundo. Keeps the front wheel from flopping around, mostly when sitting on the kickstand. Reduces the chance of the bike falling over. Personally, I didn't notice any difference in steering when I added mine.
> 
> Like here: http://clevercycles.com/p/?prod-code=Hebie+steering+stabilizer+695#Hebie-steering-stabilizer-695


I think you'd probably need something like the Hopey steering damper (www.hopey.org) to make a difference in motion.

That Hebie is a nice idea. Unloaded and on the center-stand, my Big Dummy rests on its front wheel and mostly stays where you leave it ... but as soon as anything goes on the back, especially if there is a helmet weighing down one side of the bars, it comes whipping around (and worse case dropping the helmet).


----------



## SelfPropelledDevo (Oct 2, 2005)

wow Francios: cargo bike... cool!


----------



## ventura (Jul 11, 2010)

It looks like a great bike, and a great price. But I would prefer a 22t small chainring, if I were to put 50-200 pounds of cargo on it and pedal up a hill. And if I had a 22t small chainring, I think a 22-32-42 crankset would be a good choice.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

ventura said:


> It looks like a great bike, and a great price. But I would prefer a 22t small chainring, if I were to put 50-200 pounds of cargo on it and pedal up a hill. And if I had a 22t small chainring, I think a 22-32-42 crankset would be a good choice.


You can put a 22t tooth chainring on this if you want. It is configurable to one's tastes whether they want a smaller front ring or a larger big ring.

I believe the double ring is much better optimized for most applications. Plus it allows a chainguard that keeps the greasy chainring off one's pants or calf.

fc


----------



## wvucyclist (Nov 8, 2007)

I'm curious to what your commuter bike was before the Transport, to give relativity to your review. Did it come with the bag also? 
Thanks for the review!


----------



## Mr Pink57 (Jul 30, 2009)

Trek's webiste shows that it does come with a Bontrager Transport cargo bag.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

Thanks for the write-up, Francois. 

So, peeping closely at the pictures, it does have a disc rear hub and rear IS frame mounts? 

Can it take real dirt meaty tires?

I could totally rock this bike, but it would want it to be flexible enough for mountain touring. 

I dunno... I could do this or a Kona Ute. What I like about the Ute is the 29er wheels.


----------



## Moval49er (Mar 21, 2008)

pimpbot said:


> Thanks for the write-up, Francois.
> 
> So, peeping closely at the pictures, it does have a disc rear hub and rear IS frame mounts?
> 
> ...


X2 - especially regarding the 29er tires. Also, 165mm cranks? We have a ton of hills and my house is on top of one - I'd want all the crank I could get - and a granny.

Otherwise, the racks and bag are brilliant, and I really like how Gary and the Trek engineers approache bike design.

Any hope of reviewing the Kona Ute in contrast?


----------



## SelfPropelledDevo (Oct 2, 2005)

Moval49er said:


> X2 - especially regarding the 29er tires. Also, 165mm cranks? We have a ton of hills and my house is on top of one - I'd want all the crank I could get - and a granny.
> 
> Otherwise, the racks and bag are brilliant, and I really like how Gary and the Trek engineers approache bike design.
> 
> Any hope of reviewing the Kona Ute in contrast?


I'm thinking this bike is spec'd with the commuter in mind.
to me it seems to be a plug and play adaptation

that is to say: In my view, its seems that the bike is aimed at a market where the rider's locale is fairly flat, and the hauling/securing of cargo, is obviously aimed to be thrown into the large bags and use the platform rack.

chainring cover, no granny gear, short cranks; says to me flat land. urban light cargo

whereas:

In my experience with cargo bikes
and hauling silly loads
the bike vs At Work Trailer, is the major contender

that is to say: why even a cargo bike when all you have to do is use a cargo trailer
which in reality the At Work Trailer could haul multiple cargo bikes...

however, the convenience of not dragging around a mondo-huge 2 wheel trailer
and simply riding a long tail cargo bike, is a vastly different approach.

