Touring - trek 520 - new colour

Black is back and oozes sexiness. I think I might just save my money for this one.

Hey, I just bought a 2007 Trek 520 for my upcoming trip around the world! They have upgraded the brakes and downgraded some less important components from the 2006 model.
I think the suggested retail price is $1240 but I lucked out and got a brand new one with the promotional price of $1000. The gears feel funny but I guess it'll take time to get used to it.
Gizem

mine arrives tomorrow!

Black is excellent whereas the green was ugh! However, the 32s all around seem a bit much.

It would be nice if a wee-bit smaller chain ring than 30 was provided OEM (for a bailout gear lower than 30x32). Putting on a XT triple crank and a tighter cluster would be great and would provide more closely spaced gears for the first and second rings.

Sure does not seem that a bike optimized for loaded touring really needs a 52x11. When the decision is made to go with the trade-offs of friction shifting as stock equipment, why as a mfg do you try to be all things to all people with a tall gear that you could only use going downhill with a tailwind? When you've got a lot of weight on the bike, you already can coast downhill in a tucked positon at a speed that is faster than most bikers will ever desire to peddle.

P.S., you 'gotta love those 36-spoke wheels . . . I wish I had the time to really use a bike like that.

On my way across Canada last summer, the Trek 520 was the most common touring bike I came across. I would change out the rear rack though because most 520 riders I met had busted their stock rack. Oh, and maybe swap out for a mountain or trekking triple crankset. Still, a black 520 (even with a busted rear rack) would still be quite sex.

my trek 520 is a 1998/99 model ... a rather nice deep metallic blue ... but that black sure looks real nice ...

I also have a '98. I absolutely love the gearing because I usually ride with little weight on the bike. Mostly just long day trips - no 'tours' yet. The 52 ring really makes it fly. I think Trek did a fine job of designing those gears into the 520. They know that even a dedicated tour bike will not tour very much. So, I think they added some fun-factor.

I agree. I have a '93 and really like the gearing also. I actually like riding it more than my CF roadie. Is that bad??? I really don't seem to be any slower on the 520. I like hills much better due to the gearing.

That black sure is pretty.... I used to have the 2001 metallic blue, but it got hit by a car, and now I have the 2006 metallic green. I liked the blue better. Wish I had the black.

I did the common mods: swapped out the crank for a MTB crank, tubus racks all around, fenders, different pedals and saddle. Also haven't used the stock tires from my new one, as I was doing a part-dirt tour in OZ and wanted more traction. They will go out at some point, though.

JCM, I can't agree with you. "They know that even a dedicated tour bike will not tour very much" This bike is purpose built for loaded touring, Trek has lots of other recreational / day ride / club / race bikes in its product lineup. This is their only tour bike. Why not make it appropriate for its inteded use? If you buy it and use it for something that it's not made for, and like it, that's all cool, but why not make it work perfectly for what it's supposed to work for? The gearing is a known problem in the touring community. ???

Anna

Valygrl,
I agree with you on your premise: lots of other products by Trek, and that they do sell it as a dedicated tour machine. So, why the tall rings? It's a fair question, to be sure.

I was just parroting some discussion I heard at the Bike Expo in Seattle last summer on touring machines and their relative components. Some of the folks seemed to be somewhat divided over certain marketing strategies vs product over-lap. Apparently, and surpising to me, Trek gets bashed by some people who don't like the fact that they are the Big Guy now. I think they do ok by me. I simply ride Treks because they were the right bike at the time I was looking for a bike. My 520 just popped up on the radar long enough for me to buy it used. It could have been virtually any other tour bike.

I suppose if I were to actually mount-up-and-go, I might change my rings. But, maybe not. I'm a very strong rider and it's alot of fun to be able to open it up on a bike that rides like a cloud. :)

I won't be touring more than a couple days at a time. I have a 9 to 5 and it makes it hard to take off a lot of time to do a tour. I like a touring bike because of it's toughness. I'm probably wrong here, but I've been scared of cracking my CF road bike and AL beats me up. Steel is a good compromise to me. Plus a good touring bike works well for most anything. I use mine to commute, tour and the weekend rec ride with the wife. Does a great job. What's nice is if we stop at a roadside market, I can easily get something if I need and strap it to the rack. Can't do that with my road bike.... Touring bikes rock! Especially this 520

One word for you, my man:

Titanium

Titanium's the thing - n'less you ain't got no bling. Doo-Wap Doo-Wap Doo-Wap.

