Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-22-07, 08:50 PM   #1
mattyknacks
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
mattyknacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sheepshead Bay
Bikes: 2008 Trek 520
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think I want a trek 520 when I lose some weight

I have decided to buy myself a Trek 520 when I become light enough to ride one without killing it. Can someone offer suggestions as to what weight I should be for that bike. Also, can someone tell what approx size frame I would need? I have only ridden mountain bikes and and dont know what cm size I need. I am 6' tall with a 32 inch inseam clothes wise.

Thanks,

Matty in Brooklyn
mattyknacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-07, 08:54 PM   #2
late
Senior Member
 
late's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Southern Maine
Bikes:
Posts: 8,419
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1299 Post(s)
I doubt you would kill it, with the possible exception of the wheels. But since I upgrade the wheels of every bike I buy... I don't see that as a big deal.

Surly is coming out with a complete LHT soon. You might find that a bit nicer, and a bit more rugged.
late is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-07, 09:02 PM   #3
mattyknacks
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
mattyknacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sheepshead Bay
Bikes: 2008 Trek 520
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Is Surly considered a better bike in the touring community? Being green, the Trek is the one I have heard the most about.

Matty in Brooklyn
mattyknacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-07, 09:16 PM   #4
greenstork
Senior Member
 
greenstork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Seattle, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I own neither a trek 520 nor a Surly Long Haul Trucker. It's been my observation on this forum that the Surly seems to be held in higher regard. My LBS agrees that the Surly seems to be a step above the Trek. One big advantage of the Surly also, is the ability to buy the frameset and build up the bike with all of the components you want, rather than accepting everything Trek has spec'd on the bike.
greenstork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-07, 06:35 AM   #5
Nigeyy
Senior Member
 
Nigeyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not that I'm an expert or anything and for full disclosure I do not own either bike, but I'd say a Trek 520 is just as good as a Surly LHT. Surly's are very good bikes but they are not anything special (honestly, not trying to inflame anybody, just my opinion I think they are good frames!). Notably I think Surly's done an excellent marketing job on them for a Taiwanese frame, and has been helped with little or no direct competitors in that pricepoint. Where Surly's come ahead -or behind depending on your point of view -is that they used to only be frame only, and people built them up (insert the word expensive here if you choose to purchase all your own components and pay a bike shop for a build) compared to the stock Trek 520 componentry which isn't always what you might want. A counter argument to this is that it's not hard to spend $200-$300 more to obtain an LHT with the specs you want compared to a Trek 520 price, and you can "upgrade" the Trek to quite a few components even with less than $200-$300.

From the posts on the board, it looks like Surly is now going to market a built up LHT, so we should see if it loses any of its cachet with this. Which one would I buy? Probably an LHT -but that's purely because I have spare parts and do my own bike build, thus considerably helping build costs. If I was a relative new comer to cycling or didn't have parts or the ability to do my own build, I'd lean towards a Trek 520.
Nigeyy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-07, 07:02 AM   #6
europa
Grumpy Old Bugga
 
europa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Adelaide, AUSTRALIA
Bikes: Europa, Hillbrick, Road Chief, Repco Superlite (Ol' Rusty)
Posts: 3,328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I've got the 2007 Trek520 and she is an excellent bike. I'm 6' tall, goodness knows what my instep is but I'm riding the 23" frame. I also weight about 230lbs and haven't noticed it sagging under my weight.

Wheels? Bontrager Mavericks - 36 spokes. Colletted nipples. DeoreLX hubs. You don't need to upgrade them.
Nor do you need to upgrade anything else.
The Surly LHT is not available as a built up bike either, you buy the frame and build it up yourself (or the shop does it then sells it), so the comparisons above can only relate to the frame. If Surly do bring out a full bike, they'll have to provide an Ultregra and DeoreLX components mix to match the Trek. The Trek has an excellent frame, lugged for front and rear carriers and has Trek's lifetime guarantee.

I had the bar end shifters replaced with Ultregra Brifters and travel agents for the V-brake - the result is silky, fast shifting in all gears and the most powerful and easy to modulate brakes I've ever used.