yes... a cargo bike can easily go on a 1500 mile bike tour, whereas I'm not as hot on the idea of pulling a big At Work Trailer for that duration.

of course the long tail is also capable of off road travel
which in my Bicycle Pracitice; the freedom of bicycling is ultimately rooted in the dirt.
that is to say: why be bound to follow prescribed routes of travel?
with the notions of a big cargo trailer, going over a curb is... well... absurd

whereas a solid long tail can simply deviate from travel prescription

versatility:

is ultimately what I've come to know of the cargo bike
you may find yourself: hauling a bookcase
you may find yourself: hauling some kids
you may find yourself: traveling a cross the state to visit relatives
you may find yourself: hauling cat litter

and you may ask yourself...

how do I haul this?
how did I come to think I'd carry a bike stand?
or my buddy's bike?

the answer lays with in you 
that would be knowledge
the way of the Knot is your friend
to know a half hitch
a truckers not
an any other lashing, fastening, and securing method you'd opt.

aesthetically pleasing bags are always nice
and readily deployable riggings support their use...

beknownst unto thee the suggestive nature of conviviality & convenience, thereby one day you may find yourself clad to velcro unknowing that of a rope and knot


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Moval49er said:


> X2 - especially regarding the 29er tires. Also, 165mm cranks? We have a ton of hills and my house is on top of one - I'd want all the crank I could get - and a granny.
> 
> Otherwise, the racks and bag are brilliant, and I really like how Gary and the Trek engineers approache bike design.
> 
> Any hope of reviewing the Kona Ute in contrast?


Cranks are 170mm. Logic is they anticipate the wife and kids to use this bike too.

Definitely more of a commuter, car replacement application on this. But I will stick some mountain bike tires backt there and see what fits.

This bike definitely climbs good despite the gearing and shortish cranks. I guess cargo bikes get good climbing traction because of the weight back there. I've done all my trail climbs on slick tires so far.


----------



## Moval49er (Mar 21, 2008)

francois said:


> Cranks are 170mm. Logic is they anticipate the wife and kids to use this bike too.
> 
> Definitely more of a commuter, car replacement application on this. But I will stick some mountain bike tires backt there and see what fits.
> 
> This bike definitely climbs good despite the gearing and shortish cranks. I guess cargo bikes get good climbing traction because of the weight back there. I've done all my trail climbs on slick tires so far.


Thanks! 170 mm is probably not so bad.

Car replacement is my focus here too - I'm just trying to maximize getting my porky butt up the pefectly paved, perfectly steep roads where they built my house. Unfortunately, they built all the stores and doctors and LBS at the bottom of the hill, so, in a nod to Devo, that's commuting to me. Flat and level isn't my life.

The reason I consider the Kona is 29" tires (all my spare wheels are, and I like 'em tubeless - even the Vulpines this one would wear) and discs are already there. But - I like and trust Fishers.

Don't suppose you could crowd 29ers into the Transport?:thumbsup:


----------



## SelfPropelledDevo (Oct 2, 2005)

long tail cargo bikes change the % of weight distribution
to 
50/50

see surly spew #19
http://www.surlybikes.com/blog/spew/spew_19_big_dummy/

nominally speaking:
a traditional bike has the weight around 30/70, fore and aft, respectively

the reality is that an empty cargo bike while climbing, actually has less traction than a traditional MTB.

weight in the cargo area are what make the bike stick.
however, traction proportional to additional weight is obviously a death spiral.
that is to say?
if you need more traction to climb a hill; why add weight to the rear wheel?
am I a tractor?
cargo bikes tend to force induce the motor.

the transport seems to me to be sporting the City Bike niche.
is the transport the Electra of cargo bikes?
or would that be the Mundo?


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

On an unrelated topic, Happy birthday, Devo!!

