Singlespeed & Fixed Gear - 1986 Trek 560 = Solid Fixie Conversion?

I am in the process of possibly purchasing a 1986 Trek 560 from a local here in my city. I believe the guy merely wants to get rid of it and would love to get a few bucks for it. Would this bike be a solid candidate for a fixed gear conversion? I have not driven out to see it yet but I believe it has horizontal dropouts. I have done a single speed conversion before so I know the routine. Does any one own or have owned one of these bikes and has ever attempted a conversion on it? It would be good to know before making a purchase. HIT ME UP!

here's a 1987:
http://www.vintage-trek.com/images/trek/Gardetto/Gardetto1-800.jpg

The dropouts look slightly horizontal, could possibly work. The stock crankset looks good at a glance. You'll have downtube shifter bosses, but that's not a big deal. Could work, may just wanna confirm that there's a little room to move the rear axle around in the dropout when you see it in person, but looks like a good lugged steel frame.

Go here http://www.vintage-trek.com/index.htm for more info. on the 560. That was a very nice bike; if you get it, take care to save all the components you don't use and don't grind anything off the frame.

The Classic and Vintage forum could tell you a lot more.

Yes! Those were high-quality consumer-level sport/race bikes. Nothing precious with probably midlevel components, but ones worth saving around in case you ever get a different bike and want to make that into an 80s road bike again.

I've wanted a Trek of that time period for a while now, but I keep on not having room for one more. Drat.

woah, yeah those arent horizontal at all! ive seen a couple of people that have made it work while trying to find some close up shops of the droupouts. Has anyone tried and converted one of these before? I will have to send messages to these guys but heres what I found.

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b58/spacerockkid/84_trek6.jpg

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b58/spacerockkid/n23330726_36598560_2149.jpg

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b58/spacerockkid/PICT0268.jpg

woah, yeah those arent horizontal at all!

WTF are you talking about? The dropouts on these bikes are very much horizontal. There is planty of room for wheel adjustment. I've owned a handful of vintage Treks and they are some of the nicest, best riding bikes out there, with build quality, finish, and details rivaling some very much more expensive frames. Deffinetly take it, but if you are going to convert it don't hack anything and save all the original bits. And I'm not just saying that to be grouchy, but vintage Treks have a cult following and are going up in value. The 560 was Double butted Renyolds 531 steel, which was one of the best tubesets made.

here is the bike in a 1986 brochure on vintage-trek.com:

http://vintage-trek.com/images/trek/86TrekCatalog.pdf

If you decide you don't want to convert it, if you were to just get it to clean up and resell you could afford a bikesdirect bike like a kilo tt or something from what I have seen as far as ebay prices.

For comparision, these are the dropouts on a 1988 360 i have been working on, which shares the same rear triangle and dropouts as the 560 you are considering:

http://i434.photobucket.com/albums/qq61/rotharpunc/GEDC0001-6.jpg

For comparision, these are the dropouts on a 1988 360 i have been working on, which shares the same rear triangle and dropouts as the 560 you are considering:

http://i434.photobucket.com/albums/qq61/rotharpunc/GEDC0001-6.jpg


oh sweet! yes, that actually looks like something i can work with. the first picture i saw from the first reply looked like it was way more vertical, i figured since of the year, it could go either way. thanks for giving me this info. now i am completely stoked. thanks!

:thumb:

that is a prime conversion candidate. but like the others have said, just don't grind anything off the frame and hold onto the gruppo.

I [heart] old Treks. I bought an '89 660 frameset for building up as a winter commuting/training bike. I've even done some SSCX racing on it. Great, great bike.

so what would be a good price point for one of these?

Well, I just bought it so hopefully I got a good deal!!!! What do you guys think? It totally needs new tires, its scuffed up, dirty and has a few little rust scratches here and there but what can one expect for a setup this old? Other than that it seems ok. I ended up getting it for $90.00. Good, bad, decent, a steal, a rip off, let me know!?

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b58/spacerockkid/trek6.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b58/spacerockkid/trek8.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b58/spacerockkid/trekgears.jpg

^^ $90 is a really good price for a mid-to-high end vintage Trek

I recently dumpster salvaged and converted an '88 Trek 400, which has similar dropouts to the Trek 360 in the pix above. It took some fiddling about, but with a half-link in the chain I managed to get things set up nicely.
To get more space in those drops, take the dropout adjustment screws out and remove the springs from them.

