Classic & Vintage - Trek Antelope 800

Hi,

I have a lead on what I think is a 1990 Trek Antelope 800 (judging by color, since I haven't seen the bike in person). The seller is asking $100, which seems a bit high to me, unless the bike is in near mint condition. However, I'm looking for a good rail trail bike (no challenging singletrack or anything) and was wondering if anyone has any opinions on this bike - good, bad or indifferent?

If it is a 1990, the component group is Shimano 200GS (even below the Exage!) Also, I know this model is the most basic, low-end they produced.

But could the frame at least be worth it?

Thanks,
Patrick

Seems a bit high to me. I have a 1991 Trek 830. Of course, mine was free, but $100 would seem about right for the 830. I dunno, maybe it's OK for the 800 too. Full cromoly frame, it seems like a pretty decent bike for $100. I haven't ridden mine yet, so I can't tell you about the ride, but it looks like it will make a really good bike-- not for technical stuff, like you said, but for trails and city potholes, it should be great.

I assume that if it's a 1990 Trek 800 (http://www.vintage-trek.com/images/trek/90Trek/90Trek.pdf), it's either the white with bright green, or black with bright blue?

EDIT: Near mint condition might make it worth the $100. I'd say it's a fair price, but not a great price.

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think the 1990 Trek 800 is a full chro-moly frame. Certainly, the 1995 and 99 models were not, they only had a chro-moly seat tube. (My son has a 95 and I had a 99). Perhaps the last Trek 800's, 2002, 2003, were full chro-moly. As for $100, that's top price so it should be in excellent condition with a smooth shifting deraileur and a chain that is within stretch tolerance, nice tires and brakes that don't squeel. As an example, I paid $25 for my sons 800 off of a local ebay purchase. It needed a new chain and rear cassette, so the total was $65.
If the bike is perfect, then maybe it is worth it, but most 16 year old, low end bikes are not worth $100. If you lose this one, I wouldn't be upset about it, there will be more deals like this one.

I assume that if it's a 1990 Trek 800 (http://www.vintage-trek.com/images/trek/90Trek/90Trek.pdf), it's either the white with bright green, or black with bright blue?

EDIT: Near mint condition might make it worth the $100. I'd say it's a fair price, but not a great price.

Yes, seller claims it is white. If white is the original color, 1990 is the only year they produced white on the 800. I've been doing some more searching on the internet, and most of what I turn up for the 100GS and 200GS components is that they are crap. If this seller ever gets back to me, I might offer him half the asking price...maybe less. Unless it's absolutely mint, I'm not sure how well components that were crap 16 years ago will operate today.

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think the 1990 Trek 800 is a full chro-moly frame. Certainly, the 1995 and 99 models were not, they only had a chro-moly seat tube. (My son has a 95 and I had a 99). Perhaps the last Trek 800's, 2002, 2003, were full chro-moly. As for $100, that's top price so it should be in excellent condition with a smooth shifting deraileur and a chain that is within stretch tolerance, nice tires and brakes that don't squeel. As an example, I paid $25 for my sons 800 off of a local ebay purchase. It needed a new chain and rear cassette, so the total was $65.
If the bike is perfect, then maybe it is worth it, but most 16 year old, low end bikes are not worth $100. If you lose this one, I wouldn't be upset about it, there will be more deals like this one.

If it's a 1990, according to the link Blue Order provided, it's a mix of Cro-Moly tubes, High tensile fork and "Trek Special" stays (whatever that is).

I'm not really set on it, just looking for opinions on the frame. I gave up on an ebay auction for a 950, which ended up selling for $75, but that frame was more chip than paint, and the components looked ready to fall off the bike. But I loved the lugged frame, and it looks like the 950 is far more rugged than the 800.

On the other hand, if as you say, it's a 2002, it would be a deal probably. But the seller claims it has 7 speed rapid fire. The last year vintage-trek.com lists (1995) already have grip shifters.

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think the 1990 Trek 800 is a full chro-moly frame. Certainly, the 1995 and 99 models were not, they only had a chro-moly seat tube. (My son has a 95 and I had a 99). Perhaps the last Trek 800's, 2002, 2003, were full chro-moly.You may be right; the catalog says main tubes chro-moly, Seat stays and chainstays don't say chro-moly, while for the higher-end Trek Mtbs, they do say chro-moly.

Still a pretty good frame, in my opinion.

Here's a link to the catalogues: Vintage Trek (http://www.vintage-trek.com/TrekBrochures.htm)

EDIT: Ah, I see you've already been perusing the site...

But I loved the lugged frame, and it looks like the 950 is far more rugged than the 800.The 950 was in the middle of their top of the line mountain bikes. 900 series positioned above 800 series. I think the 900 series was for rough trail riding, while the 800 series was for light trail riding. Take a look at the 1993 catalog; it explains the differences betwen the bikes.

These Treks look like really solid bikes, whichever series they're in.

It does look like a decent frame. I might offer the guy $50, and if he goes for it, I can ride it until things start to break, and then cobble together replacement parts.

Keep us posted.

If you buy it, we'll need pics. :)

the 200GS group.... rrrrrrr
I had them on my '89 Gazelle Field Cruiser too. Boy they suck! Just to let you know the money isn't well spend on the groep. The frame is a different story of course :)

In 1990 I bought a Specialized HardRock that was identical in many aspects to this Trek: CroMo main frame, hi-ten forks and full 200GS components. It was sold more as a comfort bike than as a MTB and as I've never been into mtbiking my intention was to use it as a tourer. The frame is still in use today but the 200GS bits were a different story. First thing I did when I got the bike home from the shop was to "discard" the derailleurs (lots of plastic) and the rest simply got rusty within a couple of years (but some of them made their way into other bikes and have been in use till recently). The 200GS RapidFire's are worth keeping because their internals are exactly the same as those of the first XT's.

Shimano put the 200GS on the market as Citybike gear, not mountainbike gear.

The inners of the 200GS rapidfire's are pretty decent. If only the plastic covers of all the 200GS group weren't so [forums censored my word, lol] made.. Oh my goodness do they are weak ;)

And the RD is even more weak. It's the type that doesnt use a bolt hanger but has to be clamped next to the dropout. No heavy duty for this RD please :)

Some pics of my stuff. The BL is huuuuuge and the shifters aren't complete on this pics although i have the other parts in my drawer).

http://img490.imageshack.us/img490/2817/blm2012zg1.jpg

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/6769/200gsRF2.jpg

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/3802/200gsRF4.jpg
You can see how it works if you look good

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/4135/200gsRF1.jpg
sorry for the playing in photoshop and the thread hijack ;)

Plastic internals! Well, I guess they're durable.

At any rate, this guy has put the sale on hold for some reason...at least I have more info now about the Trek 800 series. Thanks!

I'm in a hot bike market, and I can barely sell vintage Trek 800/820 Antelopes for $80. I'm talking the rigid frame, friction/rapidfire made in Taiwan types.


I've sold several - I always start 'em off at $100, but so far have never gotten that much for one.