I see what you are saying. Seems Trek went more for comfort than sport. Kinda reminds me of the Raleigh bike my mom had. Cottered cranks, 3 speed internal hub. I think the thing was actually like 55 pounds. Comfy to ride, and rolled very effortlessly, until you pointed it up a hill.

Short cranks are easy on the legs for easy spinning, but aren't so good for trying to build up as much crazy speed as you can.


----------



## fox1965 (Dec 21, 2010)

*Trek v. Yuba Mundo*

Trek Cargo looks a lot like Yuba Mundo in its cargo section. Yuba load supports are not foldable but can carry more than a double - 440 pounds plus a rider. Yuba weighs almost 10 pounds more but can carry another 220 compared to Trek. I guess it comes down to if you ever need the extra capacity. I own Yuba and used it to its max and am very happy with it. It rides really smoothly and balances the load really well. Let's hope Trek Cargo will do the same. Looks like a nice addition to Yuba, Kona, Surly BD family of trucks.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

fox1965 said:


> Trek Cargo looks a lot like Yuba Mundo in its cargo section. Yuba load supports are not foldable but can carry more than a double - 440 pounds plus a rider. Yuba weighs almost 10 pounds more but can carry another 220 compared to Trek. I guess it comes down to if you ever need the extra capacity. I own Yuba and used it to its max and am very happy with it. It rides really smoothly and balances the load really well. Let's hope Trek Cargo will do the same. Looks like a nice addition to Yuba, Kona, Surly BD family of trucks.


How much exactly does the Yuba Mundo weigh? I tried to find out but could find anything accurate.

fc


----------



## fox1965 (Dec 21, 2010)

*Yuba Weight*

Yuba Mundo v3 21 speed - 55 pounds. Now that I have winter spiked tires on and a front rack it approaches 60. I usually carry one bag of varied weight only and two kids of 120 pounds combined. This is the heavy duty version, BMX Modus hubs with 48 spokes and 14 mm solid axles etc. You can significantly lighten it if you go Shimano XT, but then weight limit goes down, since the rear wheel would become a limiting variable. So far I carried 4 kids on it or 2 adults on ice and snow and I could barely feel it in terms of handling. I had to downshift and pedal harder, but it was manageable. I am 6'2" and over 200 pounds, so I am happy with my monster.


----------



## josh zollinger (Jan 28, 2008)

Does anyone have any experience with a child carrier like the Peapod on the Transport? I'm on the fence right now between a Ute & a Transport, both are right pricepoint for me (I like the Yuba but I just don't need that much hauling capacity). Right now I'm leaning towards a Transport but only if I can fit a child seat on the rear deck.


----------



## Turtle01 (Sep 20, 2005)

One thing that I'd like to point out so the new people looking at cargos don't freak out on one of the details.... The bottom bracket is not uncharacteristically low. It is in fact almost the same as the Big Dummy. The BD with 26x2.1" tire (outer measure is ~26") with a 1.6" BB drop is 11.4". The Transport is stated with a 11.4" BB with 26x1.5" tires. So, it's in actuality a tiny bit higher than the BD if using the same tires (by the stated specs anyway). The real life measurements may vary and will with tire size on both. Trek's hardtails state a 11.7" BB for unsagged measurements as well, so sagged they'd be closer to the 11.4" as well.

Oh, I like the idea of the 170mm cranks on the 17" frame. I'm 5'6" and 170mm is what my other bikes have. :thumbsup: 

Disclaimer I don't have a cargo bike. I'm just entertaining the thought of getting one in the future. :yesnod:


----------



## fox1965 (Dec 21, 2010)

Josh, I would not spend too much time deciding which bike you want. If you are going to transport kids on it, the Kona does not have leg supports. Trek, Yuba and BD have them. Otherwise the bikes are similar. Kona is the most fragile of the bunch, Yuba the most heavy duty. Go and get one, ride it before your purchase if you can. I am doing well with Yuba without a car (no my wife does not have one either...). You can really transport about anything you would transport in the car and you can cover quite big distances. It basically behaves like a standard MTB or an MTB tandem.