$90 isan excellent price, good score! that bike is really nice and should clean up great!

I actually converted my Trek 560 Pro Series to a fixed gear. It was actually a really nice ride, and I enjoyed it a lot.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3227/2758313291_01b4aa068d_o.jpg

The dropouts gave me little room for adjustment, but I had good chain tension at a 42x16 gear ratio.

However, this is not my current bike because I was experiencing problems with the fork, and now I am riding a Kilo TT.

I actually converted my Trek 560 Pro Series to a fixed gear. It was actually a really nice ride, and I enjoyed it a lot.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3227/2758313291_01b4aa068d_o.jpg

The dropouts gave me little room for adjustment, but I had good chain tension at a 42x16 gear ratio.

However, this is not my current bike because I was experiencing problems with the fork, and now I am riding a Kilo TT.

Very nice tiny bike!

East Hill

lol @ East Hill. ever get that tiny Colnago?

I have probably 20k miles on my 560. Great riding bike - you'll enjoy how it handles.

"Well, I just bought it so hopefully I got a good deal!!!! What do you guys think? It totally needs new tires, its scuffed up, dirty and has a few little rust scratches here and there but what can one expect for a setup this old? Other than that it seems ok. I ended up getting it for $90.00. Good, bad, decent, a steal, a rip off, let me know!?"

Sounds like a very good deal on a really nice bike. Good luck on the conversion.

They make great fixed gear bikes...I love riding mine around.

http://www.cisforcoomer.com/hosted/bikes/560/inside/right_side_in_elevator.jpg

I had to use a half link to get perfect tension. Also, the drive-side chainstay isn't pressed in, so clearance is tight with a 42mm chainline and a big chainring. I have about 1mm of clearance between my chainstay and 52 tooth chainring. Good luck on the conversion! :)

They make great fixed gear bikes...I love riding mine around.

http://www.cisforcoomer.com/hosted/bikes/560/inside/right_side_in_elevator.jpg

I had to use a half link to get perfect tension. Also, the drive-side chainstay isn't pressed in, so clearance is tight with a 42mm chainline and a big chainring. I have about 1mm of clearance between my chainstay and 52 tooth chainring. Good luck on the conversion! :)

Is that a 760?

Nah, it's a 560. 1985 model, as old as me but probably in better shape. :P

Since this seems to have become a 'show off your vintage trek fixed gear' thread, here's mine.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e364/fuzz2050/Funeral/CIMG0281.jpg?t=1233678455

It's a 1985 600.

I'll play. Here's my Trek 660 as I first built it up.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/CalOso/DSC01491.jpg

The paint was a little ragged, and I never cared for the gray, so I had it powdercoated. This is close to the Trek "race blue" that earlier versions of the 660 had. And I got some nice SKS full fenders.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/CalOso/trek660002.jpg

Very nice conversion. I just did about the same thing with a Centurion Accordo, mudguards and all.

By the way, to those not conversant on Trek's of this vintage, the model number is something of a code to the frame geometry. The first digit is the model level (higher is better), the remaining two have a lot to do with frame geometry and purpose of design.

x20's are touring bikes (the Trek 520 is an absolute classic of this genre). x60's are racing, the 460 was the amateur level (I've got one - geared - and absolutely adore it), 560's 660's, 760's keep getting better in tubing as you go up the ladder, all frames are made with a fast handling geometry. The 460's have the added advantage of not having come with shift lever braze-ons, keeping the clean lines without unnecessary hacking.

"Every time someone hacks a vintage frame to make a fixie, God kills a kitten."

By the way, to those not conversant on Trek's of this vintage, the model number is something of a code to the frame geometry. The first digit is the model level (higher is better), the remaining two have a lot to do with frame geometry and purpose of design.

Didn't know this. So, what about the x00 models? I have a 1988 400. It feels like a pretty generic "sport recreation" frame. Not too relaxed but not really twitchy/racer either.

That sounds about right. At one time, someone mentioned to me the full gamut of frame design intentions/fame number combinations, but as my geared interests are almost totally in either fully bagged tourers or high speed fast handling racing bikes, the x20 and x60 series are the only ones I remember. x00 were either generic, or (more likely) marketed as a somewhat comfort oriented sport tourer.