I use my Trek as an all-rounder, not just as a long distance, heavy weight tourer. She is light, she is fast, she handles dirt, mud and bitumen with aplomb. You can toss her around while playing boy racer and you can just sit back and cruise. A very capable and comfortable bike.

Richard
europa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-07, 07:13 AM   #7
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Posts: 24,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Both are good bikes - this spring the Surly IS available as a complete bike.
http://www.surlybikes.com/lht_comp.html

I think the Surly is better suited for loaded touring 'out-of-the'box'. It is geared better with 48-36-26 chainrings and an 11-34 cassette. The 520 has higher-end Shimano components, but I've yet to see that as a distinct advantage for touring.

Unless you are like 500lbs, I don't think you need to lose weight to ride and enjoy either.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey

Last edited by chipcom; 01-23-07 at 07:19 AM.
chipcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-07, 07:15 AM   #8
brianmcg123
Senior Member
 
brianmcg123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: TN
Bikes:
Posts: 597
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by europa
The Surly LHT is not available as a built up bike either, you buy the frame and build it up yourself (or the shop does it then sells it), so the comparisons above can only relate to the frame. If Surly do bring out a full bike, they'll have to provide an Ultregra and DeoreLX components mix to match the Trek. The Trek has an excellent frame, lugged for front and rear carriers and has Trek's lifetime guarantee.


Richard

LHT can come either as a Frame and Fork or built up.

http://www.surlybikes.com/lht_comp.html

I went the frame and fork route as I had some stuff from another bike and I wanted to buy stuff that wasn't specd on the built up one.
brianmcg123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-07, 07:56 AM   #9
oldmtngoat
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree with the other posts. The wheels on the Trek are likely to be more than adequate. A 36 spoke wheel is plenty strong.
oldmtngoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-07, 07:59 AM   #10
oldmtngoat
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree with the other posts. The frame strength isn't an issue. A 36 spoke wheel is very strong. I know people who weigh much more than 200 pounds, riding a traditional steel road bike for years with no broken spokes or frame problems. I'd suggest getting the bike and using it to get out and exercise, exercise, exercise!
oldmtngoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-07, 08:40 AM   #11
GeoKrpan
George Krpan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westlake Village, California
Bikes:
Posts: 1,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
The complete LHT will be $300 cheaper than the Trek 520.
The components on the LHT are just fine. The components on the Trek are spendier but offer no advantage. The Treks 52/42/30 crank is actually a disadvantage.
That'll incite the Trek nerds.

Getting the bike will help you to lose weight.
GeoKrpan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-07, 09:09 AM   #12
yater
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigeyy
Not that I'm an expert or anything and for full disclosure I do not own either bike, but I'd say a Trek 520 is just as good as a Surly LHT. Surly's are very good bikes but they are not anything special (honestly, not trying to inflame anybody, just my opinion I think they are good frames!). Notably I think Surly's done an excellent marketing job on them for a Taiwanese frame, and has been helped with little or no direct competitors in that pricepoint. Where Surly's come ahead -or behind depending on your point of view -is that they used to only be frame only, and people built them up (insert the word expensive here if you choose to purchase all your own components and pay a bike shop for a build) compared to the stock Trek 520 componentry which isn't always what you might want. A counter argument to this is that it's not hard to spend $200-$300 more to obtain an LHT with the specs you want compared to a Trek 520 price, and you can "upgrade" the Trek to quite a few components even with less than $200-$300.

From the posts on the board, it looks like Surly is now going to market a built up LHT, so we should see if it loses any of its cachet with this. Which one would I buy? Probably an LHT -but that's purely because I have spare parts and do my own bike build, thus considerably helping build costs. If I was a relative new comer to cycling or didn't have parts or the ability to do my own build, I'd lean towards a Trek 520.
I agree here. I just bought a surly frame (long haul trucker) because I had some parts to build it up. If I had been looking for a complete bike, I would have chosen the 520. They're both tanks and should last a long time.
yater is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:34 AM.