Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Fitting Your Bike
Reload this Page >

Trek 520 build...What frame size?

Notices
Fitting Your Bike Are you confused about how you should fit a bike to your particular body dimensions? Have you been reading, found the terms Merxx or French Fit, and don’t know what you need? Every style of riding is different- in how you fit the bike to you, and the sizing of the bike itself. It’s more than just measuring your height, reach and inseam. With the help of Bike Fitting, you’ll be able to find the right fit for your frame size, style of riding, and your particular dimensions. Here ya’ go…..the location for everything fit related.

Trek 520 build...What frame size?

Old 02-18-20, 08:01 AM
  #1  
davehor
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Trek 520 build...What frame size?

Hi,

So I'm hoping to use the hive intelligence to help me buy the right sized frame.

Trek 520: either 60 or 63!

Me 190cm (6'3") and 91cm (36") inseam. Gonna use the frame for a Reiserad/Touring build: long days, one after the other, eating up kilometers (miles ) with alot of baggage. Would like a relaxed position and not too stretched out.

Can you guys and girls help me out here. Anyone with similiar experience or some insight?

Thanks in advance,
Dave
davehor is offline  
Old 02-19-20, 12:07 PM
  #2  
eduskator
Senior Member
 
eduskator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Québec, Canada
Posts: 480

Bikes: TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 208 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times in 72 Posts
I checked on Trek's website, and a 63 would fit you best according to your specs.

If your one of these that rides one size smaller, go with the 60 .

Last edited by eduskator; 02-19-20 at 12:11 PM.
eduskator is offline  
Old 02-20-20, 07:27 AM
  #3  
Phil_gretz
Journeyman Bike Commuter
 
Phil_gretz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 5,522

Bikes: '71 Jeunet 640, '74 Fuji Special Road Racer, '79 Peugeot PXN10LE, '88 Fuji Saratoga, '13 Motobecane Fantom29 HT, '16 Motobecane Turino Pro Disc, '16 Motobecane Gran Premio Elite, '18 Velobuild VB-R-022

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 798 Post(s)
Liked 342 Times in 201 Posts
You appear to have "normal" proportions (torso vs legs), so that argues toward the 63 cm frame. You can adjust the stem accordingly.
Phil_gretz is offline  
Old 02-21-20, 09:32 PM
  #4  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,630

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 957 Post(s)
Liked 75 Times in 69 Posts
For touring I would definitely use something like a 700c x 32 mm tire with SKS fenders. I have a 1984 610 and it takes that size pretty well. I have those tires on Sun CR-18 rims, which are a little wider than most of what's out there these days. You might get a better ride quality with 650b wheels and tires (38 mm tire width?), but you'll probably need some frame brazing to attach cantilever brake pivots.

I'd also set the bike up for 130 mm rear end so you can make a 3x10 drivetrain with indexing. I'd go for a supercompact triple - something like 26-36-46, with 12-32 in the rear. Depending on your derailleurs, you may be able to go wider-range in the back. But this should give you a range 104 gear inches down to 22 inches.

Getting a good gearing set-up without stress to the frame is pretty important for durability. I've been a fan of cold-setting frames, but it has not always worked well for me. If your 520 is old enough that it does not have a 130 mm rear spacing, I might choose a newer frame as the basis for thie project.

Unless the frame is made for it, I would not go with disc brakes.

Saddle, seatpost, bars - set up what you like; at a lot of levels a touring bike is still just a road bike.

Last edited by Road Fan; 02-21-20 at 09:35 PM.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 02-22-20, 01:37 AM
  #5  
davehor
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Everybody I ask is recommending a 63. I guess this is gonna be my size Thanks to everyone. I'll let you know, here, as soon as I've sat on it.
davehor is offline  
Old 02-22-20, 07:39 AM
  #6  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,630

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 957 Post(s)
Liked 75 Times in 69 Posts
Looking at the site (I didn't know Trek was still offering a 520! and it's steel!), the seat tube angle would be more steep than I like. My size would be 51 or 54. In 1980s Treks, my 610 is 21" or 52 cm, and I had a 620 that was 55 cm. The seat tube angles were both about 73 degrees, and I always struggle to find seatposts with enough setback for a B17 or a Brooks Professional. YMMV, but this would keep me off of this otherwise great frame.

