Classic & Vintage - Trek 400 model year 1992

I just bought an older lugged Trek 400 with True Temper Steel. It's white with red decals. I did a little research to find out what year it was and I think it's a 1992 model based on the information I found on this site http://www.vintage-trek.com/model_numbers1.htm.

I have a couple of questions:
Were these decent bikes (quality steel, components, etc.)? I'm mostly wondering if the frames were good quality since everything else I'm willing to upgrade over time.

Is it worth putting money into it to restore it and replace components?

Any information and or opinions you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

It is a lower-end Trek. But that makes it a respectably good bike.


Is it worth putting money into? Impossible to answer this question without more info. What needs to be replaced? What do you want to do with the bike?

In short, if you are interested in making this bike really modern, then it is probably not a good deal to start with this bike. If you are interested in tinkering and then riding around on a cool old bike, then probably it is. Assuming it is a good condition, you might find that new cables are needed. They seem to never hold up. Might need new tires/tubes.

jim

Thanks Jim.

The rear derailleur seems to be in bad shape. It works but would probably need to be replaced soon. The frame is in great condition. Some paint chips here and there but no rust.

I have a Cannondale R800 that I bought last november that is more or less my Cadillac or perhaps my Porsche. I live in New York and would never lock that up outside for more then 15 minutes, so I was looking for something that was a little less theft worthy.

That being said I don't want to ride a complete bomb. I was hoping to get this in great riding shape, so I'll enjoy riding it but not be too concerned about it getting stolen.

Since it's a low end model does that mean the frame isn't very good?

Since it's a low end model does that mean the frame isn't very good?

No, not at all. Treks have always been pretty consistently good. I have a "low end Trek" (330, to be specific. It is lower than yours, I think.) that I think very highly of. It will never be collectable, but it is a very nice bike. Great ride and decent components. I think mine is doubled butted TrueTemper CroMO, btw. Not all fancy, but certainly respectable.


For the use you describe, this is a good bike. Maybe even too nice? A few little things like a rear derailleur can add up quickly. If you can find the time to scrounge for used and are willing/able to do the work yourself, then definitely this bike is worth doing. But, if the answer to the two above questions are no, then you may find yourself having to put quite a bit of money into it.

Here is how to make the decision easier: Determine what a mechanically fully functional Schwinn World will sell for in your area. (Here, that would be around $50-$100 or so.) Those types of bikes can be found readily. It would be just fine for your purpose. So, if your repair bill is going to be much higher than that, then you may be wasting your money.

Unless you just like the challenge of it. Or would rather not ride the bare minimum. Or would like to have the option of actually riding it on the road as it was intended.

I definitely need to get a new stem (it's way too long now). It also needs new pedals. The seat post and seat clamp are HEAVY. I don't think it's original, so I might want to replace that. I also think it has tubular tires on it, so I'd eventually need to get a new wheel set.

It's probably going to be a bit more money then I originally wanted to spend on this bike. Perhaps I'll do it over time. Get the essentials first like new pedals and stem, and get everything else like wheel set and derailleur once they fail.

Thanks for your input Jim.

I also think it has tubular tires on it, so I'd eventually need to get a new wheel set.


If the wheelset is original, as spec in the 1992 brochure, they're clinchers. Matrix Titans? I recently purchased an '87 400T with a Matrix Titan wheelset. They look like good, solid wheels: 36 14G stainless spokes, double-walled eyeletted rims. I'd keep them if I were you.

If the wheelset is original, as spec in the 1992 brochure, they're clinchers. Matrix Titans? I recently purchased an '87 400T with a Matrix Titan wheelset. They look like good, solid wheels: 36 14G stainless spokes, double-walled eyeletted rims. I'd keep them if I were you.

I'm not really sure what they are. I don't have the bike next to me. When I take a look at it again I'll post the details. They're black anodized aluminum rims and what looks like tubular tires. They're 700 19, which doesn't seem like what would have been on there originally.

