Mountain Biking - Trek 930 Single Track

I am 52 years old and getting reacquainted with biking. I recently purchased a 1995 Trek 930 "Single Track" at a backyard sale as a good "first" bike. I am confused over the term "single track". When I google the term, it refers to mountain biking in a one-way direction as opposed to double track which, I guess, means mountain biking along a trail where bikes are going in both directions? Anyway, I assume that the term single track (or double track that appears on other Treks) has nothing to do with the bike itself. Is that the case? Can someone enlighten me?

John, Good luck with the 930, those old Treks can be quite a bargain. I think your description of single track is close to correct. A trail that only allows a single bike to travel through is a singletrack. I would not describe it as one direction since other bikes may travel in the opposite direction, but someone has to give, or pull off the 'track' or path to let the other cyclist by. As for what Trek meant when they put the term on their bikes, beats me.

Hi John:

That same bike is hanging in my garage, and it's been through everything from a 12-hour mtb race, to adventure races, to poking around my neighborhood. In fact, I only replaced it with the Santa Cruz about three months ago.

So anyway - as you've seen, singletrack is basically a path only wide enough for one bike (going whichever way). Singletrack is usually more technical than a fire road (technical = hard), and is also usually lots of fun :D

I think Trek put it on the bike to "prove" it was a real mtb...but I can tell you it's practically bullet-proof. Good luck with it.

Does it look like this?

http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/9391/newone7ob.jpg
(my bike)

You've probably seen singletrack before. It's the really narrow winding hiking trails you see on the side of hills in wildlife areas.

Anyhow if you go riding offroad remember to keep your tire pressure low so that the tires soak up the bumps.

When mountain biking became popular in the late 80's, there was an assumption that folks would ride UP a hill as well as down a hill. Some folks would take off into a national park or forest, and ride hundreds of miles. So, for a while, the trend was toward bikes that were relatively light and well balanced.

The Trek 930 of the mid-90's was part of that "school" of mountain biking. Tough, yet light steel components that could take a beating year after year. Light enough to ride long distances off road. A fine bike.

After that, the mountain bike industry got interested in downhill, dual suspension, carbon frames, lots and lots of "marketing" ideas that added weight, or complexity, or cost to mountain bikes. A light, strong, affordable steel frame mountain bike does not fit the industry's profit oriented marketing...sad, because those were the best bikes for riding UP a hill.

Well yes, you are right. They now have a bike for every possible different style of riding, so now you have to buy 2-3 bikes to be able to do the selection of riding you want to do.

Well, I don't know. I was riding a Trek 830 up until last week. I'm keeping it, 'cause it's a good bike and prolly not worth more than $50 to anyone else. It has all the original components on it and it works okay. But, it didn't do anything special for me riding it. I have a Stumpjumper FSR now and loooove it. The ride is niiice. Shifting smooth, braking easy and the suspension is plush. Hopefully, 10 years from now, it'll still be rolling, just like my 830. But, I won't go back except to ride around town or whatever.

Thanks - to all that replied. Since I paid $60 (the bike was like new, hung in his rafters for the last 7 years, and never been on mountain trails) the comments I've received on the 930 are most satisfying.

I think mine is 95 or 96 and it costed 500-600 dollars(thats what my uncle said not sure though) so 60 is a great deal if its new.

I used to have one of the ones like Pheard. It was a great bike extremely solid and fast for a mountain bike. It was unfortunately stolen off of the campus at which I attend school. If any of you decide to part with you signeltrack let me know I would love to have it.

Hi, I also bought a trek 930 but the shifter cable has been removed and i can't understand how it connects. most of the shifters by the crank attach with a bolt to the cable that pull the lever up or down. but this has a seat for the cable sheath end to fit in and a hole for the cable to go through. but i see no place to attach the cable end to. can someone tell me how this is arranged to work the shifter?

Pics, we need pics.

Does the front derailleur have something like this attached to the cable clamp bolt?

