Re: Upgrade 20 Year Old Trek 400 Road Bike?

[Donald Gillies]

1. Chainrings have not really gotten more narrow over the past 20
years. What has happened is that the spacers got thinner - if you
look at sheldon brown's website ("Sprocket Spacing" table), the
cog width is roughly 1.8 mm for all generations of rear freewheels
and cassettes EXCEPT for shimano 10-speed which is 1.6 mm.

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/k7.html

If you wanted to run a 27-speed drivetrain on your bike, it would
not be a problem although you'd probably have to file down the
crank arm tabs to get the chainrings a little closer together.
Still, you'd be able to continue using the crankset with 27
speeds. Most front mechs don't index - even ultegra 27 speed
gear system requires trimming the front derailleur at times.

2. If your bike had a 531 or tange prestige frameset, then i'd
recommend upgrading - these frames last forever. Unfortunately,
the frame on a Trek 400 is ( i think ) heavy plain gauge chromoly,
with a "dead" feel to the ride, about 8 lbs, whereas a 531/tange
frame is about 6.5-7 lbs, and a modern 853 frame with a light
carbon fork is about 5.5 lbs, whereas a super high-tech frame/fork
like Waterford R33 (TruTemper) is about 4.5 lbs ! ! !

- Don Gillies
San Diego, CA

[Rick]

Donald Gillies wrote:

> 2. If your bike had a 531 or tange prestige frameset, then i'd
> recommend upgrading - these frames last forever. Unfortunately,
> the frame on a Trek 400 is ( i think ) heavy plain gauge chromoly,

Not true. 83 and 84 were Tange mangalloy, 85, 88, and 89 were TT
RC4130 cromoly, and 86 and 87 were Reynolds 531.

> with a "dead" feel to the ride, about 8 lbs, whereas a 531/tange
> frame is about 6.5-7 lbs,

Where are you getting these figures? My '88 400 made with TT 4130,
22.5" (~56 cm) is just a touch over 7 lb for frame/fork and is anything
but 'dead'.

> and a modern 853 frame with a light
> carbon fork is about 5.5 lbs, whereas a super high-tech frame/fork
> like Waterford R33 (TruTemper) is about 4.5 lbs ! ! !

- rick