You live in NYC, your RD is shot, you have horizontal drops - this bike needs to be converted to a fixie, and you can start cheaply as a single speed. Ditch both derailleurs, freewheel and shifters, buy a rear SS freewheel to match either your big or small chainwheel, a 16T would be a good start to go with the small 42T front - correct chainline, too. Shorten your chain, move any washers on the rear axle needed to get a 42-43mm chainline, redish the wheel (no new spokes required). See if you can swap your removed drivetrain parts and stem for another stem and cash to pay for the SS freewheel and single-stack chainring bolts. No additional investment required (or very little).

You live in NYC, your RD is shot, you have horizontal drops - this bike needs to be converted to a fixie, and you can start cheaply as a single speed. Ditch both derailleurs, freewheel and shifters, buy a rear SS freewheel to match either your big or small chainwheel, a 16T would be a good start to go with the small 42T front - correct chainline, too. Shorten your chain, move any washers on the rear axle needed to get a 42-43mm chainline, redish the wheel (no new spokes required). See if you can swap your removed drivetrain parts and stem for another stem and cash to pay for the SS freewheel and single-stack chainring bolts. No additional investment required (or very little).

You mean like all the cool kids? :)

That's not a bad idea but I think it has vertical drops. I'll take another look at it tonight. I just got the bike yesterday and can't remember what it has.

You know your bike jive. I kinda have no idea what you just said. I'm still learning about building up bikes and fixing them etc., but I have a friend that knows more than me so I'll talk to him about the possibility.

It is a lower-end Trek. But that makes it a respectably good bike.


I think the issue is the quality of the frame, not the componentry. I'm not sure I would rank this as a lower end frame.

The tubing is True Temper RC2. My understanding (please correct me if I'm wrong on this) is that RC2 is high quality seamed Cr-Mo. In fact, I thought that True Temper was one of the tubing manufacturers that really got it right on producing seamed tube sets on par with drawn tube sets. Also, the 92 400 is Cr-Mo through out, including the fork and stays. See http://www.vintage-trek.com/refurbish.htm for the butting info.

If there is any potential complaint about the quality of the 92s is that I think (repeat, think) that by this time Trek was using a cast head tube that integrated the upper and lower "lugs" and the head "tube" into a single unified cast piece. That is, 1 piece, not 3! This added a bit to the total weight but drove production costs down.

Still, I wouldn't right this off as a low end frame. I would rather have one of these fully Cr-Mo frames than a handbuilt production frame with hi-ten forks and stays.

Last comment.... you get funky RD cable routing issues with the through the CS routing. Many folks have gotten indexed RDs to work with some fiddling.

I think the issue is the quality of the frame, not the componentry. I'm not sure I would rank this as a lower end frame.

The tubing is True Temper RC2. My understanding (please correct me if I'm wrong on this) is that RC2 is high quality seamed Cr-Mo. In fact, I thought that True Temper was one of the tubing manufacturers that really got it right on producing seamed tube sets on par with drawn tube sets. Also, the 92 400 is Cr-Mo through out, including the fork and stays. See http://www.vintage-trek.com/refurbish.htm for the butting info.

If there is any potential complaint about the quality of the 92s is that I think (repeat, think) that by this time Trek was using a cast head tube that integrated the upper and lower "lugs" and the head "tube" into a single unified cast piece. That is, 1 piece, not 3! This added a bit to the total weight but drove production costs down.

Still, I wouldn't right this off as a low end frame. I would rather have one of these fully Cr-Mo frames than a handbuilt production frame with hi-ten forks and stays.

Last comment.... you get funky RD cable routing issues with the through the CS routing. Many folks have gotten indexed RDs to work with some fiddling.

Thanks for your informative post. It sounds like basically what your saying is that this frame is neither great quality nor low quality sort of middle of the road. The bike does feel pretty heavy although I have no idea where the weight is coming from frame or components.

I would like to get this bike in great riding shape and looking really nice, but I just don't want to spend the money on it for a frame that is considered worthless or at least not worthy of an upgrade.

Thanks

If the wheelset is original, as spec in the 1992 brochure, they're clinchers. Matrix Titans? I recently purchased an '87 400T with a Matrix Titan wheelset. They look like good, solid wheels: 36 14G stainless spokes, double-walled eyeletted rims. I'd keep them if I were you.

