speyfitter

https://www.trekbikes.com/ca/en_CA/bikes/adventure-touring-bikes/520/520-disc/p/569323/

So is it discontinued or not ?

HelpSingularity 

Looking at the Canadian (your link) and the USA website I would hazard to guess that the venerable Trek 520 is no longer being produced.

veganbikes

Maybe ask Trek?

Yan 

I just called the Trek store in Manhattan (Chelsea location). The Trek 520 is permanently discontinued. Trek's touring frame is now their gravel bike, the Trek Checkpoint.

As I said in the recent bikepacking discussion thread, gravel bikes are the up-marketed, functionally identical replacement for touring bikes and utility-cyclocross bikes. The inflated pricing of gravel bikes makes more money, so the old bikes are now being discontinued. This has been years coming and should surprise no one.

The most recent Trek 520 was $1679. The cheapest Trek Checkpoint is $2500.

indyfabz

Yeah. Look what Trek says about the Checkpoint:

https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/checkpoint/
ensures you’ll reach all the places you dream of exploring on

Yan 

To be fair I think the Trek Checkpoint is a pretty nice frame. The drawbacks are:

• Only one screw boss on the front and rear dropouts, so rack and fender have to share the same screw
• Fork crown mounting hole does not pass completely through front to rear, so while a fender can be mounted, a dynamo light cannot

Unfortunately both of these are pretty big drawbacks. You can still mount a light on the bars, but then you can't mount a handlebar bag.

This is a fashion bike that conforms to the magazine image of bikepacking. Fenders and racks at the same time? Get out of here dorks.

mstateglfr 

You may have said that in the other thread, but once again, just because you said something doesnt make it true or accurate.
You just reiterated your claim that gravel bikes are functionally identical to touring bikes and utility CX bikes, but then you list reasons why the Checkpoint is inferior to Trek's dedicated touring bike. So to recap, gravel bikes are functionally identical to touring bikes, but the Checkpoint gravel bike is inferior for touring when compared to the 520.
I mean, that clearly conflicts. It conflicts because you consistently use broad claims to cover more situations and examples than can be defended. Its hilarious that you even make the claim in a thread where you then disagree with your claim.

I do agree that the fall of traditional touring bikes is years in the making and should surprise no one. Touring bikes back in the 80s were all the rage in the first half of the decade and were overstocked in the second half, leading into the 90s(this is well documented and not worth arguing over). Traditional touring bikes never regained the popularity they once had as the 90s came to a close. The 00s saw a resurgence in touring bikes since Surly introduced its LHT and also since bike made from steel and viewed as utilitarian got a bump in interest. But that has largely passed too.
There simply is not a large market for traditional touring bikes and so mass produced options are currently relatively rare. <---part of what doesnt help is that those who do have a touring bike are not buying a new one every few years or so. From what I have seen- compared to road or mtb, the average lifecycle of a touring bike is significantly longer. This means fewer sales in an already small segment of bike sales. That obviously cant help things.

- Why is the lack of a front dynamo light mounted to the fork considered a pretty big drawback? Seriously, what % of touring bikes have a front dynamo?...so how do all the other people manage?

- As for fender and racks being mounted at the same spot, I would think you would be more irate that a 2022 and forward Trek Checkpoint cant even handle a front rack. That makes your concern at the front end moot, but also really doesnt support your claim that gravel bikes are functionally identical to touring bikes. https://trek.scene7.com/is/content/T..._27May2022.pdf

- Why cant you use a handlebar bag and a front light? Thats done all the time. Slap a bag on the bars and slap a light on the bars. Boom- done. If you are saying a dynamo light cant be mounted with a bar bag, well I will refer back to my first response to your post and point out that countless people manage to tour just fine without a dynamo hub or connected lighting.







Here is reality-
- Trek 520 historically is a more capable platform to tour in a traditional manner when compared to a Trek Checkpoint.
- Trek 520 has not had large sales numbers for years and years. Like even before they went to the aluminum fork and goofy thruskew setup on the 520, it wasnt selling like hotcakes.
- Trek axed a model that just hasnt been popular and has a lot of overlap with a more popular model.
- Traditional touring is not mainstream.
- Gravel bikes are not just rebadged traditional touring bikes or functionally identical to traditional touring bikes, despite your insistence.

