Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46
  1. #1
    Riding like its 1990 thenomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    IE, SoCal
    Posts
    3,628
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    To keep or not '85 Trek 620 vs Surly Cross Check

    Just grabbed this Trek 620 1985 today. Great condition but not complete.

    I have older Shimano 600 components I can rebuild it with easily to make it complete.

    BUT...
    My problem with any of these bikes i bring home is that I like them too much myself! I set it up to fit me and I can see really enjoying this thing. Should have never thrown my leg over it.

    Here's the main dilemma, my Surly Cross Check frame (bought for a steal at $175) is basically the same size just with a shorter headtube/standover. So I compared them both:

    Trek is 56st x 56tt, BB is .5 inch higher, 531cs lugged frame (beautiful!), rear chainstays are the longer, standover is right 'there' but can be flatfooted, all the brazeons you want incl front lowrider, can be converted to 700c...(I've always sort of missed my 56cm Trek 760)

    Surly 53st x 56tt, BB lower slightly, 4130 frame Tig welded, lots of nice brazeons, threadless, 700c Wiiiiide tires can fit, wanted as SS 'cross bike, rode it as a loaded SS commuter all year last year and loved it and have told myself I'd keep because of versatility etc!

    I can build the 620 and make a pretty penny or sell the Surly and make less money while keeping something worthy of keeping for a long time.
    I know what this forum will say but I have to ask anyhow, for my own sanity!


    Was also going to build it for my dad to ride but. . .
    Attached Images Attached Images
    My blog about rides, bikes and builds: ridesgoneby.blogspot.com

  2. #2
    Senior Member auchencrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    10,090
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Lugged steel trumps paper scissors and stone every time.
    - Auchen

  3. #3
    Wookie Jesus inspires me. Puget Pounder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,225
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Touring bike vs cross bike. Which serves your purposes better? I like Surlys, but they are burly and feel sluggish to me. Much better at being utiliarian bikes than inspirational riders, but you are comparing it to a touring bike.

    I would go with the Xcheck, but I don't tour.

    The trek is way classier.

  4. #4
    Still learning oddjob2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    North of Canada, Adirondacks, NNJ
    My Bikes
    Too many
    Posts
    5,034
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by thenomad View Post
    Just grabbed this Trek 620 1985 today. Great condition but not complete.

    I can build the 620 and make a pretty penny or sell the Surly and make less money while keeping something worthy of keeping for a long time.
    I know what this forum will say but I have to ask anyhow, for my own sanity!


    Was also going to build it for my dad to ride but. . .
    You already have 4 bikes, what's a 20% increase in fleet size, NADA! Keep them both.

    Surly frames go for stupid big bucks on ebay, ANY Surly frame.
    Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving. Albert Einstein
    2014 Additions: 1985 Trek 560, 1992 Trek Multitrack 700 (my 2nd), 1994 Trek Carbon 2200, Peugeot PX-10, 1981 Schwinn Voyager, 1989 Bridgestone RB-1

  5. #5
    Senior Member pcb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bergen County, NJ
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by thenomad View Post
    Just grabbed this Trek 620 1985 today. Great condition but not complete.

    Here's the main dilemma, my Surly Cross Check frame (bought for a steal at $175) is basically the same size just with a shorter headtube/standover. So I compared them both:

    Trek is 56st x 56tt, BB is .5 inch higher, 531cs lugged frame (beautiful!), rear chainstays are the longer, standover is right 'there' but can be flatfooted, all the brazeons you want incl front lowrider, can be converted to 700c...(I've always sort of missed my 56cm Trek 760)

    Surly 53st x 56tt, BB lower slightly, 4130 frame Tig welded, lots of nice brazeons, threadless, 700c Wiiiiide tires can fit, wanted as SS 'cross bike, rode it as a loaded SS commuter all year last year and loved it and have told myself I'd keep because of versatility etc!

    I can build the 620 and make a pretty penny or sell the Surly and make less money while keeping something worthy of keeping for a long time.
    I know what this forum will say but I have to ask anyhow, for my own sanity!

    Was also going to build it for my dad to ride but. . .
    Well, I'm kinda new here, but I believe the correct answer would be: "Keep both!" Leave the Surly an SS commuter, build the 620 lighter with gears for non-commuting rides. Find something else for dad.

    If space/budget/spouse impose a different choice, I think the Trek will ride nicer than the Surly, which makes it the keeper. As long as you don't really need clearance for mega-wide rubber or you want a beater you don't have much $$ into and don't worry about crashing, keep the Trek. You can always find another CrossCheck for cheap. I've had two, didn't pay over $250 shipped for either, sold the first for more than I paid, still have the second built as a studded-tire snow bike.

