THROWBACK THURSDAY: 1992 TREK 9000 REVIEW – THE PROS AND CONS OF SIMPLICITY

The wonder years of full suspension mountain bikes.

1992 TREK 9000 REVIEW

In this fledgling age of fully suspended bicycles, there is an ongoing process of learning which designs work best and which don’t work at all. Up to now, elastomer polymer and hydraulically damped systems have provided good results when used in the right applications. Hydraulically suspended units are advantageous in the sense that they generally have the best compression adjustability. These systems also have the most damping control. Elastomer units, on the other hand, are much simpler because of fewer moving parts but have a lower degree of adjustability in both compression and rebound damping.

For ’92, Trek decided to mate urethane bumpers with one of the more unique rear suspension designs on the market. Few people expected Trek to join the fray of suspension bike builders, but their entry no doubt bolstered the claim by many that suspension was not just some passing fad.

In the long run: With the 9000, Trek falls into the same category as every other big-name manufacturer that puts out a flawed suspension bike for their first attempt. We would like to see either a coil spring or air shock replace the stack of rubber bumpers currently used in the rear.

FACTS & FIGURES

At the heart of the Trek 9000 is its internally lugged, American-made frame constructed from Easton 7000-series ProGram tubing. The aluminum tubing has been well received by riders because of its inherent ride qualities and weight savings. Our 18-inch test bike (19.5 effectively) had a 22.25-inch top tube, 11.25-inch bottom bracket, 17-inch chainstays and a 41.5-inch wheelbase. The Trek 9000 weighed in at 28 pounds, 14 ounces.

Trek’s 9000 was outfitted with Shimano’s Deore DX gruppo accompanied by a Deore XT RapidFire Plus upgrade. Surprisingly, our shifting wasn’t up to par with typical Shimano hardware. The fault lies in the amount of extra cable housing necessary to accommodate the rear suspension system. The rear derailleur housing had an S-shaped bend, which protruded away from the seat tube, thus rubbing on the rider’s legs. Wheel assemblies consisted of Shimano hubs, along with Matrix Single Track Pro rims. The Matrix tires had mediocre climbing and braking performance but cornered fine.

It turns out that mining trucks and mountain bikes have little in common.

TECHNICAL TALK

The heart of the 9000 is the stack of elastomer urethane bumpers that make up the rear suspension system. The simple design is comprised of an extruded 6061 T-6 aluminum swingarm that pivots at the seat tube and compresses the bumpers. Trek had experimented with gas shocks in the past but settled on bumpers.

The bonded frame has super-clean joints and a nice reinforced seat collar. The 9000’s frame always took first-time viewers by surprise when they laid eyes on the hole in the seat tube in which the rear brake cable is guided. As menacing as it looks, there is actually a reinforcing lug at the chainstay pivot juncture that helps ensure frame strength. Instead of a bushing, the swingarm pivot houses a Teflon-impregnated ceramic bearing that allows for smooth action and a lower friction temperature. Claimed travel comes in at 3 inches. We would have liked to have seen an additional water bottle mount; one is just not acceptable.

In conjunction with the rear suspension unit, the Trek DDS3 fork is standard equipment on the $1500 bicycle. The adjustable fork is air-sprung and oil-damped and has 2 inches of travel. The DDS3 forks are built by the Showa suspension company in Japan, but most of the design input came from Trek.

Equipped with an elastomer shock, the Trek 9000’s suspension system is one of the simplest available. Unfortunately, the lack of shock damping also made it one of the springiest. Test riders were also hampered by loosening problems with the nuts and bolts that hold the rear end together.

OUT IN THE BACKWOODS

Our eagerness to test the Trek was quickly laid to rest after our first ride. The lack of any rebound damping in the stack of seven bumpers made the bike feel like a springboard. Fast descending over rough terrain was almost frightening because of the quick rebound. When riding up and over squared-off ledges, the rear would spring back so fast that the rider would be suddenly thrown out of the saddle. The ride could best be compared to throwing a leg over a mechanical bucking bull at the local cowboy saloon! The Trek is not a bike for bumpy singletrack, but if you insist, it’s best that you take along your chaps.

Trek told us that the bumpers are original equipment on the multi-ton mining trucks that scavenge the hills looking for minerals; perhaps that should be their sole application. To our amazement, stock bumpers are supposed to accommodate riders from 130 to 210 pounds. Given these guidelines, heavier riders were still bothered by the springy rear end. Lateral looseness made the swingarm feel as if it was going to fall apart. Our test bike suffered from a constant loosening of swingarm bolts from day one.

The DDS3 forks worked marginally over most conditions. There was a tendency for them to top out when a rider would pull up on them. Overall stroke of the fork was smooth but not as progressive as we would have liked. Lateral rigidity was good.

THERE’S ALWAYS NEXT TIME

When we talked to Trek about the development of the 9000, they credited their “large and capable staff” of engineers for designing the bike. At the same time, they minimized the need of using a race team for research and development because “racer testimonials” on the success of any design are too subjective. This isn’t the first time we have heard a large bicycle company gloat over their in-house talents, neither are they the first to suffer from such an approach. Unfortunately, this mentality carries over into the performance of the 9000.

We were happy to see a big company like Trek enter the suspension market. However, like Schwinn and Cannondale before them, Trek will have to learn from their mistakes in order to improve the next generation. We would like to see a rear shock that has some rebound damping and a rear end that stays together for the duration of a ride. In all of their ads touting the 9000, Trek refers to the bike as a “beast.” They said it, we didn’t.

SPECIFICATIONS

Model: Trek 9000

Manufacturer: Trek USA

801 W. Madison St.

P.O. Box 183

Waterloo, WI 53594;

(414) 478-2197

Sizes available: 16.5”, 18”, 20”, 22”

Finishes available: White/black and black/orange.

Suggested retail price: $1500

FRAME

Tubing: Easton 7000 ProGram

Head angle: 71°

Seat angle: 73°

Top tube length: 22.25”

Chainstay length: 17”

Braze-ons: 1 water bottle mount.

Weight: 28 lb., 14 oz.