I'll probably figure out more as I dig up more frames. I've got a GREAT deal of respect for those 80's Trek's.

For what it's worth, I set up my '89 660 and my '00 5200 (CF race bike) as identically as I could with reach to the bars, saddle to BB, etc. They handle almost identically. The 660 is slightly heavier but it still winds up fast and rails the corners.

this is good actually, it gives me fixer upper ideas for my new setup. thanks a lot guys. any other suggestions on parts or conversion techniques, let me know!

here's my 1985 trek 400 conversion, killed by a toyota on sept 22, 2008:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3011/3251356147_5c03cc3dfa.jpg

By the way, to those not conversant on Trek's of this vintage, the model number is something of a code to the frame geometry. The first digit is the model level (higher is better), the remaining two have a lot to do with frame geometry and purpose of design.

x20's are touring bikes (the Trek 520 is an absolute classic of this genre). x60's are racing, the 460 was the amateur level (I've got one - geared - and absolutely adore it), 560's 660's, 760's keep getting better in tubing as you go up the ladder, all frames are made with a fast handling geometry. The 460's have the added advantage of not having come with shift lever braze-ons, keeping the clean lines without unnecessary hacking.



It's not the second digits that determine class, it's usually the first. 5xx, 6xx and 7xx are all touring bikes. The 520 needs no introduction, the 720 is even more epic, and almost impossible to find. I have a 610 that has chainstays longer than even the Long Haul Trucker, and the 600 I posted earlier is still rather touring in geometry.

4xx are usually of lower quality, although I would kill for a 420L for my girlfriend (do you know how few mixtes were made with nice tubing?), although they were still quite nice. They had a more generic 'sport touring geometry, even the 420's

I think X00's were framesets that were sold without being built up. Eh, it's hard to find a pattern in the madness, just bookmark
http://www.vintage-trek.com/

man, i love how i just started a new vintage trek lovers forum. it is making me feel apart of a new generation of bike enthusiasts. anyway, i have another question about my conversion. i am thinking about purchasing a new rear wheel or wheel set because the stuff on there now is pretty rusty. what do you guys think about that? what do you suggest i get (new hubs, new rear wheel, entire set? what brands etc.). also, can anyone suggest a design gear ratio for me, being a newb and never owning or riding a fixed gear? again, the bike i am converting is a trek 560.

If you live in a relatively flat area, I would recommend 46/17 (or any combo that gives you aprox. 73 GI), but that really is a personal thing. Wheels really depend on how much you want to spend. How much do you want to spend. They also depend on the aesthetics you're going for. What aesthetics are you going for (brightly colored rims? something subtle? a more classic look?)? Velocity Deep Vs laced to Formula Hubs are a favorite for those looking for bright colors (they're also quality wheels...deeps more than DPs). I run Velocity Aeroheads (lighter than Deep Vs and a little cheaper that still have a somewhat deep profile) laced to Soma Somax hubs (probably a little overpriced, but what I wanted) for a slightly more subtle looks. I guess we need to know more about your needs, preferences and situation to be able to better answer your question.

i guess you could say i am trying to keep this project fairly cheap but at the same time i would like for it to look anywhere from decent to nice. im not really trying to make it completely scream, "please steal me" when i lock it up at my local bike rack but i would like for it to have some solid and straight looking wheels, hence id say classy yet subtle in a cheaper priced wheel is what i am going for. also, i am new to this so any setup that is easier to install and work with than another would also be good. as far gear ratios go, i live in a fairly flat terrain, or at least ill be riding around in one. there are a few minor hills here and there and with time i hope to be able to tackle SOME of them, so i would need a solid flat land commute ratio along with a tad bit of versatility. also, itd be cool to try and learn some tricks too!? muhhahaha, kidding. does that somewhat help? one other thing, is there any special tools i may need? i have some tools such as a chainwhip from my last project but ive never done a fixed gear.

If I lived in a flatter area than Seattle, I'd personally go with something that gives me more gear inches than 73. I run 46/17 and it's perfect for climbing most Seattle hills, but when I'm in flatter areas I find myself wishing I was still running 48/16 so I could go faster without spinning out.

i'll play. here's my '89 trek 660.

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r34/jch3n/IMG_8778.jpg

the gearing is 42x17, but i live in seattle. i think you should get a new wheelset if the stock ones are pretty beat. i bought my bike geared off craigslist. all i did was rebuild the rear wheel with a fixed/free hub, take off all the deraillers, shifters, and extra chainrings and buy new brake levers.

Since this seems to have become a 'show off your vintage trek fixed gear' thread, here's mine.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e364/fuzz2050/Funeral/CIMG0281.jpg?t=1233678455

It's a 1985 600.

It looks older than 1985 to me. That decal scheme was phased out by 1983, and it looks like it has forged dropouts rather than the investment cast ones used in 1985.

Not that there's anything wrong with that -- it's a nice bike!

It's not the second digits that determine class, it's usually the first. 5xx, 6xx and 7xx are all touring bikes. The 520 needs no introduction, the 720 is even more epic, and almost impossible to find. I have a 610 that has chainstays longer than even the Long Haul Trucker, and the 600 I posted earlier is still rather touring in geometry.

4xx are usually of lower quality, although I would kill for a 420L for my girlfriend (do you know how few mixtes were made with nice tubing?), although they were still quite nice. They had a more generic 'sport touring geometry, even the 420's

I think X00's were framesets that were sold without being built up. Eh, it's hard to find a pattern in the madness, just bookmark
http://www.vintage-trek.com/
No, Skyrocker had it right. The first digit indicates the frame material "5xx" used Ishiwata 022 tubing, 6xx used Reynolds 531 main tubes and pre-fab Ishiwata or Tange forks and rear triangle, 7xx was all Reynolds 531 brazed in Waterloo, 9xx was all Columbus (SL or SP depending on frame size) brazed in Waterloo, and 1xx was Reynolds 753 brazed in Waterloo.

The second digit indicated the frame geometry: 0 or 1 was a "sports touring" geometry, 2 was touring geometry, 3, 6 or 7 was racing geometry. The last digit was just a model designation.

The "n00" frames were bare framesets, but IIRC this designation was dropped in the early 80s so that a single, terminal 0 indicated a bare frame. E.g. a "977" was a Columbus tubed, racing geometry frame built with a Campy Super Record group, while a "970" was just the bare Columbus frame and fork.

Your right, it's a 1980 trek 600, my other trek touring bike is an '85 620. It's actually set up for touring though. See how it's easy to get them confused, they're even the same color.

Just ride the Trek and get a BD fixie

what is a bd fixie?

man, i love how i just started a new vintage trek lovers forum. it is making me feel apart of a new generation of bike enthusiasts. anyway, i have another question about my conversion. i am thinking about purchasing a new rear wheel or wheel set because the stuff on there now is pretty rusty. what do you guys think about that? what do you suggest i get (new hubs, new rear wheel, entire set? what brands etc.). also, can anyone suggest a design gear ratio for me, being a newb and never owning or riding a fixed gear? again, the bike i am converting is a trek 560.

Formula hubs with lo-profile box rims,preferably all silver like these....

http://www.bicyclewheels.com/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=B&Product_Code=FGS3&Category_Code=FGS

ok, so i can probably figure this out on my own but i wanted to ask just for the sake of doing it right. how would i remove these bosses without completely damaging them? ive been told to keep it all intact even if i convert it, so i want to make sure i do these bosses justice.

you can't remove them without doing damage.

really? ah man, well i wasnt going to grind down the boss holes but i thought you could take them off? oh well.

just took off the bosses without any damage. the key is using a set of vice grips and pull real softly.

ok, so thus far i have the trek 560 pretty much stripped, however i am having trouble getting the bottom bracket out. i removed the crank with the crank removing tool, now im not sure how to take the lock ring off of the bottom bracket. again, im completely a newb so if someone can explain to me how that works and possible what tool ill have to purchase, that would be great.

It's not the second digits that determine class, it's usually the first. 5xx, 6xx and 7xx are all touring bikes. The 520 needs no introduction, the 720 is even more epic, and almost impossible to find. I have a 610 that has chainstays longer than even the Long Haul Trucker, and the 600 I posted earlier is still rather touring in geometry.

JohnDThompson said it, but you're wrong and the other person is right.

touring (X20s):
http://www.vintage-trek.com/TrekBrochure1984Touring.htm

racing (x60s):
http://www.vintage-trek.com/TrekBrochure1984Racing.htm