  6. #6
    Senior Member pcb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bergen County, NJ
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by oddjob2 View Post
    You already have 4 bikes, what's a 20% increase in fleet size, NADA! Keep them both.

    Surly frames go for stupid big bucks on ebay, ANY Surly frame.
    +1 on the correct choice being keep both!

    I guess I've been lucky with Surly on ebay, I've landed two CrossChecks and a Steamroller pretty darn cheap. Maybe frame size, seasonal timing, etc factor in.

  7. #7
    Bianchi Goddess Bianchigirll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Camp Hill, PA
    My Bikes
    Too many to list here check my signature.
    Posts
    20,044
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Anyone can go down to the bike shop and buy a surly. Not everyone can have a nice lugged steel bike. I personally would love a nice trek from that era because of all the great craftsmanship and little extra touches on it.

    Like the shifter cable through the stay, not to mention the stay caps on the dropouts.



    Bianchis '87 Sport SX, '90 Proto (2), '91 Boarala 'cross, '93 Project 3, '88 Trofeo, '86 Volpe, '89 Axis, '79 Mixte SOLD, '99 Mega Pro XL Ti, '97 Ti Megatube, , '90 something Vento 603,

    Others but still loved,; '80 RIGI, '80 Batavus Professional, '87 Cornelo, '86 Bertoni (sold), '09 Motobecane SS, '98 Hetchins M.O., '09 K2 Mainframe, '89 Trek 2000, '?? Jane Doe (still on the drawing board), '90ish Haro Escape

  8. #8
    Riding like its 1990 thenomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    IE, SoCal
    Posts
    3,628
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've got more than 4 bikes and like to turn them around and ride something different. I put all the "light" parts I had on my cyclocross bike and have been riding that as my fast 18lb bike. I have a Schwinn Peloton waiting to be built as a steel roadie. I keep trying to get more time to race cross and single speed was a way to justify my CC purchase.

    May research what prices the CC are going for so I can make some money. I've always loved vintage so this could stand the test of time. 700c and lighter is what I like for a vintage frame (IMO).

    But, I don't do touring, my commute is now going to be much shorter, I can ride single track on the Cross Check and I was trying to sell off some bikes to make some mad cash for some other things.
    My blog about rides, bikes and builds: ridesgoneby.blogspot.com

  9. #9
    Senior Member pcb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bergen County, NJ
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bianchigirll View Post
    Anyone can go down to the bike shop and buy a surly. Not everyone can have a nice lugged steel bike. I personally would love a nice trek from that era because of all the great craftsmanship and little extra touches on it.

    Like the shifter cable through the stay, not to mention the stay caps on the dropouts.
    I prefer the earlier Treks without the fastback through-bolt lug, socketed dropouts, etc. The socketed drops and fastback socketed lug were all done to decrease production costs and build time. Machine/automated brazing crept in, the heavy one-piece faux headtube/lug debuted, etc. John Thompson can probably correct me if I'm off, but I think the earlier frames required and showed more skill and workmanship. Don't get me wrong, I'd still rather have this 620 than a Surly CC, but brazed seatstay caps and slotted/domed stay ends float my boat better than square-cut tube ends stuffed into sockets.

  10. #10
    Riding like its 1990 thenomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    IE, SoCal
    Posts
    3,628
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I do like the brazed TREK seatstay caps too. Just traded a 53cm 1978 frame to a commuting buddy. Very nice long campy dropouts and nice long lugs.
    However, I have a thing for lining the lugs as well and the more the better. May have to keep it just for the visuals of it all.

    Just saw where one person did SS cross on a 620, I'd bet theres still a bit of fun in the old girl too. hmmm

    Not big on triples either
    My blog about rides, bikes and builds: ridesgoneby.blogspot.com

  11. #11
    自転車整備士 oldskoolwrench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Denver, Colorado USA
    My Bikes
    '86 Moots Mountaineer, '94 Salsa Ala Carte, '94 S-Works FSR, 1983 Trek 600 & 620
    Posts
    900
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by thenomad View Post
    Just grabbed this Trek 620 1985 today. Great condition but not complete.

    I have older Shimano 600 components I can rebuild it with easily to make it complete.

    BUT...
    My problem with any of these bikes i bring home is that I like them too much myself! I set it up to fit me and I can see really enjoying this thing. Should have never thrown my leg over it.

    Here's the main dilemma, my Surly Cross Check frame (bought for a steal at $175) is basically the same size just with a shorter headtube/standover. So I compared them both:

    Trek is 56st x 56tt, BB is .5 inch higher, 531cs lugged frame (beautiful!), rear chainstays are the longer, standover is right 'there' but can be flatfooted, all the brazeons you want incl front lowrider, can be converted to 700c...(I've always sort of missed my 56cm Trek 760)

    Surly 53st x 56tt, BB lower slightly, 4130 frame Tig welded, lots of nice brazeons, threadless, 700c Wiiiiide tires can fit, wanted as SS 'cross bike, rode it as a loaded SS commuter all year last year and loved it and have told myself I'd keep because of versatility etc!

    I can build the 620 and make a pretty penny or sell the Surly and make less money while keeping something worthy of keeping for a long time.
    I know what this forum will say but I have to ask anyhow, for my own sanity!

    Was also going to build it for my dad to ride but. . .
    Looks as if you've answered your own questions there. The 'cross component is your biggest factor in keeping the CC over the 620, and your
    original intent was to flip the 620 anyway for funds.

    If you have a bonafide use for the 620 then by all means keep it, but if you deep 6 the CC instead you'll be hard pressed to make the 620 do what the
    CC was designed for.

    It all comes down to your riding needs.

    (and this is coming from a literal Trek junkie the past couple months... )

  12. #12
    Senior Member Chrome Molly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    My Bikes
    I lose count...
    Posts
    1,343
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The 620 could make a decent commuter if so equipped. The surly proceeds would certainly leave you with a nice bike (700c conversion, fenders, etc). 30 years from now find a CC and be retro cool then too.

  13. #13
    Riding like its 1990 thenomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    IE, SoCal
    Posts
    3,628
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well crud, the tide is turning after the initial thrill of the chase. I like every bike in my size, its a curse.

    It's going to be a beautiful touring bike for commuting or long tours. But my commute is going from 23 miles r/t to 8 miles r/t and I wont be doing any long touring for many years. The 620 should fit well but 1 cm lower on the height it would be perfect.

    The CC on the other hand is just versatile enough to use as a commuter, geared or SS CX, loaded tourer or century road bike.

    I'll sleep on it and see how I feel once I get it all built up.

    Quote Originally Posted by oldskoolwrench View Post
    Looks as if you've answered your own questions there. The 'cross component is your biggest factor in keeping the CC over the 620, and your
    original intent was to flip the 620 anyway for funds.

    If you have a bonafide use for the 620 then by all means keep it, but if you deep 6 the CC instead you'll be hard pressed to make the 620 do what the
    CC was designed for.

    It all comes down to your riding needs.

    (and this is coming from a literal Trek junkie the past couple months... )
    My blog about rides, bikes and builds: ridesgoneby.blogspot.com

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    2,482
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I vote for the CC. I love nice quality lugged steal, and I know people have done CX races on them for years, but I'd be worried about bending a fork leg on an old 531 tubed bike. I've seen so many bent vintage forks, and the fork on my butted 531 bike seems flimsy/flexy compared to most others I've ridden. And I feel like it would be kind of a shame to bash up an old Trek of that quality. And it sounds like your CC suits your needs well and fits you a little better. I know I would have trouble letting it go, but would definitely sell the Trek and enjoy the CC. It's also a nice quality bike.
    90 Miyata 914 with full Dura-Ace
    74 Ellis-Briggs, full butted 531
    80s Cierra Professional 5000, Tange Champion 2 and Shimano 600
    2011 New Belgium Cruiser
    Fetish Cycles "Discipline" built up with DJ2 fork and Shimano XTR, LX, Avid BB7.

    Quote Originally Posted by scyclops View Post
    Oh yeah, sure, what if everyone thought that way? Then internet forums would merely be places where rational people exchange useful information and ideas - instead of the chaotic, emotionally-charged circuses that they are.

  15. #15
    Senior Member badger_biker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Rural Western Wisconsin
    My Bikes
    2004 Specialized Sequoia Elite, 1990 and 1986 Cannondale ST400, 1987 Trek 400 Elance, 1987 Schwinn Voyageur, 1986 Nishiki Cascade, 1985 Specialized Expedition, 1984 Bridgestone 400, 1975 Motobecane Le Champion
    Posts
    859
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I parted with the same year 620 only because it was too small for me. Even so it had a great ride. I'd keep the Trek since 1985 is the only year they had the extra long chain stays and is a true touring classic. But then I'm a sucker for touring bikes.
    1975 Motobecane Le Champion
    1984 Bridgestone 400 -- 1985 Specialized Expedition 1986 Cannondale ST400 and Nishiki Cascade -- 1987 Trek Elance 400T and Schwinn Voyageur
    1990 Cannondale ST400 -- 1994 Univega Via Carisma

  16. #16
    Riding like its 1990 thenomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    IE, SoCal
    Posts
    3,628
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Took it from a frame, parts and wheelset to a full bike. Still waiting on a rear cable hanger to come in.

    I'm going to ride it on some longer rides and see how it feels. The only thing is that I'd like to swap the wheelset and try out 700c which will be easy with the 983 brakes I sourced for it.

    I've got it for sale but I may change my mind once I ride it. I really like the way these bars feel too.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    My blog about rides, bikes and builds: ridesgoneby.blogspot.com

  17. #17
    Senior Member cyclotoine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    YT
    Posts
    7,577
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sell both and buy a Soma DC. 27" is a deal breaker, you will never get as much stopping power out the trek with 700c as you will from the Surly and you are bound to feel the rear end sway when you get up and hammer. That said I still think that it will be more lively than the surly but I have never ridden a cross check, I just know my LHT was a dead ride and my Soma Saga is at least a couple notches about. It is Tange Prestige vs. surly chromo though. It sounds to me like you're better off with the surly. Sometimes the most pedestrian bikes are the ones we love the most. I sold my redline conquest pro. I had so much fun on that bike, I probably shouldn't have sold it.
    1 Super Record bike, 1 Nuovo Record bike, 1 Pista, 1 Road, 1 Cyclocross/Allrounder, 1 MTB, 1 Touring, 1 Fixed gear

  18. #18
    aka Tom Reingold noglider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    West Village, New York City
    My Bikes
    too many
    Posts
    18,863
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I'll bet the Trek is lighter.
    Please email me rather than sending me a private message. My address is noglider@pobox.com

    Tom Reingold
    Residences: West Village, New York City and High Falls, NY
    Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog

  19. #19
    Riding like its 1990 thenomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    IE, SoCal
    Posts
    3,628
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    well, the surly has a scandium fork from my conquest and i hear the stock fork is heavy so I can't really compare apples to apples. I think they may be within 1lb with the same equipment.

    I may end up selling the CC eventually but for now I'm going to change it to a monstercross style, either ss or geared.
    I suppose that's the beauty of it though, it may not be perfect but the ability to keep changing it makes it fun.
    My blog about rides, bikes and builds: ridesgoneby.blogspot.com

  20. #20
    Senior Member Der_Kruscher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    117
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If there's a weight difference it's probably nominal. Certainly it wouldn't be enough to base a decision on, anyway. I had a 54cm CC that weighed in at about 21lbs - not terrible. Others scoff at them but I had a blast on my CC. My biggest quibble with them is the tiny head tubes in relation to their top tubes - they have way too much standover clearance and you're forced to use a big stack of spacers or a positive rise stem to get the bars up to a useable height for most people.

    Quote Originally Posted by noglider View Post
    I'll bet the Trek is lighter.

  21. #21
    Riding like its 1990 thenomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    IE, SoCal
    Posts
    3,628
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yeah, not a fan of the short headtube but my fit is dialed in and I feel good on it. The standover is nice if you are on the dirt and put feet down on uneven surfaces.
    My blog about rides, bikes and builds: ridesgoneby.blogspot.com

  22. #22
    Rustbelt Rider mkeller234's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Canton, OH
    My Bikes
    1990 Trek 1420 - 1978 Raleigh Professional - 1973 Schwinn Collegiate - 1974 Schwinn Suburban
    Posts
    8,264
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ride the Trek for a bit, since it's almost completely built up. That's the only way real you will know how much you like it. It's definitely a cult favorite, but try to forget that when you ride it.
    |^^^^^^^^^^^^^^| ||
    |......GO.BROWNS........| ||'|";, ___.
    |_..._..._______===|=||_|__|..., ] -
    "(@)'(@)"""''"**|(@)(@)*****''(@)

  23. #23
    Gouge Away kaliayev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    BFOH
    Posts
    964
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'd keep the Trek or sell both if you are looking for an cx/all rounder. Every Surly I've ridden I thought was turd.
    2003 Stevenson Custom Cycles Sportive
    1978 Trek TX700
    1990 Trek 750
    All are frame/frame set builds.

  24. #24
    guy on a bike
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    AUSTIN TEXAS!!!
    Posts
    498
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldnt changing to 700s from 27s drop your stand over height a tiny bit?

  25. #25
    OldSchool
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA
    Posts
    826
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by thenomad View Post
    The 620 should fit well but 1 cm lower on the height it would be perfect.
    You are in the same situation with Trek that I am and I have been longingly looking at Treks for some time. My good fit size is 54 to 55 and that is exactly in between sizes on almost all Trek models from the 80's. I can't go smaller than 22.5 to the 21 inch size and 22.5 really pushes the height factor and top tube length a little although seat placement with the slack seat tube angle would address most of the top tube issue. I have looked at 620, 720, 660, 300 series, too many to list, and never pulled the trigger on one yet. What is the stem length on this?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •