I have a 2006 Elite and a 1998 Trek 520. There is no comparison between the two for long trips. Although I very much enjoy the Sequoia because it's fast, fun and light, the 520 has it all over it for strength. To me, that's what should be the determining factor when you're out there. The advice about wheels is good.

Comfort is relatively the same to me, one being aluminum/CF and the other high quality steel. Both ride extremely well and are built with long rides in mind. In other words, the Sequoia borrows heavily from the classic tour bike geometry with regards to how the rider feels on the bike, except they are like sports sedans, not pickups with campers on them. Sequoias are not competition type road bikes - they're built for advanced recreational riders who nevertheless want decent performance. They are also very popular among older riders who are feeling the pangs of arthritis and other wear-and-tear issues.

On Trek 520's:
There are several decent tour bikes out there that will give as good a loaded performance as the 520, and for less money. I cite Aurora, Novara, etc. You will pay alot for the fact that the Trek is made from True Temper OX2 tubes that are made in the USA (equal to reynolds 853) and hand assembled here as well. For many, that's important. Now, I got mine on the local CraigsList for $550 in mint condition with all the goodies - and I do mean ALL. I got lucky. It's a great bike. If I were to actually use it for a fully loaded tour, I would change the gearing like everybody seems to suggest. But, as I don't tour, I have left it alone because I like a fast bike, and the stock 520's are fast. They make a tremendous all-purpose bike. But, that price of $1200 for a bare bike really is a sticking point to me. I would think that you could talk them down quite a bit, tho, with the competition the way it is...