Classic & Vintage - Trek 600 or Schwinn Super Sport

I posted the other day about possibly buying a Trek 600 bike going for $125 with a mix of Ofmega and Shimano 600 components for my wife posted on Craigslist. I thought it may be long gone, since I didn't hear from the owner in three days. However, I just got an e-mail from him today, saying he's gonna show it to the first person who sets up a time.

Today though, I found what i believe to be a 1984 Schwinn Super Sport with Cyclone II components going for $180 that's closer to home. The Trek is about 120 miles away, while the Schwinn is within 3 miles :)

Anyway, the motivating factor here is weight. Should I go with the Trek 600 since it's made of Reynolds 531, or are the mid-80s Super Sports comparably light?

Thanks,

- joe

I posted the other day about possibly buying a Trek 600 bike going for $125 with a mix of Ofmega and Shimano 600 components for my wife posted on Craigslist. I thought it may be long gone, since I didn't hear from the owner in three days. However, I just got an e-mail from him today, saying he's gonna show it to the first person who sets up a time.

Today though, I found what i believe to be a 1984 Schwinn Super Sport with Cyclone II components going for $180 that's closer to home. The Trek is about 120 miles away, while the Schwinn is within 3 miles :)

Anyway, the motivating factor here is weight. Should I go with the Trek 600 since it's made of Reynolds 531, or are the mid-80s Super Sports comparably light?

Thanks,

- joe

There were Trek 600s over several years, and I think some were fully db 531, some were tubes only, and some were 531 tubes with some other cromolly for the forks and stays. I have a very similar '84 610 and a fully db '82 (I think) 600. The fully db is a LOT lighter. I'd find it hard to believe a SS is as light a frame.

The 600 I have is a fairly flexy bike, but I kinda like that.

The weight for a 1984 Super Sport (23" or 58.4cm c-t frame) is 24 pounds. This is for a ready-to-ride bike with pedals.

1984 Schwinn road bike specs (http://www.trfindley.com/flschwinn_1980_1990/1984Ltwt18.html)

I've owned both. They are both nice bikes, but the Trek is slightly lighter, and just feels "livelier" to me. My Trek, which I still own and ride regularly, is equipped with Campy components and Brooks saddle. That may be part of the reason I prefer it.
The guy who bought the Super Sport has it stripped and is threatening to make a single speed out of it. I would not have sold it to him if I had thought he would ruin it that way.:(

Trek is a much better bike. I am surprised it is still around.

As always, thanks guys. I can always count on a quick response here on the C&V forums.

I've carried and ridden (briefly) Trek bikes with 531 frames and they are beautiful. To me, they felt weightless compared to my cheaper bikes.

I just weighed my Triathlon, which has a Reynolds 501 frame. It came in at about 24-25 pounds (I weighed myself and then picked up the bike while on the scale :D). So, if the Super Sport is around the same weight, I think that will suffice.

I'm supposed to check it out tonight if I hear back from the guy. If it's a decent bike, I may just bring it home and save myself the trouble of driving out to East Colorado. If it's a pig though, I'll wait for the Trek.

My super sport sustained the impact of a car which knocked me out for a brief moment in time. The frame suffers a slight buckle but the frame is rideable. It does need a new fork.

I'll be painting it before winter. I hope it rides okay after the crash. The Tenax Schwinns are pretty freaking awsome.

I just went to see the Super Sport, and in the words of Bill O'Reilly, F***ING THING SUCKS!!!

It was in awful shape. Horribly weatherbeaten - everything on it was cracked and rusted. Poor thing struggled to shift altogether.

I just e-mailed the guy with the Trek. Hopefully he still has it. I've told him I'm ready to buy tomorrow.

The saga continues!

Shame on the yutz who let that SS get trashed. Good luck on scoring the 600.

I think trek 600s were 531 all around, not frame only. Could be wrong.

I think trek 600s were 531 all around, not frame only. Could be wrong.
From the '85 Trek catalog:

Trek 600 - Trek's top-of-the-line Sport Performance machine.

Frame: Main tubes: Reynolds 531CS, double-butted.

Fork: Reynolds 531CS w/Aero Crown

Stays: Reynolds 531CS

Yay for my memory! (I also own a trek 600 that's way too big for me. I ride it when the miyata's got a flat or nasty out. 27" wheels do serve a decent purpose)

From the '85 Trek catalog:

Trek 600 - Trek's top-of-the-line Sport Performance machine.

Frame: Main tubes: Reynolds 531CS, double-butted.

Fork: Reynolds 531CS w/Aero Crown

Stays: Reynolds 531CS

That's a trick decal, 531cs (club sport) meant 531 butted main tubes, but with forks and stays of special cro-moly tubing.

That's a trick decal, 531cs (club sport) meant 531 butted main tubes, but with forks and stays of special cro-moly tubing.
That's misleading if not downright dishonest.

By saying the fork and stays are "531CS", and with Reynolds 531 widely advertised as a Manganese-Molybdenum alloy, it sure smells like misrepresentation.

From vintage-trek.com (http://www.vintage-trek.com/Trek_timeline.htm):

"Reynolds 531CS (Club Sport) frame tubing is first used by Trek. According to Terry at Reynolds-Cycle.com: '531CS was a special set, supplied mainly to Trek. The main triangle was butted 531 and the rear stays were CrMo (501).' The fork was taper gauge CrMo (501). (Info. provided by Dickey Greer.)"