----------



## DJAdzyH (Apr 20, 2011)

hi folks. I am in Singapore having trouble getting hold of a cargo bike. Planning two kid seats for my twins.

Trek was only company here said they could order it in for me. However they advised the Trek Transport is not recommended for child seat, strange i found. They could not recommend any brand of child seat that will slot on the TreK Transport.

Any advise on this? I expect with some custom work i must be possible.

tks adam [email protected]


----------



## kuan (Oct 18, 2008)

DJAdzyH said:


> hi folks. I am in Singapore having trouble getting hold of a cargo bike. Planning two kid seats for my twins.
> 
> Trek was only company here said they could order it in for me. However they advised the Trek Transport is not recommended for child seat, strange i found. They could not recommend any brand of child seat that will slot on the TreK Transport.
> 
> ...


Trek is lame. They are just another big corporation hiding behind concerns over liability.

Anyway I think it can be done. The way Xtracycle has it on their site they sell an adapter to go with the Yepp Maxi seat. Screw the adapter onto the Trek's deck and attach the seats.


----------



## DJAdzyH (Apr 20, 2011)

Hi Kuan, appreciate the reply. Yes Trek not ideal. However they are only company in Singapore willing to bring in a long tail for me. You are correct can probably fix the Yepp Maxi adapter to the Trek Transport long rack. Yepp Maxi is available in Singapore. I have a suspended Yepp Maxi on my MTB they are nice child seats. However with this adapter on a rack they sit unnecessarily high.

I prefer this Peanut Shell seat that sits flush to the rack:
http://yubaride.com/utility-bikes-accessories
One reason I am looking at the Yuba or Kona Ute bodd difficult to get here.

Does anyone know the exact width of the rack on the Trek transport ?

Tks


----------



## Adam_M (Aug 8, 2008)

Bear in mind that a child seat fitted flush on the rear deck will maximize the interference between the seat 'legs' and cargo carrying. There is a reason the latest Peapod III design sits higher on the Xtracycle/Big Dummy.


----------



## DJAdzyH (Apr 20, 2011)

Adam_M said:


> Bear in mind that a child seat fitted flush on the rear deck will maximize the interference between the seat 'legs' and cargo carrying. There is a reason the latest Peapod III design sits higher on the Xtracycle/Big Dummy.


Hi Adam m,

Many tks the reply. Good point. In my case I want kids low for stability not worried about cargo bag. I just ordered the transport size 20 from trek Singapore which is good news. Now looking to source the Peanut shell child seats. I have a suspended yepp child seat on my mtb they are better quality product then the peanut shell which looks cheap but I don't like how high the yepp rides.

All advise from trek is to not use trek transport for child seat but I am planning to try. Have not seen anyone else do it on the Internet?

Ps: the Yuba Mundo in black looks sweet I am keen on that but impossible to get here. Looks like trek being so big is gonna win markets like this.

Tks Adam h

Tks


----------



## damnitman (Jan 30, 2008)

Any new owner reviews specifically of the Transport? I'm moving soon and would like to not have to buy a car when I get to my destination. I've narrowed my probable purchase to either a BD or the Transport...Whichever I buy I'm planning on a component upgrade, so realistically a BD frameset might be the way to go, ergo I am looking for reasons to keep looking and the Trek to justify the added expense of the component / wheelset upgrades...thanks.


----------



## lawfarm (May 14, 2010)

Trek Transport+ Review - BikeRadar

My riding time on a Transport is about 10 miles, just out of curiosity. I found the ride to be much harsher than the Dummy, and don't really think the Transport is a viable competitor...the only reason it is likely to get market share is because Trek has a huge dealer network.


----------



## Plum (Sep 14, 2004)

There's a review of the transport (with the motor option) in the newest copy of Bicycle Times. Seemed to be well reviewed, unless you're wanting to haul kids with it.

