Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Touring
Reload this Page >

Size help for a Trek 520 or LHT

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.

Size help for a Trek 520 or LHT

Reply

Old 01-09-18, 06:41 PM
  #1  
KLOSHE
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Alaska
Posts: 18

Bikes: Domane 6.9 , Trek 5200 , Miyata 1400

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Size help for a Trek 520 or LHT

I'm looking at either a trek 520 disc or surly LHT disc for touring and commuting. I'm 72" tall with a seat height off crank of 79cm. and front axle to top of handle bar of 67.5cm on my domane road bike. Any recommendations on sizing. My LBS sells both, but most bikes and saddles feel fine for 10 minutes. I want to know what is comfortable after 6 hours. thanks.
KLOSHE is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-18, 06:46 PM
  #2  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 34,395

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 122 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4726 Post(s)
a different saddle, maybe change the stem too .
fietsbob is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-18, 08:09 AM
  #3  
bradtx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Pearland, Texas
Posts: 7,582

Bikes: Cannondale, Trek, Raleigh, Santana

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 304 Post(s)
KLOSHE, Same height and my touring bikes are 23" (58.4 cm).
Bodies are different so my reply is simply a starting point.

Brad
bradtx is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-18, 08:19 AM
  #4  
ironwood
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Boston area
Posts: 1,534

Bikes: 1984 Bridgestone 400 1985Univega nouevo sport 650b conversion 1993b'stone RBT 1985 Schwinn Tempo

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Originally Posted by KLOSHE View Post
I want to know what is comfortable after 6 hours. thanks.
There's one way to find out, and that is, to ride for six hours
ironwood is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-18, 05:34 PM
  #5  
52telecaster
ambulatory senior
 
52telecaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Peoria Il
Posts: 1,726

Bikes: Bob Jackson World Tour, 81 miyata 912 and 86 miyata 312.

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 544 Post(s)
honestly on a touring bike i find it more comfortable to have quill stem. not many bikes are made that way anymore which is one reason i ordered a bob jackson.
52telecaster is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-18, 07:19 PM
  #6  
Tourist in MSN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 4,889

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, Perfekt 3 Speed -age unknown, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 880 Post(s)
You really should look at top tube length coupled with stem length. You can change a stem, but if the top tube is too long you will have more reach than you really want. And some bars have more reach than others.

Most people set up a touring bike so that the top of the handlebar is about the same height as the top of the saddle, I suspect your carbon race bike has the bars quite a bit lower so the reach you want on a touring bike might not be the same as the reach on your race bike.

I find that I like a saddle a bit narrower the further forward I lean on a bike. My point is that you might want a different saddle shape on a touring bike than you have on your race bike.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-18, 09:45 PM
  #7  
raria
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 562
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 498 Post(s)
Why?

My Fuji touring has one.

Originally Posted by 52telecaster View Post
honestly on a touring bike i find it more comfortable to have quill stem. not many bikes are made that way anymore which is one reason i ordered a bob jackson.
raria is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-18, 09:48 PM
  #8  
52telecaster
ambulatory senior
 
52telecaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Peoria Il
Posts: 1,726

Bikes: Bob Jackson World Tour, 81 miyata 912 and 86 miyata 312.

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 544 Post(s)
Originally Posted by raria View Post
My Fuji touring has one.
i think there is a little more flex. when i am on a bike for 6-8 hours i will take any give i can get. btw those fuji touring bikes are darn nice. saw a couple in peoria il a while back that had about a zillion miles on both. you dont get those kind of miles unless the bikes are comfortable.
52telecaster is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-18, 10:41 AM
  #9  
pdlamb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: northern Deep South
Posts: 4,369

Bikes: Fuji Touring, Novara Randonee

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 638 Post(s)
Originally Posted by raria View Post
My Fuji touring has one.
(Referring to a quill stem)


So does mine, but the newer models (starting around 2007, maybe?) have gone to threadless.
pdlamb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-18, 11:04 AM
  #10  
raria
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 562
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 498 Post(s)
Originally Posted by 52telecaster View Post
i think there is a little more flex. when i am on a bike for 6-8 hours i will take any give i can get. btw those fuji touring bikes are darn nice. saw a couple in peoria il a while back that had about a zillion miles on both. you dont get those kind of miles unless the bikes are comfortable.
Good point. That was one thing I noticed straight away, the stem was flexy. But your point is very well taken, I hardly get numb hands on that bike even after 100miles.
raria is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-18, 05:30 AM
  #11  
jpescatore
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Ashton, MD USA
Posts: 124

Bikes: Trek Domane SL6 Disc, Trek 520

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
I have a Trek 520, I'm 70" tall with shorter than average inseam - 56cm frame was right for me and no complaints in over 20 years and 50K miles. The year I bought it, Trek had gone to STI shifters and I've never had a problem with those either - but they have long since gone back to bar end shifters, which I've just never liked.