Yeah, but it's much more expensive than steel. I just bought my wife a 2005 Terry Isis Titanium a few days ago. She's very excited. Anyone make titanium touring bikes?

Litespeed Blue Ridge is titanium and close to $4,000!

heh, yeah, but knobster has a CF, that's spendy too. knobster, you're going to have to ride your carbon bike now to keep up with your wife! why do you think it's not durable enough? if you're too scared of cracking it to ride it, it's just garage art.

i wouldn't want a ti tour bike - too wiggly - although, come to think of it, my first tour was on a titanium lightspeed mountain bike that I borrowed from my sister.

;)

Yeah true, but my bike is still half the price of that Lightspeed. I do ride that bike sometimes when I'm feeling a little sluggish. I like being able to ride on gravel roads or down rail beds and if I fall on the 520, no big deal. I'm not too sure about the CF bike. I do have it on Craigslist... Might be a bad time for that though.

Edit: BTW, sticking with the Trek theme, it's a Trek Pilot 5.0

Trek changed the color of their 2007 520s to black, maybe REI will get with the program and change the color of their Randonee to something other than 'coffee'! Great bike for the $$$, but needs a color update!

Interesting how people see things differently. I searched high and low to get my willow green 520 because I think black is a boring color. I think the "coffee" color of the Randonee is a great color for a touring bike and certainly identifies the bike to its manufacturer/distributor.

Interesting how people see things differently. I searched high and low to get my willow green 520 because I think black is a boring color. I think the "coffee" color of the Randonee is a great color for a touring bike and certainly identifies the bike to its manufacturer/distributor.

I agree. I bought my 520 used and thought hard about painting it, but personally I like all the nicks and scratches on it. Looks like it's been somewhere. I like the green also.

just got my 520 yesterday and i'm horribly concerned that it's too small for me! that'll learn me for taking the word of a brother who works in a bike shop ont he other side of the country! still, it rides beautifully, i jsut wouldn't want to have to ride it for mroe than a few hours until i've tweaked things a little.

the black is dang sexy though.

oh, serious bummer! Can you exchange it? It would be worth it, nothing is more important in bike than fit.

good luck.

anna

Especially in a long distance touring bike. Yeah, it might not bother you on 20 mile rides, but when you get into riding 50-100 or even more rides, it'll make your life hell. Like Anna said, if you can exchange it, do it now before you go on your first tour.

Just got my new 2007 Trek 520 yesterday. Pretty cool lookin' in black. :)

One thing I noticed was that the stock rear rack is different from previous models. Seems the angle of the front support is straight verticle, whereas in previous models is was more angled.

Just wondering if this is an upgraded rack - I know Trek has received a lot of complaints on the quality of the stock rack, so maybe they changed it??

Anyone have an idea?

Attached so you can see the difference are images of the 2006 model vs. the 2007:

Meh. That rack does look flimsy. Even compared to my cheapy Delta. I've loaded up 60 lbs and more of groceries on my Delta rack and not had any problems... I don't think I'd even try it with that rack on the Treks.

edit: That said, that newer rack does look better than the old one.

just got my 520 yesterday and i'm horribly concerned that it's too small for me! that'll learn me for taking the word of a brother who works in a bike shop ont he other side of the country! still, it rides beautifully, i jsut wouldn't want to have to ride it for mroe than a few hours until i've tweaked things a little.

the black is dang sexy though.

I bought a used 520 this spring, and it was a bit small, but a Nitto Technomic stem fixed everything up right, and I couldn't be happier. Great bike. It's dark green, which I like better than black.

I suggest that you take your bike to a local bike shop and get both yourself and your bike measured. Without proper measuring, there is no way of telling if it's a good fit. You have spent all that money, you definitely want a bike that fits.
I just bought my Trek 520 and the shop I bought it from made sure that I was well-measured before they put the order. Your height is not enough - the proportion of your legs/torso is very important.

btw, I sent my (approximately) 1993 520 to Trek a couple of years ago to get repainted. They did a terrific job, removing all the rust and giving a factory paint job with a current decals. They will only paint it in the current color for that model, so if you were to send in a 520 now, it will come back black. Seems to me it was $150 or so. I removed and replaced all the components myself. I imagine if you used a bike shop to do that, they would charge $100 or so???

ok so after a weekend of riding this thing (and apart from one major issue which i best not discuss lest anybody ever find out where my brother works and word spread around the cycling community and he be put out of business - rest assured i'll not be letting him forget about it and it's put the bike off the road for the moment and yes, it is that bad) i think i've figured out what the problem is.

i'm 6'3" but have been put on the 23" - the second largest one. i've probably got a pretty high leg:torso ratio and the biggest problem i found when i initially jumped on the bike was that the handlebars were jsut too far forward so i was way more hunched over than i wanted to be, especially considering that this problem in my previous bike has given me some serious hand problems. evidently in his infinite wisdom he'd decided that it would be best to "stretch me out a little" in spite of the fact that i'd ordered a touring bike so he'd switched the stem out from the stock one (about 50mm with the upward angle) to a flat 120mm one.

it was only from looking at photos in the trek catalogue (like the photo comparison posted earlier) that i spotted the angle issue (i knew about the extension issue before i rode the thing from) and realised that this change would probably put the handlebars at a good position.

anyways, the black is frigging sexy, the derailleurs are taking a bit of getting used to (in that they're like "indicative" rather than "prescriptive" if that makes sense? like that you're never "in" any particular gear, you just move to somewhere near one and then have to flick about a bit to find the sweet spot) and the bar end shifters feel odd.

is it wrong of me to think that as i'll probably never want to ride this thing fully bent over with my hand on the very bottom of the bars that there's an argument for chopping about 3 or 4 inches off the ends to make the shifters pretty close to reachable with a quick stretch of the pinkie?

folks, i overtook cars en masse and got it going up near 60 km/h - which was both thrilling and bloody scary.

will keep you posted as i get this thing working for me.

This weekend I realized that the Trek 520 that I just bought had warped tires. I needed something with more tread for touring anyway, so I took it back to the store I bought it fromm and replaced them with Specialized All Condition. I've had this bike for 2 weeks now, and I have mixed feelings about it. I don't care about the color, it could be pink with flowers for all I care! But it does bother me that the seat is way too uncomfortable for extended rides, the stock tires have no tread whatsoever which sucks for touring and the fact that the crankset is way too high for loaded touring. I bought it anyway because I've read that it's a work horse and that's what I need for my upcoming trip around the world.

This weekend I realized that the Trek 520 that I just bought had warped tires. I needed something with more tread for touring anyway, so I took it back to the store I bought it fromm and replaced them with Specialized All Condition. I've had this bike for 2 weeks now, and I have mixed feelings about it. I don't care about the color, it could be pink with flowers for all I care! But it does bother me that the seat is way too uncomfortable for extended rides, the stock tires have no tread whatsoever which sucks for touring and the fact that the crankset is way too high for loaded touring. I bought it anyway because I've read that it's a work horse and that's what I need for my upcoming trip around the world.

For an upcoming trip around the world, wouldn't it behoove you to replace the saddle with one you find more comfortable, replace the tires with others you feel more appropriate for a tour of that magnitude and change the gearing to better suit your needs? The Trek 520 is indeed a workhorse, but it's still up to the individual to customize the bike to the features that he/she finds most suitable for individual tastes and need. I suspect there are few stock bikes which wouldn't need some degree of alteration to match the demands of a round-the-world tour.

My new 520 hasn't even touched asphalt yet, but already I've changed the stock rack to a Blackburn expedition and the saddle to one I find infinitely more comfortable. I haven't decided to change the gearing yet, but may if I don't like the current setup after putting in some miles.

ok so after a weekend of riding this thing (and apart from one major issue which i best not discuss lest anybody ever find out where my brother works and word spread around the cycling community and he be put out of business - rest assured i'll not be letting him forget about it and it's put the bike off the road for the moment and yes, it is that bad) i think i've figured out what the problem is.

i'm 6'3" but have been put on the 23" - the second largest one. i've probably got a pretty high leg:torso ratio and the biggest problem i found when i initially jumped on the bike was that the handlebars were jsut too far forward so i was way more hunched over than i wanted to be, especially considering that this problem in my previous bike has given me some serious hand problems. evidently in his infinite wisdom he'd decided that it would be best to "stretch me out a little" in spite of the fact that i'd ordered a touring bike so he'd switched the stem out from the stock one (about 50mm with the upward angle) to a flat 120mm one.

it was only from looking at photos in the trek catalogue (like the photo comparison posted earlier) that i spotted the angle issue (i knew about the extension issue before i rode the thing from) and realised that this change would probably put the handlebars at a good positio.

anyways, the black is frigging sexy, the derailleurs are taking a bit of getting used to (in that they're like "indicative" rather than "prescriptive" if that makes sense? like that you're never "in" any particular gear, you just move to somewhere near one and then have to flick about a bit to find the sweet spot) and the bar end shifters feel odd.

is it wrong of me to think that as i'll probably never want to ride this thing fully bent over with my hand on the very bottom of the bars that there's an argument for chopping about 3 or 4 inches off the ends to make the shifters pretty close to reachable with a quick stretch of the pinkie?

folks, i overtook cars en masse and got it going up near 60 km/h - which was both thrilling and bloody scary.

will keep you posted as i get this thing working for me.

Current 520 offerings already are 1/2" shorter than vintage Trek tourbikes, i.e., the biggest size used to be 25-1/2" (your size) not just 25".

For an upcoming trip around the world, wouldn't it behoove you to replace the saddle with one you find more comfortable, replace the tires with others you feel more appropriate for a tour of that magnitude and change the gearing to better suit your needs? The Trek 520 is indeed a workhorse, but it's still up to the individual to customize the bike to the features that he/she finds most suitable for individual tastes and need. I suspect there are few stock bikes which wouldn't need some degree of alteration to match the demands of a round-the-world tour.

My new 520 hasn't even touched asphalt yet, but already I've changed the stock rack to a Blackburn expedition and the saddle to one I find infinitely more comfortable. I haven't decided to change the gearing yet, but may if I don't like the current setup after putting in some miles.

I believe this is one of the main reasons why you see the high end touring bikes only offered as a frame and fork. A lot of people are going to want to put their own drivetrain on the bike. Most of the people that I have come across that do any sort of riding change the tires and saddle when they get a bike. I would agree with you also that someone doing such a ride depending on the comfort and dependability of the components need to closely examine such important items as well.

This weekend I realized that the Trek 520 that I just bought had warped tires. I needed something with more tread for touring anyway, so I took it back to the store I bought it fromm and replaced them with Specialized All Condition. I've had this bike for 2 weeks now, and I have mixed feelings about it. I don't care about the color, it could be pink with flowers for all I care! But it does bother me that the seat is way too uncomfortable for extended rides, the stock tires have no tread whatsoever which sucks for touring and the fact that the crankset is way too high for loaded touring. I bought it anyway because I've read that it's a work horse and that's what I need for my upcoming trip around the world.

I would pay extra for pink with flowers....

Anyway, yeah, the stock saddle and pedals are almost like placeholders, meant to be swapped. The gearing is IMO a mistake, the tires... well, I see no reason for tread on a road tour, but for a mixed or mostly dirt tour, yeah, they are not so great. I rode the stock tires that came on my first 520 until they wore out, which was an amazingly long time - something like 6000 miles.

My understanding is that Trek also owns Bontrager which explains what you get on what is really, for Trek, one of their low volume models.

[QUOTE=valygrl]I would pay extra for pink with flowers....

Hehe, me too! I can tell we're both Californians! :D

ok so after a weekend of riding this thing...

i'm 6'3" but have been put on the 23" - the second largest one. i've probably got a pretty high leg:torso ratio and the biggest problem i found when i initially jumped on the bike was that the handlebars were jsut too far forward so i was way more hunched over than i wanted to be, especially considering that this problem in my previous bike has given me some serious hand problems. evidently in his infinite wisdom he'd decided that it would be best to "stretch me out a little" in spite of the fact that i'd ordered a touring bike so he'd switched the stem out from the stock one (about 50mm with the upward angle) to a flat 120mm one.

... The derailleurs are taking a bit of getting used to (in that they're like "indicative" rather than "prescriptive" if that makes sense? like that you're never "in" any particular gear, you just move to somewhere near one and then have to flick about a bit to find the sweet spot) and the bar end shifters feel odd ...


It's hard to fit you at distance, but I'm 5' 11" and ride a 25" frame that shows about 4-4.5 inches of seatpost and stem. So I guess you might be way too low. The tops of my handlebars are level with the saddle, so I easily ride from the drops.

As for the shifters, the front one is in friction (i.e. no clicks), which is an advantage as you can fine tune the derailleur position to avoid any grinding noise. But the rear shifter is indexed, which means it should click in place at each position. If it doesn't, it's either because the indexing is not adjusted properly or because the "Index - Friction" knob on the right lever is turned onto "friction".

There is an image here (http://www.tfn.uk.com/acatalog/barend9lar.jpg). The right lever is the top one, and I'm talking about the "handle" on it.

Hello, Ladies and Gentlemen.
This is my first post, and I apologize if I am ignorant of forum etiquette.
An earlier post by Clipperton expressed concern that the 520 he ordered is too small. I just had a wonderful experience at my LBS that I must share.
I ordered the 520 today. Uncertain if I needed the 21" or 23", Jason at the shop ordered both. He said it would be best if I tried both and just take home the better fit. I couldn't believe it. He said not to worry, they will sell the other. Once I pick the correct frame, they will take care of the crankset swap from there and then fine tune the bike fit.
If you are ever in the Smoky Mountains area, you need to visit Cycology Bicycles. Great folks over there.

just how heavy is this trek 520 steel framed bike? do you feel the extra weight especially going up hill?

It's hard to fit you at distance, but I'm 5' 11" and ride a 25" frame that shows about 4-4.5 inches of seatpost and stem. So I guess you might be way too low. The tops of my handlebars are level with the saddle, so I easily ride from the drops.

As for the shifters, the front one is in friction (i.e. no clicks), which is an advantage as you can fine tune the derailleur position to avoid any grinding noise. But the rear shifter is indexed, which means it should click in place at each position. If it doesn't, it's either because the indexing is not adjusted properly or because the "Index - Friction" knob on the right lever is turned onto "friction".

There is an image here (http://www.tfn.uk.com/acatalog/barend9lar.jpg). The right lever is the top one, and I'm talking about the "handle" on it.


thanks mate. it's odd as the back shifter does click at times and then sometimes just doesn't seem to click in fully. annoying moments occur when i discover this has happened by getting up out of the saddle to climb a hill or some such.

regarding the size issue raised by tago, i'm now waiting anxiously to get hold of the correct stem - i've realised that the next size up has a 59cm top bar instead of 56cm so i'd probably have been even more stretched out. i've big plans for this saturday - the forecast is for 37 degrees (that's about 100F for you american types) and the abortive beach ride from last weekend should be a go-er.

thanks mate. it's odd as the back shifter does click at times and then sometimes just doesn't seem to click in fully.

I'm assuming this comes with 9sp Dura Ace bar end shifters, right? There's a little half-ring on the right shifter. Pop it up and you can turn it clockwise and counter-clockwise. There should be marks at one end for Friction and at the other for SIS (indexed). I usually run mine somewhere near 2/3 to 3/4 toward SIS--indexed but not too clicky. YMMV. Another problem can be if the screwhead holding it all together is not tightened down properly--it'll work itself loose when you shift back and forth. If you're not getting good indexing on the RD, make sure the screwhead is tightened down snug then adjust the little ring and make sure you get the feel you want, then fine tune with the barrel adjuster on the RD if it's not settling in.

just how heavy is this trek 520 steel framed bike? do you feel the extra weight especially going up hill?

Don't be fooled by the fact that it is steel.

A well-built steel frame often weighs less than a poor-to-fairly-built ai frame. ;)

just how heavy is this trek 520 steel framed bike? do you feel the extra weight especially going up hill?

This one weighs 29lbs with no trunk. Take off 1lb for a lighter saddle and another few ounces for an alloy bar. Finicky riders can reduce another 2lbs or so with lighter wheels.

There is no "extra" weight - it weighs what it weighs. I usually have full fenders and a trunk bag/pannier on it. So, normally it weighs closer to 33lbs on a daily basis. Hills? Just ride more and get strong.

http://i12.tinypic.com/2edv343.jpg

Mine is up around 33, with tubus cargo/tara racks and planet bike fenders, different saddle (no idea the weight difference). JCM's 29 pounder doesn't have a front rack, or a rear rack apppropriate for fully loaded touring. It looks fabulous for light touring, though!

Mine is up around 33, with tubus cargo/tara racks and planet bike fenders, different saddle (no idea the weight difference). JCM's 29 pounder doesn't have a front rack, or a rear rack apppropriate for fully loaded touring. It looks fabulous for light touring, though!

Thanks. It does the job for my long day trips. Tubus is in the future. Some yellow Ortiebs roll-tops will be under the tree. Till I get the Tubus stuff, they'll be loaded light, mostly for commuting and general rousting about.

a Trek 520 is one of the most versatile bikes a rider could ever own. I have been very suitably inmpressed with the off-road and singletrack abilities of my Trek 520.

You don't NEED tread on tires to ride gravel. But, if you are going around the world on a bike, one set of tires gotten when the bike was new ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE THE ENTIRE TRIP.

But the Bontrager Hard Cases are most excellent and fast tires, and the 32s handle gravel roads and the like just fine.

And stock saddles on bikes? Burley had the right idea, speccing their touring bikes out with B-17s, but for %98 of the other bikes out there, the stock saddles are ususlly pretty marginal OEM.

Trek 520. True workhorse of a bike. Fast, versatile, stout, bomber.

so on saturday i (kinda foolishly in hindsight) set out to do a bit of an extended version of a ride i'd previously done taking in a couple of major suburbs out to the east and south-east of melbourne and culminating in a ride up the coast to the city. i know now that it's a 118km round trip. i knew then that it was gonna get up to 37 degrees (about 100F). i also knew that due to the horrific bushfires that are raging around the north-east of our state that the air was smoky - not hazy in a you-can-spot-it-if-you're-looking-over-a-large-expanse kind of way but smoky in an is-somebody-having-a-fire-in-their-backyard-in-my-neighbourhood? kind of way.

anyways long story short the bike held up incredibly - i'd shifted the seat and tweaked the shifters as suggested above (merci beacoup m gagnon) and, though still a little more hunched over than i'd like (until that "new" stem arrives) it was otherwise a great ride. i took in some gravel trails and after the initial feeling of riding on eggshells it went fine.

i did spend about an hour laid out on the loungeroom floor at home not moving afterwards as cramps in, well, pretty much everywhere meant that moving was kind of a non-starter but i'll get those sort of things ironed out later on and i was able to go for a 30km ride yesterday (in 42 degrees!) so no harm done i guess.

a Trek 520 is one of the most versatile bikes a rider could ever own. I have been very suitably inmpressed with the off-road and singletrack abilities of my Trek 520.

You don't NEED tread on tires to ride gravel. But, if you are going around the world on a bike, one set of tires gotten when the bike was new ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE THE ENTIRE TRIP.

But the Bontrager Hard Cases are most excellent and fast tires, and the 32s handle gravel roads and the like just fine.

And stock saddles on bikes? Burley had the right idea, speccing their touring bikes out with B-17s, but for %98 of the other bikes out there, the stock saddles are ususlly pretty marginal OEM.

Trek 520. True workhorse of a bike. Fast, versatile, stout, bomber.

Well said. I'll also give high marks to those Bontrager Hard Case tires. Mine are 28mm and are very tough. I know that flats are just a matter of luck and circumstance mostly, but I have about an equal number of miles on those as I have on my 1.5" Armadillos, and the Bons have only flatted once.

a Trek 520 is one of the most versatile bikes a rider could ever own. I have been very suitably inmpressed with the off-road and singletrack abilities of my Trek 520.

You don't NEED tread on tires to ride gravel. But, if you are going around the world on a bike, one set of tires gotten when the bike was new ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE THE ENTIRE TRIP.

But the Bontrager Hard Cases are most excellent and fast tires, and the 32s handle gravel roads and the like just fine.

And stock saddles on bikes? Burley had the right idea, speccing their touring bikes out with B-17s, but for %98 of the other bikes out there, the stock saddles are ususlly pretty marginal OEM.

Trek 520. True workhorse of a bike. Fast, versatile, stout, bomber.

I was about to replace the stock tires with Specialized All condition S-works because we are taking off to Europe in March and it will be raining almost every day. I am concerned that the Bontrager may not hold well on wet surface. Any thoughts?

I put a new set of Bont Hard Case 700x32c ON a winter rain bike for commuting this winter -And I live in Seattle. I've also got a great selection of tires available, I work at a bike shop, I look at different tires every day. The Bonts are one of the GRIPPIER, wider 700c tires out there. True dual compound tread.

they'd be great on tour if they are otherwise in good condition. I'd totally go with the Bonts for grip over the Specialized... For wide tires it's difficult to find a better high performance tire in my opinion. How wide of a tire are you going to run, gizem310?