Trek Y11 ... any good?
Miran Pozar
Hi!
I'd like to know what people think about the Trek Y11 bike.
It's a full-suspension - unified rear triangle.
Is there anybody who rides this bike to give me some
opinions? How does it ride? How's the rear susp.?
Frame: carbon fibre
Fr. shocks: Rockshox Indy SL long travel (3")
Re. shock: Fox coil over oil damper
Crank: Shimano STX RC
Shifters, gears: Shimano LX, Rapid Fire
Brakes: Shimano LX M600 V-brakes
Rims: Matrix Swami
Some other Bontrager parts, Shimano SPD,...
Thanks.
Stan Schweitzer
Miran Pozar wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I'd like to know what people think about the Trek Y11 bike.
> It's a full-suspension - unified rear triangle.
> Is there anybody who rides this bike to give me some
> opinions? How does it ride? How's the rear susp.?
>
I have a 96 that i have had since november 95. EFC 3" travel fork,
flite ti seat, xtr cranks,canti's,front dr.,cassette,bb,rear hub,
Sachs new success rear dr.,mavic 217's, ringle post,front hub and
xt shifters, avid levers. The frame is extremely durable. I crash
frequently and the frame just takes it. Make sure you are getting
one with a replaceable rear dr hanger. I have destroyed my hanger
twice. The rear suspension is twice (could be 4 times ) as stiff
when standing. You really only stand when sprinting,jumping, or
hitting a really large obstacle. If you stand on a climb you
loose traction. It is a great play bike and trail bike. It is
not a racer. Make sure to get a camel back. I tried the water
cage mount a couple of times but once you stick your hand into the
spinning tire you give up on it. I like it a lot.
Stan
Andy Gumpper
Miran,
A question like this depends on more than just the bike
itself. You must also account for your size, style of riding,
type of trails, and maybe the weather.
As for the bike, I think it's a good one. I own a Y-22, which
has different components. I love the OCLV frame. The design
works very well for me: 155-170lbs, Xcountry in TX and Ark,
love technical trails, mud,sand,logs,rocks, some mountains
in Arkansas, 25-105deg F. Personally, I thing the suspension
on the Y-11 would do just as good as what I'm using (maybe).
I upgraded to XTR V-brakes, and prefer gripshift.
I am not sure how it compares with the latest dually competition,
but there aren't many with an OCLV(Trek) frame.
Ben Kayfetz
Miran Pozar wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I'd like to know what people think about the Trek Y11 bike.
> It's a full-suspension - unified rear triangle.
> Is there anybody who rides this bike to give me some
> opinions? How does it ride? How's the rear susp.?
>
> Fr. shocks: Rockshox Indy SL long travel (3")
> Re. shock: Fox coil over oil damper
> Crank: Shimano STX RC
> Shifters, gears: Shimano LX, Rapid Fire
> Brakes: Shimano LX M600 V-brakes
> Rims: Matrix Swami
>
> Some other Bontrager parts, Shimano SPD,...
>
> Thanks.
I own a 95 Y22, and it is the best dam bike I have ever owned.....
Thanks
Ben Kayfetz
martha alexander
I just bought a 97 Y22 after riding a Proflex 453 for about 4 years.
I love the Y22!!!!!!!! I don't race but I ride nearly everyday in
Maryland mostly on singletrack and I love logs, rocks, streams, etc.
I weigh 165lbs and am 5'8" and at 48 years of age have shoulder and
back problems from doing stupid stuff while kayaking. Overall I'm
very pleased with the bike and my back and shoulders are thanking me
for the new found comfort. Bob
Brian Kerecz
I also own a 1995 Y-22 and would not even consider another bike again.
This is the design everyone else is now imitating. Go with the original
You won't regret it. My .02
Brian
Ben Kayfetz <ben_k...@sympatico.ca> wrote in article
<32EBD7...@sympatico.ca>...
Mike and Debbie Thompson
I'd like to know who is imitating Unified Rear Triangles. Almost
nobody is using or considering using that system and with good reason.
If you hardly ever stand up you need to find some rough stuff or go
faster or both. My next door neighbor who is also my mechanic has a Y
bike, my son has a Proflex 856 and I have had a Super v, an Outland a
GT RTS and a cheapie Raleigh 7000. I like the $800 Raleigh better than
that bend in the middle pogoing Y.
Mike
--
Mike Thompson
Mud Sweat & Gears
http://www.bikeusa.com
5340 NW Cache Rd.
Lawton, OK 73505
405-355-1808
800-933-1808
Vikram Banerjee
In article <32F17E...@sirinet.net>, Mike and Debbie Thompson
<dtho...@sirinet.net> wrote:
you hardly ever stand up you need to find some rough stuff or go
> faster or both. My next door neighbor who is also my mechanic has a Y
> bike, my son has a Proflex 856 and I have had a Super v, an Outland a
> GT RTS and a cheapie Raleigh 7000. I like the $800 Raleigh better than
> that bend in the middle pogoing Y.
