kcl52

I need help deciding between elance 300 or 400

There are both around $125.
Elance 300 is in excellent condition 1986
Elance 400 has some dents and scratches 1986 also (based on the serial) saddle needs to be replaced.

Ishiwata triple-butted chrome-molybdenum alloy vs reynolds 531.
27'' tube vs 700c
24.5lb vs 23.6 lb

https://www.vintage-trek.com/images/t...rekCatalog.pdf

Should I go for the condition of the bike or the frame?

Forgot to mention, the 400 is a 19'' frame, I'm 5'8'' inseam 30.25''. I'm not sure if the frame is a bit small for me.

mtnwkr

I'd personaly go for the 300. Ishiwata tubing was also very good and I'd rather have a bike that was taken care of than one with dents and in poor condition.

m750rider

I think a 19" frame will be too small for you.

ColonelJLloyd 

+1

kcl52

Thank you for all the responses!

I tried the 400 this morning and it felt okay, but I have not been on a bike for years.

I'll see the 300 later this afternoon. Seller is asking $125, I think it's a reasonable price? However, the stand over height of the bike is 30.5. Is this bike too big for me? o.O

wrk101

There really isn't that much difference between the 300 and the 400. Its really all about condition. Dents? I don't think so.

$125 for a vintage steel Trek is a deal, if the bike fits. In pristine, ready to ride shape, no defects, etc., they sell quickly around here at $200, sometimes more.

Bike is not too big for you. Measure your bicycle inseam, not your regular inseam. There is a significant difference. Google will explain it all for you.

At 5-8, you are probably looking for a 21 inch frame. Next size up on many of the vintage Treks was 22 1/2 inches, which is likely too big for you.

EjustE

I'd take the ('86 and '87) 400 over a 300 any time of the day, regardless the patina on the frame. There is no comparison between the Ishiwata steel on the 300 and the 531 on the 400. You can deal with a bike supposedly too small (and riding a bike a size too small does have it's advantages, it is more responsive, esp. with the slack geometry of those Treks). In road bike sizes, my sweet spot is a 56cm. I have road bikes from 52 to 58 cm. The larger bikes have more aggressive geometry. Here is my 52cm ("too small for me") 1987 Trek 400T (that's an 120mm stem) :



The way it is, aerobar, triple, 25mm gator skins and all, just a tick over 21 lbs

wrk101

"Has some dents" is a patina I can do without. Has some scratches? No big deal.

ColonelJLloyd 

It's THAT good?

kcl52

I decided to get the 300 because the condition of the bike was superb, and I just felt right on it (it was a 53cm frame). Wish I could try both bike next to each other to feel the difference.

The 400 doesn't really have dents, I think it's mostly paint chips. This sounds kind of crazy, but should I get the 400 too and try them both? Since they are both reasonably priced, I shouldn't lose much money. I'm too indecisive!

tmh657

I will buy most any steel framed Trek road bike from the beginning to late 80's in good shape if I can make a profit on it so no, it's not crazy if you have the skills, the space and the patience to keep the one you like and flip the other one.

kcl52

The problem is... I don't know much about bikes. I'd probably just sell it right away.

cb400bill

You could use it to learn those skills.