My newer, lighter bike for go fast day rides has disc brakes - I sure wish I'd had those on loading touring where there was a turn at the bottom of a downhill. I'm a convert - wouldn't go back to rim brakes.
jpescatore is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-18, 12:28 PM
  #12  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,174

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1194 Post(s)
At 6' I think you're probably just a few inches short of making either bike's largest frame size easily work for you (both probably will require futzing around a lot with stem length and saddle positions-- you're probably looking at what size equates to a 'virtual' seat tube length (i.e., no C-C) of not more than ~25" (63.5 cm). For the LHS, for example that looks like the 62 not the 64. For the 520 I think you're stuck with making the largest size work--the 63... perhaps just a tad big but the next size down may be a bit too confining. With the headtube size of Trek's 63 you'd have no problems with more upright seating and you can always spend more time in the drops in headwind situations.
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-18, 04:11 PM
  #13  
DanBell
Senior Member
 
DanBell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: On the road...
Posts: 422

Bikes: Co-Motion Divide

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
At 6' I think you're probably just a few inches short of making either bike's largest frame size easily work for you (both probably will require futzing around a lot with stem length and saddle positions-- you're probably looking at what size equates to a 'virtual' seat tube length (i.e., no C-C) of not more than ~25" (63.5 cm). For the LHS, for example that looks like the 62 not the 64. For the 520 I think you're stuck with making the largest size work--the 63... perhaps just a tad big but the next size down may be a bit too confining. With the headtube size of Trek's 63 you'd have no problems with more upright seating and you can always spend more time in the drops in headwind situations.
I'm not sure how you've done your math here but it doesn't seem right to me. I'm also 6'0" and rode the 56cm Disc Trucker for years. It was the perfect size for me and I can't imagine riding the 62 or 64.
DanBell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-18, 07:10 PM
  #14  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,174

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1194 Post(s)
Originally Posted by DanBell View Post
I'm not sure how you've done your math here but it doesn't seem right to me. I'm also 6'0" and rode the 56cm Disc Trucker for years. It was the perfect size for me and I can't imagine riding the 62 or 64.
I'm a bit over that and for me the 64 I think would be a stretch too but the 62 LHT doesn't seem overly large-- it's got a flat top bar that comes in at ~34" for a standover height... not much room to play with there and the next size down has a standover of more like 33" which probably would be better but I wasn't that impressed with the sub-190 headtube length for the 60 LHT. That's pretty much where my thinking came from. Even a 59 is a bit too small for me but if a 56 works for you, there's your answer. I'm always on the largest sizes which mostly are 61s for C-C and with the sloping top tubes I end up with a lot of exposed seat post.
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-18, 07:27 PM
  #15  
koolerb
Senior Member
 
koolerb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 976

Bikes: Giant Defy 1, and some others

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
At 6 ft tall I would guess 56-57-58 range.
koolerb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-18, 08:23 PM
  #16  
Doug64
Senior Member
 
Doug64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,171
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 627 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
At 6' I think you're probably just a few inches short of making either bike's largest frame size easily work for you (both probably will require futzing around a lot with stem length and saddle positions-- you're probably looking at what size equates to a 'virtual' seat tube length (i.e., no C-C) of not more than ~25" (63.5 cm). For the LHS, for example that looks like the 62 not the 64. For the 520 I think you're stuck with making the largest size work--the 63... perhaps just a tad big but the next size down may be a bit too confining. With the headtube size of Trek's 63 you'd have no problems with more upright seating and you can always spend more time in the drops in headwind situations.
I don't think these sizes would be a good fit for a 6' tall person, especially the LHT which has a long top tube. I am 6' tall, and the 58 cm LHT frame is almost too big for me, even using a 90 mm stem.
Doug64 is offline  
Reply With Quote

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 Terms of Service