A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Info on 1986 Trek 620



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 11th 03, 03:03 PM
Mark Traphagen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Info on 1986 Trek 620

Knowing my growing frustration with attempting touring with my Trek
mountain bike, my wife just snapped up a 1986 Trek 620 for $200 on
Ebay. It is supposedly mint condition, ridden only 20 miles and hung
in a garage until now. If any of you are familiar with this bike, I'd
appreciate some opinions/info.

First, sizing...I weigh about 160 lbs., and 5'6" tall and buy pants
with a 30 length. The frame specs are 47 c.m. seat tube, 52 c.m. top
tube, and 45.5 c.m. chainstays. Should this fit me OK?

Second, what components, if any, should I look first to upgrade...and
will I be able to find newer components that will fit? If you're
interested, here's the full specs from the auction page:

"This bike is brand new with less than twenty miles on it. Although it
is an older bike(1986) it is Trek at its roots best. Handmade, lugged,
Reynolds 531 tubing...this bike can easily be converted to a top
quality competitive cyclocross bike. Features are Normandy hubs, Deore
crankset, canti brakes, Huret Crane deraileurs and shifters,
Stronglight headset, Blackburn rear rack, Kirtland rear rack top
touring pack, Zefal HP frame pump, Cat Eye computer (verifies low
mileage). The frame specs are 47 c.m. seat tube, 52 c.m. top tube, and
45.5 c.m. chainstays. This is a very nice quality bike that was simply
never ridden, just hung in our garage."

Thanks in advance for any help anyone can offer.

Mark
T
Ads
  #2  
Old July 11th 03, 05:43 PM
Mike Jacoubowsky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Info on 1986 Trek 620

First, sizing...I weigh about 160 lbs., and 5'6" tall and buy pants
with a 30 length. The frame specs are 47 c.m. seat tube, 52 c.m. top
tube, and 45.5 c.m. chainstays. Should this fit me OK?


Very nice of your wife to be looking out for your cycling! But...

If the sizing given is accurate, that's a non-fit. The issues are two-fold-
First, getting the seat height set properly is going to have you towering
over the handlebars, giving you that nose-in-the-gravel feel that very few
would enjoy. Second, you'll be hanging way over the front end of the bike,
due to the too-short top tube.

The 620 was a pretty decent bike back in the day, and for $200 might make
somebody a pretty nice ride, if it fits them. The sizing information
implies that the bike would be better suited to somebody about three inches
shorter. At first I was thinking that perhaps the 47cm seat tube was a
center-to-center measurement (which would make it a bit taller), but the
52cm top tube is about as short as you can go without having substantial
pedal/front wheel overlap.

Fit is the place to *start* when looking for a new bike. It's not an
afterthought. A $1000 bike bought for $100 that doesn't fit still puts you
$100 further away from the right bike.

The biggest problem, of course, is how you deal with the fact that your wife
did something very nice for you that may not work out. That's almost as bad
as riding a bike that doesn't fit. Maybe worse! I'm sure that however I've
dealt with such situations I've bungled them badly. Still married though...

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


"Mark Traphagen" wrote in message
m...
Knowing my growing frustration with attempting touring with my Trek
mountain bike, my wife just snapped up a 1986 Trek 620 for $200 on
Ebay. It is supposedly mint condition, ridden only 20 miles and hung
in a garage until now. If any of you are familiar with this bike, I'd
appreciate some opinions/info.

First, sizing...I weigh about 160 lbs., and 5'6" tall and buy pants
with a 30 length. The frame specs are 47 c.m. seat tube, 52 c.m. top
tube, and 45.5 c.m. chainstays. Should this fit me OK?

Second, what components, if any, should I look first to upgrade...and
will I be able to find newer components that will fit? If you're
interested, here's the full specs from the auction page:

"This bike is brand new with less than twenty miles on it. Although it
is an older bike(1986) it is Trek at its roots best. Handmade, lugged,
Reynolds 531 tubing...this bike can easily be converted to a top
quality competitive cyclocross bike. Features are Normandy hubs, Deore
crankset, canti brakes, Huret Crane deraileurs and shifters,
Stronglight headset, Blackburn rear rack, Kirtland rear rack top
touring pack, Zefal HP frame pump, Cat Eye computer (verifies low
mileage). The frame specs are 47 c.m. seat tube, 52 c.m. top tube, and
45.5 c.m. chainstays. This is a very nice quality bike that was simply
never ridden, just hung in our garage."

Thanks in advance for any help anyone can offer.

Mark
T



  #3  
Old July 12th 03, 02:59 AM
Mark Traphagen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Info on 1986 Trek 620

Thanks for the responses, guys. Mike, don't worry about my wife, she
knows it was a crapshoot and won't be disappointed if it doesn't work
out.

As far as size, we'll wait and see. While I am 5'6", I have very short
legs and usually feel more comfortable on a bike a little smaller than
other people my height would use.

mark
t
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.