I just took a look at the wheel set. They are a brand called Wolber. They're made in France. They also say "Hard Anodized" "GTX 2" "700 Brake Micro Flashing Treatment"

The tires say Prologue VRS 700x19c Hook Bead Rim. They also say Schwinn in very tiny type. The "Hook Bead Rim" I assume confirms that they are clinchers and not tubulars as I thought. Is that right? Does anyone know anything about these rims? Are these rims any good, and can I put fatter tires on them?

Any one else care to chime in about the worthiness of upgrading such a bike.

Thanks again for all your input.

Right on clinchers. I still vote for the cheapest route - the single speed conversion. Then you can lighten up the seatpost, wheelset (although the rims are alloy and maybe a reasonable weight), handlebars and such at your leisure while still having a perfectly enjoyable ride. The TT tubing is fine, but from old reviews the ride is a little less compliant than 531 or SL.

Last comment.... you get funky RD cable routing issues with the through the CS routing. Many folks have gotten indexed RDs to work with some fiddling.

The cable runs underneath the chainstay not through it. Did all the 400's run through the chainstay, or am I misunderstanding what you mean by routing through the Chainstay.

Right on clinchers. I still vote for the cheapest route - the single speed conversion. Then you can lighten up the seatpost, wheelset (although the rims are alloy and maybe a reasonable weight), handlebars and such at your leisure while still having a perfectly enjoyable ride. The TT tubing is fine, but from old reviews the ride is a little less compliant than 531 or SL.

Good to know about the tires being clinchers. The dropouts are vertical can it still be converted to a fixed gear or single speed?

I thought from the 92 brochure they looked like short horizontal dropouts. A little work is in order. I'll be back.

Are you sure? - the pic in the 92 brochure has a dropout adjustment screw, so it has to be horizontal. If from the serial number it was a late '92, it may really be '93 specs. checking that one out.

No cromolly 400 in '93 so has to be a '92. Assuming it has verticals, the chainstay measurement is 43.0cm. With that info you take it to this calculator (http://eehouse.org/fixin/formfmu.php)
and decide your gearing. Most SS/FG riders use from about 70 to 80 gear inches on the street. We'll start off with the cheapest out and at the lower end of the gearing, and a 52*19 gives you 71 gear inches, fits a 43cm exactly, and you have a 52 front chainring already, so your only purchase is the 19 tooth single freewheel. (+ SS chainring bolts)

Good to know about the tires being clinchers. The dropouts are vertical can it still be converted to a fixed gear or single speed?

Wolber GTX were decent middle of the road rims, I believe. I had a pair, and they served me well for a couple years before I sold the bike. I think they are double-walled and eyeleted.

What hubs are they laced to? You can purchase inexpensive conversion kits to build a single speed. It's easier with a freehub (cassette hub rather than a screw-on freewheel), because you don't have to redish the wheel. However, with vertical dropouts, you would need a chain tensioner, but you can always use an old derailleur as a tensioner! See here (http://sheldonbrown.com/singlespeed.html) for Sheldon Brown's write-up on SS conversions. If you do go that route, you might also want to check out the Singlespeed & Fixed forum.

Your other option is to find an inexpensive rear derailleur and ride it geared. If I were you, I wouldn't dump tons of money into it just yet. Whip it into shape with new tires, brakepads, cables, etc. and ride it for a while. If you like the feel and performance of the bike, then it's a keeper. If not, you can strip whatever new parts you got for it and put them on something else.

Boo creepy chain tensioner. Big negative style points. That's why we used that linked calculator to avoid it.

Redishing the wheel is a positive, not a negative because you are removing some (to all) of the dish.

My '94 Trek is a SS conversion with vertical drops running 47*17 (70 gear inches) and no chain tensioner. Click on the bottom right in my signature for pics.

Wolber GTX were decent middle of the road rims, I believe. I had a pair, and they served me well for a couple years before I sold the bike. I think they are double-walled and eyeleted.

