This company has taken tremendous strides in triathlon. Its aluminum and its fabulous carbon TTX bikes are first rate and, once you get over about 5'9" in height, the dealers and consumers who champion Trek ought to be very proud and confident in what this company offers. All those good things notwithstanding, Trek seems to us to be casting about for direction on what to do for female triathletes.
In fairness, there's an honest philosophical difference of opinion between what we think and what Trek thinks regarding what women want (when it comes to a tri bike). Trek thinks women have basic structural differences in their pelvic regions (above the obvious) that causes them to generate power differently, ergo the WSD bikes they design. This refers not only to their road bikes, but to their tri bikes.
Though they believe this when it comes to racing as well as recreational riding, road as well as tri, their view does not seem to have generated traction in either road racing, time trial racing, or triathlon racing (at least in pro and top age-group racing). They would argue and say that yes, their view is in evidence at the races, just look at the degree to which women ride with their bars higher than men. Our response is, where's the evidence for that in road racing? And in triathlon, how would Trek know if women preferred to ride lower, since Trek's bikes are made so that women cannot get very low on them?
That's the scope of the philosophical distance between Trek and Slowtwitch, framed (we admit) in a way that favors our view. That established...
There are a couple of ways you can go with this company, if you're short. Starting at the top end, pretty much you can forget the otherwise fabulous Equinox TTX frame, because they just haven't made their smallest mold yet. There's a mold coming, I'm told, an XS, and from what we hear from Trek's product managers there is no firm decision on what they're going to do with it.
Next down are the aluminum Equinox models, all made in 700c, nothing smaller than 50cm, and again this is not a bike that's going to fit most people shorter than 5'6".
Next comes the Equinox 7 WSD, the highest-end of the women's specific tri bikes. This bike's smallest size, at 47cm, has the same head tube top -- the same stack if you will -- as the 50cm "boys" Equinox 7. How can that be? Because Trek thinks that a women needs a bike that has the same height as the man's bike in the next size up (road or tri). In other words, the women's 50cm will have the height of the men's 52cm, the women's 52cm the height of the men's 54cm, and so forth. At the same time, each of these sizes is smaller in length than the men's corresponding size. So, although the women's 52cm will be taller than the men's 52cm version, it will be shorter than the 52cm men's size.
The other change is that the women's seat angles will be a little steeper than the men's bikes. But that's in road race, not necessarily in tri.
When you talk to Trek about this, and why the 47cm Equinox 7 WSD gets 700c wheels instead of 650c, you get an amalgum of, "this is what we believe about women's anatomy," and "this is what the market is telling us." It seems to us that Trek needs to decide whether to lead on women's bike design, or whether to follow. Leading and following the market are both defensible goals, but rarely so when you try to execute both goals in tandem. For this reason Trek is still, we believe, asea on the future of its WSD tri bikes.
All that said, the stack of the Equinox 7 WSD isn't that bad, and at 49.0cm it's as low as any we've seen for a 700c bike (because of it's extremely short 7.8cm head tube). So, if it's a 700c wheel you're determined to ride, and you're short, the Equinox 7 (in 50cm) or 7 WSD (in 47cm) gives you that lowish (among 700c bikes) 49cm stack. The reach on the 47cm women's version (the WSD) is going to be a bit shorter, sez Trek, because it's got a shorter top tube.
In truth, the 50cm men's model is plenty short for quite a few people, depending on how they ride. The bike is built at 76 degrees of seat angle, but it's not really 76, since the Bontrager Race Lite TTX seat post is offset and flippable. The real top tube length is going to be more like 48cm or even shorter, depending on how steep you ride, if you ride with the post flipped forward. Of course, if you ride that seat post flipped backward, it'll be like steering your car from the back seat. Forget riding with the post in that configuration, especially if you're a woman.
The bike is priced nicely. You get a bunch of aero-type features in the frame, and at $1800 and change you'll ride 10sp 105, Cane Creek brake levers, Bontrager wheels (which in our experience are bulletproof), Bontrager Race Lite TT fork -- the same fork that goes in the Equinox TTX 9.5.
But the aero bars spec'd on this bike are Profile Aerolite clip-ons, a wonderful bar in other circumstances but a disastrous choice on this bike, because of its high profile armrests coupled with this bike's high stack (the stack is low for a 700c front wheel, but high compared to the bikes in this size made by Cervelo, QR, Felt, Kestrel, in short, all the bike companies that Trek must best if it's going to become the premier tri bike seller). Unless you want to ride so high in front you'll be able to see in second story windows while in the aero position, you'll need to switch the bars out for VisionTech, Hed, Oval or Blackwell. One look at Trek's catalog studio shot of its bike and you can see what we're writing about.
Let's sum this up. The Equinox 7 in 50cm, and Equinox 7 WSD in 47cm, is the same exact bike for all practical purposes, with these two distinctions: different paint; and the Equinox 7 is a little bit longer. But these two bikes are the same height, with the same stack, the same parts and the same price. So if you need a bit of extra length, or a little less length, that's the determiner when deciding on which bike.
If you can live with the men's version's longer length (which isn't very long if you ride the bike with the seat post flipped forward), you might also consider the Equinox 9 (it's the same everything, but slightly upgraded parts and at $2400).
Unfortunately, you will find Trek's catalogue, website, customer service reps, field sales reps, dealer tech reps, tech sheets, and retailers of little help in sorting through all this. I've spoken to or read from all of the above, and none of them represent, as of this writing (February, 07) an up-to-date, coherent narrative describing Trek's bikes. The website has several incorrect listings on its geometry page, and we've measured bikes in the retail stores that do not conform to Trek's printed specs. This is not unexpected, because Trek (we think) is reading the women's tri market by braille at the moment. It has done a fabulous job with its tri bikes for men. We recommend them with few or no reservations. It's just that they're still casting about with what to do beneath 50cm. For that reason, Trek gets a mixed review when it comes to tri bikes for those 5'6" or shorter.
Read more about Trek's tri bikes here.
SMALL BIKE CENTRAL