>
I have to agree with Mike. I was in the market for a full-suspension bike to
ride in the mountains around Calgary. So I needed a bike that could climb up as
well as go down fast. I checked out a bunch of different bikes. First I did a
literature search to narrow down my choices. Mainly I didn't want a bike with a
lot of pivots that would get sloppy. I narrowed it down to the Trek Y and the
Cannondale Super V Active. In terms of price they were pretty similar and the
only problem I had with either bike was the Y bike's pivot was a bushing, not a
bearing as on the Super V. I took a test ride on each bike. I didn't like the
URT design becuase of the requirement to stay seated. Also the Y was not as
stiff overall as the Super V.
In the end I got the Cannondale and like it alot (except for the headshock which
I replaced with a Manitou FS). I stay seated in mild stuff and can get out of
the saddle when it gets crazy. The bike's suspension and my body's suspension
get me over just about anything.
I wouldn't buy a URT (not a great suspension design), or a linkage bike (too many
pivots and I don't want to fuss over a bike) - but that's just me. It seems like
some people are enjoying their Y bikes and in the end that's all mtn biking is
about.
Cheers,
DG
mar...@nucleus.com (Vikram Banerjee) wrote:
>I narrowed it down to the Trek Y and the
>Cannondale Super V Active. In terms of price they were pretty similar and the
>only problem I had with either bike was the Y bike's pivot was a bushing, not a
>bearing as on the Super V. I took a test ride on each bike. I didn't like the
>URT design becuase of the requirement to stay seated. Also the Y was not as
>stiff overall as the Super V.
Mountain Speed has a supposedly lighter and stiffer rear triangle that
comes with sealed bearings - they fit the Trek Y and the Gary Fisher
Joshua. They cost about double that from the bike manufacturers.
Has anyone tried them? How do they perform?
Dennis
Mike and Debbie Thompson
Go active. Stay away from URT's. Personal oinion.
Bart Childers
Mike and Debbie Thompson <dtho...@sirinet.net> wrote in article
<32FCA4...@sirinet.net>...
> DG wrote:
> > >Cannondale Super V Active. In terms of price they were pretty similar
and the
> > >only problem I had with either bike was the Y bike's pivot was a
bushing, not a
> > >bearing as on the Super V. I took a test ride on each bike. I didn't
like the
> > >URT design becuase of the requirement to stay seated. Also the Y was
not as
> > >stiff overall as the Super V.
On the Y-bike you don't have to stay seated. The pivot is low enough not to
cause the radical decrease in plushness that is found in "Sweet Spot" URT
designs. Plus, you don't get any pedal -induced pogo-ing.
> > Mountain Speed has a supposedly lighter and stiffer rear triangle that
> > comes with sealed bearings - they fit the Trek Y and the Gary Fisher
> > Joshua. They cost about double that from the bike manufacturers.
Save your money. Don't get too hung-up on bushing vs. bearing pivot. The
rear triangle goes through about 20-degrees of rotation, a bearing pivot
isn't going to make that much difference. I haven't heard what the weight
savings is but it would have to be significant to be worth the cost.
> Go active. Stay away from URT's. Personal oinion.
If you ride mostly XC, go with a URT (like the Y). IMHO, the lack of
pogo-ing when pedaling and the (slight) decrease in suspension action when
standing are *benefits* to the XC rider. If you prefer downhill; go with a
swing-arm type suspension.
Stan Schweitzer
Bart Childers wrote:
snip
> On the Y-bike you don't have to stay seated. The pivot is low enough not to
> cause the radical decrease in plushness that is found in "Sweet Spot" URT
> designs. Plus, you don't get any pedal -induced pogo-ing.
>
I think this is an advantage. You can set up the spring rate for ultra
plushness when seated and stand up for radical obstacles and still
get a firm response from the shock.
Stan a.k.a. the biff master
Bart Childers
Stan Schweitzer <schw...@a1.esvax.umc.dupont.com> wrote in article
<330CC7...@a1.esvax.umc.dupont.com>...
> Bart thats not quite true. The spring rate doubles when you stand.
> I think this is an advantage. You can set up the spring rate for ultra
> plushness when seated and stand up for radical obstacles and still
> get a firm response from the shock.
You are correct. The point I was trying (unsuccessfully) to make is that
the difference in the spring rate standing vs. sitting is not as radically
different on the Trek vs. The Sweet Spot design. For many riders this would
be advantagous. Personally, I find that the "Y" design strikes a better
balance between a "swing arm" suspension and the URT design of the Schwinn
(I had a s.10 up until about 30 days ago).