Cool. Good to know. Can I put fatter tires on them. The 700 19c are a bit too skinny.


What hubs are they laced to? You can purchase inexpensive conversion kits to build a single speed. It's easier with a freehub (cassette hub rather than a screw-on freewheel), because you don't have to redish the wheel. However, with vertical dropouts, you would need a chain tensioner, but you can always use an old derailleur as a tensioner! See here (http://sheldonbrown.com/singlespeed.html) for Sheldon Brown's write-up on SS conversions. If you do go that route, you might also want to check out the Singlespeed & Fixed forum.

The front hub is Shimano 105. I'm not sure about the rear it doesn't say. That Sheldon Brown is a genius! Thanks for the link I'll read up on it.


Your other option is to find an inexpensive rear derailleur and ride it geared. If I were you, I wouldn't dump tons of money into it just yet. Whip it into shape with new tires, brakepads, cables, etc. and ride it for a while. If you like the feel and performance of the bike, then it's a keeper. If not, you can strip whatever new parts you got for it and put them on something else.

This is probably what I'll end up doing. I like geared bikes. I'll fix the essentials and see how it goes. If I really like the bike then I'll consider putting more money into it.

Boo creepy chain tensioner. Big negative style points. That's why we used that linked calculator to avoid it.

Redishing the wheel is a positive, not a negative because you are removing some (to all) of the dish.

My '94 Trek is a SS conversion with vertical drops running 47*17 (70 gear inches) and no chain tensioner. Click on the bottom right in my signature for pics.

I attempted one SS build on a frame with short horizontal dropouts. Not much room for error! I was building it on the cheap, so I used the existing front 42 ring, had to buy some single stack chainring bolts, and went with a 16T rear for the supposed benefit of running even front/rear teeth. Didn't know about that calculator.

I also tried redishing the cheap Araya rims (R.A.D. - your Wolbers are far better) and I got the chainline damn near perfect, but I ended up with a hop in the rim. Retensioned it 3 times but couldn't get it out. Umpteen hours of labor down the drain. I finally just ordered a SS conversion kit I hope to use on an old set of wheels with a freehub...no need to redish! I just hope the kit is compatible with a 7 speed freehub!

Boo creepy chain tensioner. Big negative style points. That's why we used that linked calculator to avoid it.

Yeah I don't want negative style points. I'm all ready nerdy enough I don't need any extra help.


Redishing the wheel is a positive, not a negative because you are removing some (to all) of the dish.

My '94 Trek is a SS conversion with vertical drops running 47*17 (70 gear inches) and no chain tensioner. Click on the bottom right in my signature for pics.

Wait I'm confused so you can convert it to a single speed just not a fixed gear right?

Cool. Good to know. Can I put fatter tires on them. The 700 19c are a bit too skinny.

I ran 25s on mine no problem. Again, it's back to Sheldon Brown! He's got a chart (http://sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html) (look near the bottom of the page) giving "safe" tire and rim width matches. You just need to measure the inside diameter of those rims...you can get an inexpensive micrometer at most hardware stores. Good tool to have when working on bikes.

Wait I'm confused so you can convert it to a single speed just not a fixed gear right?

You can do anything you want! :)

But for a fixed gear on the cheap (without buying a dedicated rear hub), you'd need a thread-on hub, not a freehub, to "fix" the gear to the hub. With fixed gear, there's no coasting - the pedals keep moving until the bike comes to a rest. Personally, I wouldn't try it in NYC, but lots of people do...without brakes.

I ran 25s on mine no problem. Again, it's back to Sheldon Brown! He's got a chart (http://sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html) (look near the bottom of the page) giving "safe" tire and rim width matches. You just need to measure the inside diameter of those rims...you can get an inexpensive micrometer at most hardware stores. Good tool to have when working on bikes.

Cool. The 19s are crazy thin.

Wait I'm confused so you can convert it to a single speed just not a fixed gear right?
I proposed a single speed first: 1. to get you started into this before going fixed, and 2. cheaper to start out with - no rear hub replacement. Putting a fixed cog on a standard road freewheel hub can be done, but it's referred to as a "suicide" hub because it will break loose at just the wrong time.