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/Zanetti7/990fdtp.jpg

It's a top pull adapter. The housing stops at the derailleur, and the cable clamps to a fixed point on the frame - usually on the lower part of the seat tube or the chainstay bridge.

You can get alot of info on the 930 from Bikepedia ... http://bikepedia.com/Search.aspx?Q=trek+930
I had one, and thought it was a great bike. Sounds like a nice deal for $60. Hard to beat yard sale pricing.

Hi, I also bought a trek 930 but the shifter cable has been removed and i can't understand how it connects. most of the shifters by the crank attach with a bolt to the cable that pull the lever up or down. but this has a seat for the cable sheath end to fit in and a hole for the cable to go through. but i see no place to attach the cable end to. can someone tell me how this is arranged to work the shifter?

Look at the bottom bracket shell, forward of the chain stay bridge and you should find a threaded hole ( water bottle boss) This to anchor the cable end as you surmized, which allows the cable housing to push the derailers arm. I used to have my owners manual from 1992 950.... I know it has been covered in other threads.

I was about 19 years old when I bought this bike...had no business doing so and knew squat about MB. Some coworkers rode regularly and I wanted to join so they told me great...go buy a bike. So I went and bought a bike. In hindsight, the rep who sold it to me did me a disservice...now that I know a little bit more, I know this bike was the wrong bike for me. For one thing, I'm a girl and I've since bought a road bike and now realize that I never would have been comfortable on the Trek...just the wrong fit :O( In any event, I left the job shortly after buying the bike and before ever taking it out. I was planning on returning it (was short on $$) but a roommate's friend used it to pick up something at a store (after I specifically said NO ONE touches the bike) and so I never returned it and it's never been used since. It's collected a lot of dust, though! I thought maybe my husband could use it but with 2 jobs, 3 kids under the age of 3 and a money-pit house....well, you know how it is! If I cleaned it up, would it be worth anything more than the $60 the other poster paid? Or should I just keep it for my son? What's another 15 years, right? LOL

Six years ago I posted in here about my 830. I have since turned it into my commuter bike. It's great! Steel frame is perfect for the rough roads and some skinny tires along with a rack and fenders makes it a wonderful urban bike. I am pleased that it stil has the original shifters, gears, and drivetrain. I may, at some point, upgrade all of that, but for now, it works.

I have also since learned that the early to mid 90's Treks are worth decent money to the right person. The steel frames were made in the USA, like mine. Even though it's a little small for me, I am definitely not giving it up for $50. Nor should you, depending on the year it was made. If it was made in Waterloo in the 90's and it's all steel frame, it's too good to just toss aside. FYI.

Keep it. If your husband can use it, consider attaching a trailer so he can haul one ( or maybe 2?) of your kids around. Those mid 90's Trek MTBs are great all around bikes. And yes, it will still be worthy when your oldest reaches the point they'll need a full size bike. Then watch it get handed down to each of your kids before you take it back to ride on MUPs in your old age. They last that long.
I'm still riding a 1988 Nishiki Ariel on MUPs, it's great.

I was about 19 years old when I bought this bike...had no business doing so and knew squat about MB. Some coworkers rode regularly and I wanted to join so they told me great...go buy a bike. So I went and bought a bike. In hindsight, the rep who sold it to me did me a disservice...now that I know a little bit more, I know this bike was the wrong bike for me. For one thing, I'm a girl and I've since bought a road bike and now realize that I never would have been comfortable on the Trek...just the wrong fit :O( In any event, I left the job shortly after buying the bike and before ever taking it out. I was planning on returning it (was short on $$) but a roommate's friend used it to pick up something at a store (after I specifically said NO ONE touches the bike) and so I never returned it and it's never been used since. It's collected a lot of dust, though! I thought maybe my husband could use it but with 2 jobs, 3 kids under the age of 3 and a money-pit house....well, you know how it is! If I cleaned it up, would it be worth anything more than the $60 the other poster paid? Or should I just keep it for my son? What's another 15 years, right? LOL

I'd put that on CL for $350 or so.

The 9 series are really nice frames.


Tom