I saw one in the LBS, and I liked the bag setup on it, but that's about it. The freeloader setup that I have is pretty formless, which is both good and bad.

Plum


----------



## damnitman (Jan 30, 2008)

Thanks. Anyone else?


----------



## cpm01 (Jul 14, 2011)

Buddy of mine has a transport, I have a big dummy (and am a big dummy) I kinda hate comparisons (mine's bigger than yours!) but here's my take. 


Transport
Big Dummy Complete Bike (not a build up)

The Transport has a smaller disk up front, and a rim brake in the rear, perfectly adequate. 
The Big Dummy has larger disks, fore and aft. Extremely adequate. 
The Transport has (in my opinion) nicer bars, stem and headset/ 
The Big Dummy has pretty unimaginative mountain bike straight bars/cheap stem/adequate but nothing fancy headset. 
The Transport is nearly a step-through frame, very nice when mounting the bike with heavy loads.
The Big Dummy isn't exactly a step-through, though the top tube is low enough that one may carefully mount 
with a big load. 
The Transport has a center stand
The Big Dummy has a much better (imho) center stand, , , as optional equipment
The Transport has a front fender
The Big Dummy does not have a front fender
The Transport has a very nice 'porteur' style front rack
The Big Dummy does not have a front rack
The Transport has pretty nice 26x1.5 tyres
The Big Dummy has pretty nice 26x2.1 tyres 
The Transport comes in a 17" and 20" frame
The Big Dummy comes in a 16",18",20",22" frame
The Transport 17" has a 48.5 inch wheelbase
The Big Dummy 16" has a 56.5 inch wheelbase
The Transport comes with nice fold down rear rack 'shelves'
The Big Dummy does not come with nice fold down rear rack shelves. Shelves are an option. (Wideloaders) which do not fold. 
The Transport comes with a single large rear pannier weatherproof bag
The Big Dummy comes with a set of Xtracycle 'Freeloader' open cargo bags. 


The Transport MSRPs for $1,389.99
The Big Dummy MSRPs for $1,849.00

I love my Big Dummy, 
He loves his Transport, 
and they are both really nice bikes that work.


----------



## PScal (Apr 29, 2010)

cpm01 said:


> I love my Big Dummy,
> He loves his Transport,
> and they are both really nice bikes that work.


Well said, and great comparison. Thank you!


----------



## lawfarm (May 14, 2010)

Yeah, that is a great comparison.

I _may_ be slightly biased, but I'd say that--price aside--if you throw a different set of bars (say some Jones Loop Bars), a set of fenders (say Planet Bike), and a center stand (say Rolling Jackass) on a Dummy, it's a better bike. The longer wheelbase is great for heavy cargo and for ride characteristics, and the steel frame is not nearly as harsh or 'pingy' as the Transport's aluminum frame. Plus, you have the availability of all Xtracycle accessories and cross-compatibility with a lot more potential parts (new and used).

I'm just saying... (Insert emoticon here).


----------



## damnitman (Jan 30, 2008)

Exactly what I was looking for...Thanks.


----------



## sfuller (Jan 14, 2007)

lawfarm said:


> Yeah, that is a great comparison.
> 
> I _may_ be slightly biased, but I'd say that--price aside--if you throw a different set of bars (say some Jones Loop Bars), a set of fenders (say Planet Bike), and a center stand (say Rolling Jackass) on a Dummy, it's a better bike.


My guess is that unless you find one used, a RJ centerstand will be hard to come by now. The gentleman who built them passed away earlier this year.


----------



## lawfarm (May 14, 2010)

sfuller said:


> My guess is that unless you find one used, a RJ centerstand will be hard to come by now. The gentleman who built them passed away earlier this year.


That's terrible! I see it's no longer offered on Xtracycle's site, either. He was a super-cool dude, and really great to work with.


----------



## beoutside (May 5, 2007)

Do you still like it ? How fat can you go on the back wheel ? Thanks


----------