Looks like the Fuji Touring(if anyone can actually buy one?), Surly DT, Salsa Marrakesh, Kona Sutra, Marin Four Corners, Bombtrack Arise Tour, and many others are all thats left for traditional touring options where front and rear racks can be used on a steel frame and fork.
One of the local shops here has multiple Trek 520s in stock- both the touring version and the goofy short lived Grando version. They are in stock sitting right there for immediate purchase while customers walk past and buy what works best for them.

njkayaker

It seems the demise of the 520 is reported every year. Who knows if it will be true this year.

In past years, it appears that Trek makes a very limited number of 520s and runs out. And then people claim it's been discontinued.

RB1-luvr

welp, I'm glad I bought one last year.

mstateglfr 

Local Trek dealer said both versions of the 520 are discontinued.

Polaris OBark

They killed sales with the aluminum fork. A steel fork was cheaper(?) and better.

The 520 was my second touring bike, and quite possibly the best one I have had (although my Soma Saga disk is better, I spent far more money pimping out a steel frame and fork -- you couldn't get the whole bike).

My first significant tour with the (1990) 520 was down the West Coast. It held up great. The headset got slightly loose, but apart from that it was flawless and zero maintenance. I finally gave it away (ca 2005) after years of heavy use, and it was still a great bike then.

I guess they just didn't make enough money on it, and it became harder to source the steel frame and parts during the 2020s.

Yan 

There's only a conflict in your imagination where the Trek Checkpoint is the only gravel bike that exists in the world. In reality here on Earth, there are plenty of gravel bikes which do not have these flaws. Then on the flip side, there are also touring bikes which do have these flaws. For example certain model years of Co-motion bikes, which are as traditional purist touring as they come, also do not have through-bolt fork crowns. If naming ****** bikes is the game you want to play (yawn), I can go on all day. So what's your point? These particular flaws are problems with the specific bike model, and have zero to do with gravel and touring bikes in general. Your logic is a dead end.

You are way behind the times. It's 2023. I can't speak for your joe schmo hick cousin who gets off his lard ass once a month, but these days almost every elite level multi-day gravel rider is running a dynamo light. Read and learn: https://bikepacking.com/bikes/2022-t...e-rigs-part-2/

No, not "boom-done", more like "boom-can't". Look at the photo below. The bar bag blocks the light. HELLO???

Hanging a stuff sac off the handlebars like in the photo you showed is not a serious solution. It's a drooping potato that swings around like a flopping ball sac, clapping into your headtube with every bounce. Rubs off the paint on your headtube too. Your front end bag is where you keep your ready to access items. Let's say you're into photography and that's where you keep your camera. So are you going to stop your bike an unroll a freaking stuff sack every time you want to take a photo? Hell no. In the top level gravel world, the typical setup is aerobars with a stuff sack hanging below. The light is then attached to the aerobars above the stuff sack. That's the kind of setup you see in gravel bike advertisements; but it has very poor ease of use. Better to choose a model of bike that has the correct hole in the fork. Now you can freely switch up your setup depending on the type of trip. Why limit your options?

Example of aerobar dynamo light mount in the photo at the top of this page: https://www.cyclingabout.com/bikepac...ke-adventures/

mstateglfr 

Yan - smart to have edited that post.

I don't think a checkpoint is the only gravel bike, nor did I even suggest that. I own a different gravel bike and clearly know others exist.
Once again, you threw out an overly generalized claim and it was foolish to do so. It's a common theme for you.

As for dynamo lighting, why are you suddenly referencing 'elite geavel riders' when this thread has been about a traditional touring bike setup?
Dynamo hubs are neat. They are not a requirement to tour and are relatively rare based on the untold number of touring bikes I've seen in person and online thru the years.

As for your handlebar bag example, yes that is certainly one style of handlebar bag. It's about the most extreme style when defending the position you have, but it is an example.
The example I provided is commonly used.
Perhaps the lesson here is to select gear that matches your setup and needs. Wild, right? If you need to mount your light on your bars, then don't buy a handlebar bag that sits comically high. Seems pretty easy to resolve.

Back to a dynamo setup with dedicated lighting- what % of your riding consists of riding in the dark while touring? A rechargeable light really won't suffice?
It's just touring...it isn't thru the night endurance gravel racing.