Review Options:
Sorted by Latest Review | Sort by Best Rating |
|
Reviews 1 - 5 (15 Reviews Total)
|
| Next 15 |
User Reviews
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
KingTermite
a Commuter
from Date Reviewed: August 9, 2007
Strengths: Smooth ride, comfortable, sturdy.Weaknesses: Could have better brakes and slightly higher end components. I'd love to see disc brakes on front and canti brakes on rear.Bottom Line: A great bike for the long haul or sturdy needs (like commuting, utilitarian cycling). Very sturdy, dependable.
Favorite Ride: Trek 520
Price Paid:
$800.00
Purchased At: Carrollwood Bicycle
Similar Products Used: Test rode Fuji touring.
Bike Setup: Swapped out road bars to trekking bars, added better SPD pedals.
Overall Rating: Value Rating:
Submitted by
trekincrazy
a Recreational Rider
from Date Reviewed: January 10, 2005
Strengths: Strengths? Trek 520... how's that?Weaknesses: friggin paintBottom Line: Bullet proof. I got this bike about 6 months before my first tour (San Diego to St. Augustine), and have loved every mile since. I ditched the saddle and the pedals before I even gave them a chance, in their place went a specialized body geometry saddle and some crank bros candy pedals. I made it to Phoenix before deciding the stem had to go, and the wheels needed truing. It wasn't the gearing I cursed in the mountains, but rather my excess creature comforts. They never seem to pull their own weight. However, I could see the need for a smaller crankset in more serious mountains. For touring, bar end shifting is much less fickle thank STI... I still haven't adjusted either derailleur (4,000 miles later). The stock rack made it across, however I don't think it'll be along for my next big tour. As for the other complaints about brakes... I think we should all be nervous about bombing downhill at speeds around 50mph, and near 300lbs, with rim brakes. I would like to see an option for a rear disc brake in the future. I had good luck with the tires, but I installed tuffy strips early on. Don't get me started on the paint. GRRRRRRRRR.
Favorite Ride: with the wind
Price Paid:
$1000.00
Purchased At: La Mesa Trek store
Similar Products Used: test rode the Giant and Cannondale touring bikes
Bike Setup: higher rise stem, specialized body geometry saddle, crank bros candy pedals, otherwise stock
Overall Rating: Value Rating:
Submitted by
paulgareau
a Recreational Rider
from Date Reviewed: July 5, 2004
Strengths: All around great bike. Mechanically simple, solid frame, will take anything you throw at it.Weaknesses: None so far (3 seasons).Bottom Line: I've toured over 2000 miles on this bike and have not had one problem so far - not even a flat tire! I replaced the small chain ring with a 24 tooth immediately after buying the bike. I also swapped the seat for a Terry Men's touring saddle and replaced the rear rack.
Recommended for anyone interested in self-supported touring.
Price Paid:
$1000.00
Purchased At: Easton Landry's
Similar Products Used: Tested Cannondale T800
Bike Setup: Old Man Mountain racks. Performance panniers. Terry touring saddle. Cat Eye cyclocomputer. 24 tooth granny.
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
a Commuter
from Date Reviewed: January 15, 2004
Strengths: The frame is more or less what you want for loaded touring, although it's designed with low handlebar height in mind, which doesn't make sense for a lot of folks.Weaknesses: Stupid stock gearing choices that make it less than a real loaded touring bike.Bottom Line: I am a mechanic and I know several people who bought 2003 Trek 520's. I also own a 1993 520 frame with no original parts.
The 520 is often billed as just about the last true stock steel loaded touring bike available in the US. However, there are several things about it's stock setup that make it inadequate for many people's loaded touring needs.
The stock gearing is simply too high to allow a normal cyclist to comfortably haul a normal self-contained load in hilly terrain all day. Real loaded touring bikes need to be able to do that, or else not be called loaded touring bikes. A lot of people buy this bike trusting the gearing to more well thought-out than it is, only to realize that the stock setup is spec'd with credit-card touring in mind. They then either have to deal with an inadequately low gear, or pay a bunch more money for a mountain crankset or new chainrings. (Note that the issue here is that since the stock Shimano 105 crankset is a road crankset that uses a 130/74 BCD, the minimum sized rings you can run on the middle and outer are 38 tooth, and this just creates a bunch of problems with setting up the bike for low gearing, in addition to a stock 30 tooth granny not being low enough for real loaded touring.) The high gear of 52/11 is also somewhat silly for loaded touring.
The other thing about the stock setup is that the handlebar height most people end up with is too low. For loaded touring, most people prefer the bars at seat level or above. I don't know if I've just seen several examples of shops cutting the steerer pre-emptively or what, but the bike doesn't seem to be designed with this in mind.
In 2004, look for the new Surly Long Haul Trucker to usurp the 520. Getting a custom Long Haul built for $1100 or $1200 with similar quality components at a slight higher initial cost is going to make more sense both financially and quality-wise for almost everyone who is actually into loaded touring, since most people find at least several things to be dissatisfied with about the current 520 as an all-day load-carrying bike.
Really I would have less problems with the current 520 if there weren't so many people who buy it and then realize it doesn't meet their needs as well as Trek and their LBS claims it will.
Favorite Ride: Anywhere nobody tries to kill me.
Overall Rating: Value Rating:
Submitted by
TeamOFS
a Recreational Rider
from Date Reviewed: November 30, 2003
Strengths: The comfort level, smooth stable ride.
The toughness factor with my 225lbs and the amount of gear I carry should be hard on wheels after 1800 miles they are as true as the day I brought the bike homeWeaknesses: The seat, take it off and give it to some one you don't like muchBottom Line: I wanted a bike for loaded touring, but didn't want to break my bank account. The 520 filled the bill, it started out to be just my touring ride. Now it seems that I grab it for most other rides as well. I own 2 other road bikes, both steel as well. My other bikes are faster, my 520 is far and away more comfortable. The bar end shifters are great when fully loaded, and some what more robust than STI parts. The shifter for the front derailleur lets you trim it out to allow use of the full rande of rear gears. With my weight (225lbs)loaded front and rear panniers the Trek still handles and rides well. This bike carries more stuff than a mini-van.The best thing I could say about the Trek 520 is that if I could only keep one of 4 bikes. With out a doubt it would be my 520. The only thing I did'nt like about the 520 was its painful seat, one ride and it was replaced with a Brooks Team Pro.
Favorite Ride: Cherry Capitol Club's, Ride Around Torch (Lake)
Price Paid:
$999.00
Purchased At: Al Petri & Sons
Similar Products Used: 1985 trek 520, Giant OCR Touring
Bike Setup: I swapped out the stock seat for a Brooks Team Pro. Added a Blackburn Front Mountain rack. A full set of front and rear lights for those winter rides that run a little long.
|
Reviews 1 - 5 (15 Reviews Total)
|
| Next 15 |
Review Options:
Sorted by Latest Review | Sort by Best Rating |
