|
Trek racing models
Hi all,
I found a 1985 Trek 520 with trutemper and shimano 600 at a garage sale recently, and it made me curious about the 80's and 90's treks. Can someone tell me what the hierarchy of racing models was? I'm going to be keeping an eye out for them now and want to know what to look for! Any info much appreciated! Max |
|
If you know a little about tubing, (Columbus and Reynolds tubing are desirable).
With very few exceptions- Trek's naming convention worked really well prior to 1986. Very generally it was: 900 series= Columbus/Columbus 700 series= 531/531 600 series= 531/CrMo 500 series= CrMo/CrMo 400 series= CrMo or Manganese alloy/Hi-Ten 200 and 300 series= HiTen/HiTen In 1986 the 400 series bikes came with a butted 531 frame with Trek (Tange) CrMo fork and stays. Essentially, that was what a 600 series bike had been the year before- and you'll notice there is no longer a 600 series bike in 1986. The second number generally denotes the type of frame- Sport, Touring, Race. The early Treks were all touring geometry- in mid 78 they introduced the race frames- those were x3x. So a 730 would be a 531 framed race bike. Touring bikes had x1x. So a 510 would be a CrMo framed touring bike. A little later 0 and 1 were used for sport bikes and 2 was used for touring bikes- the big exception was the 85/86 520- which was a sport/touring bike. Somewhat later x60 and x70 denoted racing frames with the higher number meaning a more prestigious group set. |
The 170 was the highest end racing model at one point, was it not?
|
Originally Posted by jpaschall
(Post 19868534)
The 170 was the highest end racing model at one point, was it not?
|
Another TruTemper Trek racer, model 360, 1988 only. Very compliant rider.
https://dl.dropbox.com/s/ky8uw7g2m0j...01988.jpg?dl=0 |
1986 Model 560 Pro Series
The handlebars, stem, levers, and brake cables were a quick all-in-one kit substitution for some crazy bullhorns.
https://dl.dropbox.com/s/eeoua072bdn...01986.jpg?dl=0 |
Originally Posted by cb400bill
(Post 19868547)
Yep. It had Reynolds 753 steel.
|
My favorite is the pink 770 with Campy SR.
|
Originally Posted by KonAaron Snake
(Post 19869293)
My favorite is the pink 770 with Campy SR.
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3809/...dc0e3483_o.jpgDSC00002 by cb400bill, on Flickr |
^^^^^^^
Nice! |
Originally Posted by cb400bill
(Post 19870827)
I like mine...
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3809/...dc0e3483_o.jpgDSC00002 by cb400bill, on Flickr |
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by The Golden Boy
(Post 19868526)
If you know a little about tubing, (Columbus and Reynolds tubing are desirable)...
|
TruTemper Treks are very good bikes. Lovely ride and handling, great in sprinting/climbing out of the saddle. This '88 560 (below the 660) has a frameset that is lighter than my earlier second-only-to-the-170 Columbus SP-tubed 970. That is also a great riding bike. Man, I forget how good this looked with these components on it...
https://scontent.fsnc1-1.fna.fbcdn.n...5e&oe=5A496806 1983 970: https://scontent.fsnc1-1.fna.fbcdn.n...2b&oe=5A458854 |
Originally Posted by The Golden Boy
(Post 19868526)
If you know a little about tubing, (Columbus and Reynolds tubing are desirable).
With very few exceptions- Trek's naming convention worked really well prior to 1986. Very generally it was: 900 series= Columbus/Columbus 700 series= 531/531 600 series= 531/CrMo 500 series= CrMo/CrMo 400 series= CrMo or Manganese alloy/Hi-Ten 200 and 300 series= HiTen/HiTen In 1986 the 400 series bikes came with a butted 531 frame with Trek (Tange) CrMo fork and stays. Essentially, that was what a 600 series bike had been the year before- and you'll notice there is no longer a 600 series bike in 1986. The second number generally denotes the type of frame- Sport, Touring, Race. The early Treks were all touring geometry- in mid 78 they introduced the race frames- those were x3x. So a 730 would be a 531 framed race bike. Touring bikes had x1x. So a 510 would be a CrMo framed touring bike. A little later 0 and 1 were used for sport bikes and 2 was used for touring bikes- the big exception was the 85/86 520- which was a sport/touring bike. Somewhat later x60 and x70 denoted racing frames with the higher number meaning a more prestigious group set. |
What would a 60cm Trek 770 in pink be worth? Just the frame and fork, decent condition but some chips and missing the Reynolds decals.
I love that bike... |
Originally Posted by steelisreal19
(Post 19889545)
What would a 60cm Trek 770 in pink be worth? Just the frame and fork, decent condition but some chips and missing the Reynolds decals.
I love that bike... |
Here is an ‘86 760 Pro Series, full 531c frameset with Campy NR drivetrain and Modolo Equipe brakeset (very nice performers). I have since added a vintage Mavic tubular wheelset that will give a 20Lb weigh-in. I found the bike in excellent (gorgeous) like new condition.
https://vgy.me/bGm9Ly.jpeg |
660
1 Attachment(s)
Trek 660 with True Temper Team tubing. A mishmash of components as I got it as a bare frame. Ride it more than all my other bikes combined.
|
1979 Trek 510
Originally Posted by The Golden Boy
(Post 19868526)
If you know a little about tubing, (Columbus and Reynolds tubing are desirable).
With very few exceptions- Trek's naming convention worked really well prior to 1986. Very generally it was: 900 series= Columbus/Columbus 700 series= 531/531 600 series= 531/CrMo 500 series= CrMo/CrMo 400 series= CrMo or Manganese alloy/Hi-Ten 200 and 300 series= HiTen/HiTen In 1986 the 400 series bikes came with a butted 531 frame with Trek (Tange) CrMo fork and stays. Essentially, that was what a 600 series bike had been the year before- and you'll notice there is no longer a 600 series bike in 1986. The second number generally denotes the type of frame- Sport, Touring, Race. The early Treks were all touring geometry- in mid 78 they introduced the race frames- those were x3x. So a 730 would be a 531 framed race bike. Touring bikes had x1x. So a 510 would be a CrMo framed touring bike. A little later 0 and 1 were used for sport bikes and 2 was used for touring bikes- the big exception was the 85/86 520- which was a sport/touring bike. Somewhat later x60 and x70 denoted racing frames with the higher number meaning a more prestigious group set. This is interesting. I have a 1979 Trek 510 and it in no way feels like a classic touring bike—the geometry is too tight for that. |
Originally Posted by Webbetron
(Post 21377575)
This is interesting. I have a 1979 Trek 510 and it in no way feels like a classic touring bike—the geometry is too tight for that.
The difference between "racing" and "touring" geometry in 1979 pretty much amounts to 3 cm of chain stay length, 1 cm of fork rake and .5 cm of BB drop. The frame angles and tube lengths are the same. https://vintage-trek.com/images/trek/Trek79.pdf |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:02 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.