I am looking into getting a C&V bike to replace my Peugeot Corbier (excellent, but too small). This came up on my craigslist and has me interested. I would really like a vintage trek touring bike. I was wondering if you had any thoughts about this one. Does the fork look bent?

Since I have less than 10 posts I can't include a link (or I think an image), but basically, here it is

sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/bik/6055616500.html

(Note this is cross-posted from appraisals because I wasn't sure the best place to put it)

Vintage treks are the BEE KNEEEEES. They are solid, well constructed, and will last forever if you maintain them. That looks to be in great shape and well maintained. I'd look at it and test ride it. The racks are nice

Pic and link assist.

The fork doesn't look bent, but the rear wheel is a replacement and it's been converted to stem shifters from DT shifters.

Vintage 85 Trek 620 touring bike w\Reynolds 531 & cantilever brakes - $280 (mountain view, CA)

https://sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/bik/6055616500.html

A few more possible points- The tires look to be 27"/630. And the front brakes close to their lowest pad position. So if a 700/622 wheel conversion is in mind do your homework before assuming the brakes will accommodate. I'd get rid of the half step gearing. The freewheel looks to be a fairly current Shimano HG one although with a 28T low gear. The rear der will handle a far lower gear if needed.Oh, and level out your seat. Andy

And, I'd take a 5mm bolt with me if I went to look at it, and make sure those DT stops aren't stripped.

Run & grab it, as long as it fits. This is one of the best ones, for touring, only the 720 is better, in their lineup. And this is the year with the nice long chainstays, the same as the 720. That's a pretty good price, too, even if it does need a little work. Good luck.

Fork looks fine to me. I have a high regard for Treks, and would consider the 620 a high-end touring bike. For $250 clams, it's a good deal, but it will require work: wheel, shifters, etc.

If I were in the market for a touring bike, I wouldn't hesitate looking at this one. The price seems low for the Bay Area.

The fork looks fine. That is a great frame. I have one just like it. It did come with 27" inch wheels. I got 700c to work, though the brake pad angles are finnicky. It'd take some work to make this the best it could be, like by ditching those stem shifters, but if they work there's no reason you couldn't ride it like that.

great bike and i ride a 620. the stem shifters don't complement the bike, so maybe DT shifters or my favorite: bar end shifters.

Or real thumbies on trekking bars. 😎 It looks like the original cantilevers there, which fit those 27" wheels perfectly. There's a thread here about converting to 700c, that explains the positives of 27" wheels & tires. You (meaning the OP, assuming he gets the bike, lol) might decide not to switch, after reading it. 😉

Great bike! I'd grab it after inspection. Bring a set of allen keys to make sure the seatpost and stem move up and down.

I've converted a bike with those brakes to 700c but, like others have said, the geometry and leverage changes so test before loaded touring.

my 620 is staying with 27" wheels. a frame is strongest when at it's original configuration, and i don't need the grief. changing everything to modern components kind of defeats buying a vintage bicycle, if i need 'modern' then my other bike has brifters and 700c wheels.

my vintage/classic bicycles give me the old skool experience...and those old 27" wheels/tires are rather comfy.

The 85 620 is a one off year for that design (except the 1986 "Cirrus 620" which was a leftover 85 with a silver head tube).

It's the most desirable of the Trek 620s.

I'm still running 27s on my 85 620- between Panaracer Paselas in 27 1 1/4 and the Sand Canyon 27 1 3/8 tires, there's some nice "classic" tires for that size.

In looking at this- the person who "converted" it did some work to it- not just dumping parts onto it. Those aren't the stock levers, and it's also not the stock headset cable hanger. It looks like they might have taken the "best bits" off of a lower end boom bike and put them on the 620- maybe because the owner was more comfortable with stem shifters and turkey wing brake levers...

In any case- if the stem and seat post aren't stuck= that's a great price. IMO- the 6206 crankset is one of the very nicest 110/74 BCD cranksets.

Huh- the posting's deleted, so someone must have bought it. Hopefully the OP!

Sadly, posting a thread here only draws attention to an ad, which means way more potential buyers. I hope the OP got it, otherwise he learned the hard way, about needing to research in stealth mode. ☹ 😉

Unfortunately I was not quick enough on this one... I will have to jump quicker next time!

Changing to 700c has nothing to do with modernizing the bike. My '83 720 wears a set of 700c wheels with early Specialized sealed bearing hubs. Now I have a nice, very low maintenance hub combined with an increased tire selection. Nothing else was updated, I just wanted a broader selection of tires, and the sealed bearing hubs are hardly what one would call a downgrade.

good enuf. my concern is spreading the rear of the bike to accommodate a 700c wheel, IMHO this may weaken the steel to some degree. other then that, it's a nice feature.

So, you're saying I could paint my head tube silver, and upgrade to an '86 model? 🤔 😉 I wasn't aware of the Cirrus version. It's interesting that there were any leftovers, they only made 950 of these, in all the sizes combined.

No need to cold set. There are plenty of 126mm 700c wheels out there, especially freewheel style. And you can almost always change the spacing on the hub.

thanks.

best news all day, it seems some have a disdain for cold setting and i tend to value my bikes too much.

the biggest downer on my 620 is the OEM heliomatic hubs. Trek corrected that in later years, but i see no value in using them.

Where are you getting the 950 number from?

That seems to be a REALLY low number, especially considering how many of these you see on the internet.

That SF 620 asking price was well under FMV.

I think you're making a much much bigger deal out of it than it is.

First, the wheel size is independent of the distance between dropouts.

Second- the 80s Treks are spaced at 128 so they can go to 126 or 130 with no mechanical spreading other than your fingers and minimal (I mean minimal) effort.

Third- think of all the 120 to 126 and 126 to 130 conversions you've seen here (and the millions more throughout the world in the past 30+ years)- and think of how many mentions you've read of a chainstay failing from spreading a rear end from 128 to 130.

You're tying your shoes together by not considering a different wheel set. If you're OK with the Helicomatic- take care of it- there's (a few) people that still have them running. I guess it's just suggested to maintain them a little more often.

Again- there's no real problem in staying with 27" wheels- the bike was designed for them- and there's still quality tires around. I've used both the Pasela 1 1/4" and Sand Canyon 1 3/8" tires. I just took the 720 to a 10 speed 130 rear end and 700c wheels. And I'm SO glad I did.

If you're curious about it- try it- you can always go back Just don't spread the thing to 135.

Good Luck!!!

If you look around closely, on the serial number pages, there's a link to the production totals, for each model & each year. It's a spreadsheet thingie, that someone made up from Trek's data, in their journal. I think I said that right, but when you find it, you'll see that I'm at least mostly right. 😉 BTW, I looked around there again yesterday, and there was an '86 Trek 520 Cirrus, with fairly long chainstays, but no 620 Cirrus. Don't sweat it, I'm sure it was an honest mistake. I know I've had to read through that site several times, it's fairly confusing. 🤔
And hey, read that '86 brochure again, especially the introduction paragraphs, for each category (racing, touring, etc.) . It clearly states that all the steel frames assembled with the new robots, were brazed with silver rods. Obviously, not the aluminum & carbon frames, lol, but the steel ones, which were obviously made in much smaller numbers. 🙂