keep on trekkin

I've done a fair bit of searching in this thread and forum, but haven't read a lot of chatter about this vintage. While I'm not planning on selling, as it rides so well, I am a bit curious of it's value.

Don't have a good list of components, but it's mostly completely stock. Still have the original pedals with toe clips. Cogs are in good shape. Spent some time cleaning, not enough yet, and bought tires for it. Any thoughts or insights on values or anything else are appreciated!

m750rider

This should be a great bike as you already know. You can find out more information about it by visiting https://www.vintage-trek.com. I have two Treks, a 1978 model year 710 and an 1984 model year 720, and I was able to get a great deal on each so my pricing experience is not necessarily what they should bring. Many folks on here say vintage Treks are going for a premium, and after riding them and comparing them to what's out there I can see why. Has it been repainted - I don't see any decals? I don't know $250-300?

Poguemahone

I believe at this point Treks were available only as frames; the buyer or shop set them up. Just about any period build is okay. (Someone will correct me on this if I am wrong).

Does it still have the headbadge? That'll affect value some.

If selling, I would get some cable clips from Velo Orange for the top tube. Heck, if not selling I would get them. Cheap, and will improve look of the bike.

keep on trekkin

Thanks for the info. Yes, i've scoured every inch of the vintage trek site, it is certainly a great resource. I used their 'serial number decoder' to get as close as I can on year, but the 'year' digit is missing! The '77 catalog on there has some components from the 502 and 504 line, as the serial number applies to either, and this bike falls square in to the 504 mold. Yes, original screwed headbadge is still there. He may of replaced the back wheel, as it has a curved QR vs the older straight one on the front. And no, no Trek decals, but the Ishiwata is still faintly visible on the fork and perhaps downtube, can't recall. Also, it's original Imron, metallic dark green.

I will most certainly be picking up the cable clips, thanks! [also love the braided stainless shifter cables coming forward from the bar-ends!]

23skidoo

Both my 77 and 78 TX-300s were bike shop builds with a mish-mash of differing components; I'd say if yours is definitely a '77, it's likely to be a shop build rather than a factory build. I'm curious about the missing seat tube decals as those normally stand up pretty well to the test of time. You sure it hasn't been repainted?

wrk101

+1 Likely repaint, no decals = big hit on valuation. Otherwise, great bike!

keep on trekkin

Good catch. Not sure why i think it hasn't, there may be an Ishiwata sticker on the seat tube just below the top tube joint, or i might be dreaming it. There is definitely an Ishiwata sticker on the fork, i may have just 'assumed' that since the paint on the fork and frame look identical, in color and wear, that it wasn't a repaint. You know what they say about assuming! I have seen old Treks ordered without TREK decals, but if there's none at all i bet you're spot on. Thanks again team!

keep on trekkin

Thanks to your insights took a closer work tonight. Two stickers on the seat tube were what led me to believe it's original Imron. Emailed the bike shop in the lower pic, got a response saying yes, they sold Treks then, owner would get back to me, never did...

Again, thanks for the wisdom. Not looking to sell just wonder what it's worth.

JunkYardBike

I purchased a '78 TX500 frameset + extras on ebay for about $150 shipped last year. Of course, mine wasn't exactly perfect and it had a keyless U-Lock still attached to it! Nothing a car jack couldn't fix.

I've seen the early full Ishiwata 022 frames go for between $200-$250, usually in very good condition. What you have going for you is the early date of manufacture. What you have going against you is, as others have stated, the lack of decals.

Here's a website praising the 022 Trek sport touring frame, in the event you haven't seen it yet: https://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/dirtbag-bikes/510.html. You've got loads of clearance for tires and fenders, which is attractive to a certain segment of the cycling world.

Here's mine (not a vintage build):

JunkYardBike

Oh, and those hubs look like Campagnolo? Maybe Tipo? Very smooth running hubs (definitely a keeper) worth about $75-$100 on ebay in excellent condition.

keep on trekkin

Good eye. Campy rear, Shimano front. And thanks a TON for that 022 website, had not seen it. Nice bike! Mine certainly got the low end of braze-ons. Front and rear for racks, but nothing in between...

EjustE

They do look like high flange Nuovo Tipo. Also the crank is somewhat of a rarity. It looks like an SR Apex 5 touring crank, 86mm BCD, which is basically a Stronglight 99 (latest generation copy - their rings are interchangeable as well). I suspect that either the crank is a later addition or this bike is later than 70s, because the first year of manufacturing for those cranks was 1980. Probably a bike store build in the 80s.

A couple of questions to the OP: what is the seatpost size and what are the derailleurs? (RD looks like an early Cyclone GT, but cannot be sure)

JunkYardBike

I was basing it on the rear skewer nut. I thought I saw slots on the front hub, rather than the Tipo 'holes'.

That is a neat crankset, and I think E is right that it's an Apex. The rear derailleur does look like a 1st generation Cyclone GT, which is exactly what I have on mine. In excellent condition, those sell between $40-$50 on ebay.

So, basically, you have a very nice ride. Enjoy it!

keep on trekkin

Bingo. SR Apex crank. RD is a Cyclone, no GT shown, but i think i read something that indicated that early GT's weren't marked as such. FD is a Suntour AG Tech.

Really don't think it's an 80's build, as the 'E' in the serial number and the rest of it points pretty clearly to a pre-80 TX500, and the components line up really close to the 77 504. However, the crank and rear hub certainly appear to have been a later add...

thanks again for the insights!