You can do anything you want! :)

But for a fixed gear on the cheap (without buying a dedicated rear hub), you'd need a thread-on hub, not a freehub, to "fix" the gear to the hub. With fixed gear, there's no coasting - the pedals keep moving until the bike comes to a rest. Personally, I wouldn't try it in NYC, but lots of people do...without brakes.

So single speed is less difficult to do then?

A guy I work with rides fixed without brakes. He swears by it, but what happens if the chain breaks! I've been trying to convince him to get a helmet.

Thanks for all your advice! :) If anything it seems I made a decent investment in this bike. I paid $200 for it. That's probably a bit too much for it though right?

I'm going to think about it for a few days and decide whether to go geared, fixed, or single speed.

If you opt for the single speed check two things first:
1. Since your frame, if vertical, does not match the on-line brochure, recheck the chainstay measurement.
2. Make sure that the 52 tooth ring has frame clearance mounted on the inside position of the crank. Easy if it does. If it doesn't, it's not a deal killer. Just come back and we'll discuss.

If you opt for the single speed check two things first:
1. Since your frame, if vertical, does not match the on-line brochure, recheck the chainstay measurement.
2. Make sure that the 52 tooth ring has frame clearance mounted on the inside position of the crank. Easy if it does. If it doesn't, it's not a deal killer. Just come back and we'll discuss.

Cool. Thanks for your help. :)

Your co-worker. No brakes, no helmet. :eek: Feel free to call him a hipster :D

Your co-worker. No brakes, no helmet. :eek: Feel free to call him a hipster :D

He's a super duper hipster I'm just sort of a nerd. :D

So single speed is less difficult to do then?

Well, easier (in terms of less expense) if you have a freehub body. You just slap a cog, some spacers and a lockring on it if you can find the spare parts, or buy a kit.

SS on a threaded hub requires redish and a singlespeed cog, which can be had relatively cheap. Fixed on a threaded hub is less expensive: just slap a cog on with a lockring and redish. Results may vary on the desire of the lockring to stay put! ;)

By the way, stick with vpiuva for advice on the actual build (see the previous post on my one attempt!) My knowledge is mostly second hand.




I paid $200 for it. That's probably a bit too much for it though right?

Not for the N.Y.C. market. People like Treks, and as pinnah advised, it's a good, quality frame. If you ever decide to resell, you'll be able to recoup all or most of your money in that market, especially if you get it into ridable shape.

BTW, where are the pics? ;)

Not for the N.Y.C. market. People like Treks, and as pinnah advised, it's a good, quality frame. If you ever decide to resell, you'll be able to recoup all or most of your money in that market, especially if you get it into ridable shape.

That's good to know. After I bought it I totally had buyer's remorse.


BTW, where are the pics? ;)

Sure. I'll take a few shots in the morning when there's daylight. Right now they would look really bad since I would have to use a flash that never ends with good results.

RAD,

Regarding the frame quality, I would say it's a very good frame. I might not have universally recognized collectors appeal due to the seamed tubing and odd headtube, but from a functional standpoint what you have there is a full Cr-Mo frame with double butted tubes. Compare the geometry of what you have with that of, say, the Soma Speedster (http://www.somafab.com/speedster.html) or even the Rivendell Ramboullet. Your frame will be comparable in most ways and better in some. For example, the Trek 400 has longer chainstays than the Soma and is close to the Riv in terms of geometry.

A note on the tubing.... Collectors of bikes with more foo-foo tube sets may prefer drawn tubes like Columbus SL or Ishawata 022. But functionally, there is no difference between the TT tubes on the 400. By the 90s, the technology for making seamed tubes had progressed to the point where high quality seamed tubes were possible.

In terms of the flex... The RC2 tubing uses .9/.6/.9 butting, which makes it comparable to Columbus SL, Ishawata 022 and Tange Super Champion. Reynolds 531 and Ishawata 019 were thinner and flexier but could be overpowered by strong or heavy riders. Also, the older tube sets like the RC2 are standard guage in diameter, which means more flex compared to (imo, overly stiff) modern over-sized tubes like that used on the Soma and nearly every other contemporary steel bike (including Rivs).