But you might want to check you existing bikes and saddle choices to see if what Trek will sell you is actually suitable.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 02-22-20, 07:44 AM
  #7  
davehor
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan View Post
Looking at the site (I didn't know Trek was still offering a 520! and it's steel!), the seat tube angle would be more steep than I like. My size would be 51 or 54. In 1980s Treks, my 610 is 21" or 52 cm, and I had a 620 that was 55 cm. The seat tube angles were both about 73 degrees, and I always struggle to find seatposts with enough setback for a B17 or a Brooks Professional. YMMV, but this would keep me off of this otherwise great frame.

But you might want to check you existing bikes and saddle choices to see if what Trek will sell you is actually suitable.
Don't mean to be rude, but we are quite different sizes, and I'm not sure if you read the OP. So thanks for the advice but I think I'll still go with a 520, and in 63 the angles are quite different.
davehor is offline  
Old 02-22-20, 07:45 AM
  #8  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,630

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 957 Post(s)
Liked 75 Times in 69 Posts
Originally Posted by davehor View Post
Everybody I ask is recommending a 63. I guess this is gonna be my size Thanks to everyone. I'll let you know, here, as soon as I've sat on it.
I hope you're aware, when you sit on it you are reacting not to the frame size but the the saddle height, its setback, and the resulting reach to the bars. The reach to the bars is affected by bar design (handlebar reach) and the stem extension. The salespeople should consider which frame size allows you the most useful range of fitting adjustments for initial setup and for future re-fittings as time goes on and as your preferences may change. You might not even know what will be comfortable for long tours until you have trained up to the point of starting one. I find that when I get a new saddle, I need to refine its position as my distance increases. What is good for the indoor trainer is good for perhaps 10 km. I may encounter pain when I reach 20, so additional refinements are needed, and so on.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 02-22-20, 07:48 AM
  #9  
davehor
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan View Post
I hope you're aware, when you sit on it you are reacting not to the frame size but the the saddle height, its setback, and the resulting reach to the bars. The reach to the bars is affected by bar design (handlebar reach) and the stem extension. The salespeople should consider which frame size allows you the most useful range of fitting adjustments for initial setup and for future re-fittings as time goes on and as your preferences may change. You might not even know what will be comfortable for long tours until you have trained up to the point of starting one. I find that when I get a new saddle, I need to refine its position as my distance increases. What is good for the indoor trainer is good for perhaps 10 km. I may encounter pain when I reach 20, so additional refinements are needed, and so on.
Well I was afraid this would happen... Thanks again for your advice. I had hoped this would have been clear in my OP but it seems it wasn't.
davehor is offline  
Old 02-22-20, 07:59 AM
  #10  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,630

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 957 Post(s)
Liked 75 Times in 69 Posts
Originally Posted by davehor View Post
Don't mean to be rude, but we are quite different sizes, and I'm not sure if you read the OP. So thanks for the advice but I think I'll still go with a 520, and in 63 the angles are quite different.
I did read it and have just re-read it, and I don't comprehend what you think I missed. Overall I don't see the difference in our sizes as relevant - I was absolutely not trying to say that "my bike will not work for you." I certainly did not miss how tall you are. In the past I have felt that Trek often makes seat tubes that are too steep, not just for me but for some others whom I have met. My main point was to suggest that you consider whether the seat tube angle is appropriate for you. Plus, the way the Trek site appears on my computer, no frame dimensions are shown for sizes greater than 57.

If you are fine with what you will get, good for you.

As far as going to get a test 'sit,' see if you can get a test ride of 45 minutes or so.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 02-22-20, 08:02 AM
  #11  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,630

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 957 Post(s)
Liked 75 Times in 69 Posts
Originally Posted by davehor View Post
Well I was afraid this would happen... Thanks again for your advice. I had hoped this would have been clear in my OP but it seems it wasn't.
All I can say is, I don't understand your concern, but I hope you intend to keep posting on the site. You may not have noticed, there is a sub-forum for Touring.
Road Fan is offline  

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.