The one place where the 400 may impose a limitation on you is on tire clearance. It was originally speced for the SunTour Blaze, which was an aero short reach brake set. This means that the crown and brake bridge may be low relative to the axles, which might limit your choices of tires. The bike was speced for 25mm tires, so you can definitely go that wide. In general, I advise running the fattest tires you can fit within reason. The Rivs and most older bikes will let you run up to 32mm tires. If you can live with 25mm you should be fine. Note, the 25s will be noticably wider than those 19s and should fit on just about any rim.

Regarding the RD.... I've not seen a good description of the style of riding you are doing. But man o man, I wouldn't get involved in a fixie or SS conversion unless you have a burning desire to go that route. The bike came with SunTour Accushift DT shifters. If they are still on the bike, get a NEW shimano RD for less than $20 and put the Accushift levers in friction mode. This gets you up and running for the least amount of problems, conversions and hassles.

After that your upgrade path should be determined by the style of riding you want to do, which is highly individulized. You could do just about anything you want with that frame with the caveat that you may need to stay within the frame's built in tire clearance. This may cause problems if you want to put fenders on the bike.

In closing.... I personally think the lugs on that era of Treks is very, very intersting. They have a very unique industrial look to them. I wouldn't hesitate putting one of the those frames into service.

this bike needs to be converted to a fixie, and you can start cheaply as a single speed

here's what u do.
Locate an earn-a-bike organization in your area (like mine)
http://www.wheelsforwinners.org
Become a volunteer. Gotta be dozens like this in NY. Have access to work bench, even truing stand... and of course, gobs of discarded parts (if you work there, then you could earn them!). Find a decent rear wheel (27" or 700), unused, that has a cassette on it. Take off said cassette. Get some extra spacers. add spacers and 17T cog until your chainline is perf (no need to RE-DISH WHeel! Yippee)
Get short chainring bolts from local bike shop (or...maybe the Earn-a-bike org has a few in a can somewhere!). Take off the bike chainring in front, flip the small one, and tighten on.
Take the crappy RD and FD off. Voila... a single speed freewheel cruiser for next to nothing.

In my book, the Trek frame is worth something... the rest of the components may be so so or dated, so to break it down is the most practical bet. My daughter and I have done 4 bikes like this (one bike, has been changed 3 times... from 10 speed with crummy RD to SS with the existing rear freewheel, then to Fixed gear, then ditched the cottered crank, added Sugino crank, and set it up with new ex-cassette rear wheel set up as SS as per above. This bike is now a sweet, much ligher weight cafe cruiser).

I can't address the short drops as I've been lucky to have deep horizontals

Pinnah has said it well. If that Trek 400 frame is "middle of the road," you've been traveling a pretty high road. In those days, Trek did a great thing by producing really fine frames and meeting price points with componentry. I own a 400 that's a few years older, made from 531, but I'd never look down at the TT tubesets. There is something about a Trek built from Mississippi steel that I find appealing.

I'm repulsed at the thought of making a fixie from that bike, but that's because I'm old enough to remember the last time the same fad came and went. (I've recently been realizing that I know WHY a lot of retro stuff is retro.) Personally, I'd rather ride the Trek than the Cannondale. If you ride for any real distances, there's a strong chance that you would end up feeling that way, too, if you hold off the conversion for a while.

Pinnah has said it well. If that Trek 400 frame is "middle of the road," you've been traveling a pretty high road. In those days, Trek did a great thing by producing really fine frames and meeting price points with componentry. I own a 400 that's a few years older, made from 531, but I'd never look down at the TT tubesets. There is something about a Trek built from Mississippi steel that I find appealing.

I'm repulsed at the thought of making a fixie from that bike, but that's because I'm old enough to remember the last time the same fad came and went. (I've recently been realizing that I know WHY a lot of retro stuff is retro.) Personally, I'd rather ride the Trek than the Cannondale. If you ride for any real distances, there's a strong chance that you would end up feeling that way, too, if you hold off the conversion for a while.

I agree! The older steel lugged Treks were great bikes and components can be upgraded easily. I've done this with my 85 Trek 520 and it's one my favorite rides.

I agree! The older steel lugged Treks were great bikes and components can be upgraded easily. I've done this with my 85 Trek 520 and it's one my favorite rides.

+1 on e the above. I have a 1981 710 that is a very nice rider. I commute 28 miles round trip to work and back 3-4 times per week. Older Treks are a joy to ride. I would only single speed/fix it if you never plan to ride it as anything other than a commuter. My prediction? You will begin to take longer slower rides that are based around having a good time rather than speed/work out. I find mine to very comfortable and while it is not a race bike I can just ride and ride and rideat a relaxed enjoyable pace.

Here's a link to a flickr set of the whole bike and a few close ups of the components. Trek 400 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/7269744@N06/)

Regarding the frame quality, I would say it's a very good frame.

Very cool.


The one place where the 400 may impose a limitation on you is on tire clearance. It was originally speced for the SunTour Blaze, which was an aero short reach brake set. This means that the crown and brake bridge may be low relative to the axles, which might limit your choices of tires. The bike was speced for 25mm tires, so you can definitely go that wide. In general, I advise running the fattest tires you can fit within reason. The Rivs and most older bikes will let you run up to 32mm tires. If you can live with 25mm you should be fine. Note, the 25s will be noticably wider than those 19s and should fit on just about any rim.

25s are the largest I would want to go anyway, so that's great to know.


Regarding the RD.... I've not seen a good description of the style of riding you are doing. But man o man, I wouldn't get involved in a fixie or SS conversion unless you have a burning desire to go that route. The bike came with SunTour Accushift DT shifters. If they are still on the bike, get a NEW shimano RD for less than $20 and put the Accushift levers in friction mode. This gets you up and running for the least amount of problems, conversions and hassles.

I use all my bikes for commuting and taking relatively long rides throughout the boroughs on the weekends. It's really the best way to see the city. I don't have a burning desire to go fixed or single speed. I'm interested in it mostly because of all riders that swear by it, but I would rather keep this a geared bike especially since that is the way it was intended to be.


In closing.... I personally think the lugs on that era of Treks is very, very intersting. They have a very unique industrial look to them. I wouldn't hesitate putting one of the those frames into service.

Yeah I love the lugs. It's good to know that this is a quality bike as well as a nice looking one. Thanks so much for your help and great advice.

I have the exact same wheels on my '79 Trek and they are great, they roll forever. I took them off a '91 Cannondale I bought and gave to my son.
I don't think you can go wrong with an older Trek frame, but then maybe I am biased.

here's what u do.
Locate an earn-a-bike organization in your area (like mine)
http://www.wheelsforwinners.org
Become a volunteer. Gotta be dozens like this in NY. Have access to work bench, even truing stand... and of course, gobs of discarded parts (if you work there, then you could earn them!). Find a decent rear wheel (27" or 700), unused, that has a cassette on it. Take off said cassette. Get some extra spacers. add spacers and 17T cog until your chainline is perf (no need to RE-DISH WHeel! Yippee)
Get short chainring bolts from local bike shop (or...maybe the Earn-a-bike org has a few in a can somewhere!). Take off the bike chainring in front, flip the small one, and tighten on.
Take the crappy RD and FD off. Voila... a single speed freewheel cruiser for next to nothing.

Thanks for the information. There are plenty of bike places like that the most known one here is recycle a bike. I'm going to keep a record of all the conversion information in this thread for the future, but I think I'll apply the knowledge I've gained for another bike. I'm leaning toward keeping this a geared bike.

I use all my bikes for commuting and taking relatively long rides throughout the boroughs on the weekends. It's really the best way to see the city. I don't have a burning desire to go fixed or single speed. I'm interested in it mostly because of all riders that swear by it, but I would rather keep this a geared bike especially since that is the way it was intended to be.


If you read the log books along the Appalacian Trail, you'll often see the following acronym - HYOH.

It stands for "hike your own hike". It's reminder that when hiking you should hike to suit your goals, motivations and interests and not for the goals, motivations and interests imposed by the group think of peers.

The same applies to cycling. RYOR.

If you like the lugs, love the frame. You get to choose your own components to suit your own interests.

More of my thoughts on velo fashion is here (http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/dirtbag-bikes/bike-fashion.html).

You did good! Nice looking bike. Interesting that it has all Exage Sport components (save the rear derailleur). Are the cranks Exage Sport as well? Maybe Trek switched to Exage Sport some time during the production of the bike, because it is an appropriate period/level groupset.

I have a used Exage Sport short cage rear derailleur you can have for the price of shipping, if you want to match your components. It has some scratches and scuffing, but the jockey wheels look much better than those on the XTR. Not sure why someone put an XTR on such a tight cassette (it looks like a Hyperglide to me...but I could be wrong). And those are horizontal dropouts...but they are very, very short!

You did good! Nice looking bike.

Wow, no kidding. Just looked at the pics. I know those are teeny 19s but the fork looks like you have lots of room for wider tires and fenders, which would work really well for commuting.

For longer rambles and explorations, you might eventually think about wider range gearing. Don't toss the XTR as it will handle wide range cassettes easily if you venture out into hillier terrain.

But dude, $200 for that bike??? You did just fine.

You did good! Nice looking bike. Interesting that it has all Exage Sport components (save the rear derailleur). Are the cranks Exage Sport as well? Maybe Trek switched to Exage Sport some time during the production of the bike, because it is an appropriate period/level groupset.

Thanks! Yes the cranks are Exage too.


I have a used Exage Sport short cage rear derailleur you can have for the price of shipping, if you want to match your components. It has some scratches and scuffing, but the jockey wheels look much better than those on the XTR. Not sure why someone put an XTR on such a tight cassette (it looks like a Hyperglide to me...but I could be wrong). And those are horizontal dropouts...but they are very, very short!

Can the jockey wheels be replaced? That's really the only issue with it. They're almost perfectly round now.

Can the jockey wheels be replaced? That's really the only issue with it. They're almost perfectly round now.

Yep. Most any Shimano jockey wheel would fit, I think, so you could salvage some off some dead derailleur somewhere. I've also heard of people using the worn wheels with no ill effects. There are some vintage derailleurs that actually had smooth jockey wheels.

But an XTR on such a small cassette may compromise shifting. Shorter cage derailleurs make for crisper shifts on smaller cog sizes. However, if it works, and you're fine with it, by all means, keep it on there.

If you read the log books along the Appalacian Trail, you'll often see the following acronym - HYOH.

It stands for "hike your own hike". It's reminder that when hiking you should hike to suit your goals, motivations and interests and not for the goals, motivations and interests imposed by the group think of peers.

More of my thoughts on velo fashion is here (http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/dirtbag-bikes/bike-fashion.html).

Great advice! Your categories on Velo fashion are spot on. Everyone I know who rides fits into one of those descriptions. :D

Yep. Most any Shimano jockey wheel would fit, I think, so you could salvage some off some dead derailleur somewhere. I've also heard of people using the worn wheels with no ill effects. There are some vintage derailleurs that actually had smooth jockey wheels.

But an XTR on such a small cassette may compromise shifting. Shorter cage derailleurs make for crisper shifts on smaller cog sizes. However, if it works, and you're fine with it, by all means, keep it on there.

They work great right now, but I thought since they were so worn down that they would eventually fail. I'll look into replacing the jockey wheels if I have any problems.

But dude, $200 for that bike??? You did just fine.\

Awesome. I'm super excited to get the fit perfect and the bike in great riding shape, so I can go ride the hell out of it. :D

I think you made a great purchase. That bike looks perfectly ridable as is, good tires, brake pads. Looks like it was kept up so bearings should be greased. etc. From your first post I thought you had more issues. And if you ever decide to go SS, you can use the biopace ring according to Sheldon. Happy riding. :beer: