2005 trek 520

Adventure Cycling Association

• Join Renew Donate
• Diversity and Justice
• Organization
• Newsletters
• U.S. Bicycle Route System
• Short Routes
• Guided Tours
• Adventure Grants
• Adventure Council
• Events Calendar
• Get Involved

Road Test: Trek 520

If the Trek 520 were a person instead of a bicycle, it would be old enough to run for president.

Not to serve, mind you — not this term anyway. The Trek 520 is “only” 34 years old, a year short of the constitutional requirement for ascension to the presidency. Anyway, that position has been filled.

Hiring policies in the nation’s capital notwithstanding, the 520 remains the elder statesman of the Trek line, according to Eric Maves, curator of the Trek Historical Collection.

“Thirty-four consecutive years in the product line; no other Trek model comes close to that track record,” he said.

As you might expect, this venerable touring bike has seen a few changes since 1983, when Ronald Reagan was in the White House and I was in the newspaper business. The lugged Reynolds 501 tubeset has given way to welded 4130; chainstays and wheelbase have stretched a couple of centimeters; and the brakes have evolved from sidepulls through cantilevers to mechanical discs.

But, at rock bottom, the 520 remains stable, sturdy, and steel, available in six sizes from small to tall, and anyone who liked it in ’83 is liable to like it today.

Heck, if you were a fan 10 years ago, you’ll probably be one now because the 520 isn’t much different. Why mess with success?

You’ll find quite a few Shimano components on the 520 — 36-hole M475 hubs with quick-release skewers, Deore M590 triple crankset, Alivio and Deore derailers, Dura-Ace bar-end shifters, and a nine-cog HG50 cassette.

And, because this is a Trek, you’ll see a lot of Bontrager bits too, as in just about everything else. Stem, handlebar, tape, seatpost, saddle, rims, tires, rear rack — even the sealant in the inner tubes bears the B.

There are a few exceptions. The brakes are Hayes CX Expert mechanical discs, with levers from Tektro, just as on the comparably priced Kona Sutra, which I reviewed in May 2014. The chain is a KMC X9. And the pedals are Wellgos, with toe clips and straps. 

Gearing is what you’d expect from a touring bike with more than three decades on the road — a 48/36/26T triple up front and an 11–32T cassette in back. The Deore trekking crank even includes a chainguard to keep lube off your chinos, if you occasionally do your cycling in street clothes.

And the color is basic black, which is always in style.

A Little History

My first Trek was considerably less subtle. That 1985 560 was an eye-popping purple and yellow, like a bruise with wheels, which seemed oddly appropriate as my years spent working a series of copy desks had left me looking a bit puffy.

I rode the wheels off it, shedding weight and a nicotine habit, and I know 520 owners who have recouped similar value from their Treks. A friend’s wife still loves her ’09 model, which has been converted to a flat-bar bike, and a neighbor only recently sold his 520 after first transforming it into a singlespeed.

But when it comes to finding out what the bike is truly capable of, I tip my hat to the late great David Lamb. In 1994, the veteran Los Angeles Times correspondent rode his 520 more than 3,000 miles from the Potomac to the Pacific, eventually spinning the three-month journey into a book, Over the Hills: A Midlife Escape Across America by Bicycle.

In an excerpt reprinted in Adventure Cyclist, he wrote, “My American-made bike — a Trek 520 — proved as roadworthy as the most expensive Mercedes-Benz, and it strikes me as remarkable that such a simple contraption was capable of carrying me so far without extracting a single penny for fuel, oil, or mechanical repairs.”

Twenty-three years later, the descendant of Lamb’s bike seems equally well suited to adventures large and small.

Size and Carrying Capacity

With sizes ranging from 48cm to 63cm, fit shouldn’t be an issue for most customers. A 57cm fit me like an old slipper, with an assist from the short-reach, shallow-drop Bontrager VR-C bar. The Blendr-compatible stem lets you mount lights, computers, and accessories above or below the faceplate. And because pedals and a rear rack are included in the $1,360 price tag, you’ll be ready to roll as soon as the credit card clears.

That rack, a Bontrager BackRack Deluxe L, is rated for a maximum of 55 lbs. The company doesn’t offer a front rack for the 520, but I had a Tubus Ergo low-rider on hand; it needed a few spacers to clear the fork’s stout lower legs and disc-brake caliper.

Performance

Once on the road, the 520’s performance was just what you’d expect from a bike that was all about adventure before the concept became a category. The ride was relaxed but responsive — just the ticket for those impromptu coast-to-coast getaways — and the Bontrager AW1 Hard-Cases felt surprisingly plush for an all-weather, puncture-resistant 32mm tire. You can go bigger if you want, but I found the Hard-Cases well suited to my rides around Albuquerque.

Snapping through the gears was a breeze with the Dura-Ace bar-cons and Alivio/Deore derailers all meshing nicely. I do have an aesthetic problem with that Alivio front derailer — it looks boxy, cheap, and clunky, especially sitting next to that triple crank with its equally obtrusive chainguard — but the solution is to avoid looking down while riding. Trust me. After a while, I forgot that my ’85 560 looked like the upshot of a hard left to the ribs and just rode the bike.

Trust me. After a while, I forgot that my ’85 560 looked like the upshot of a hard left to the ribs and just rode the bike.

The Alivio derailer may not be sexy, “but it is functional, reliable, and easy to find an economical replacement for, should the need ever arise,” said David Studner, Trek’s assistant product manager for city bikes. “The low-clamp/top-swing format is also more durable by virtue of its tucked-away design.”

This was good to know because I found myself using that front derailer more than usual. I’m sloppy about shifting, generally slouching around in the middle ring until some emergency arises, but with the Trek I found I wanted to be in the little ring if using the 28T or 32T cog to keep a clean chainline and avoid the occasional auto-downshift from the middle ring.

Road Test: Co-op Cycles ADV 1.1

I don’t see the Hayes mechanicals as often as I do the Avids, but they impressed me on the Kona Sutra and I like them here too. This is another good thing because the rim-brake 520 has been discontinued effective this year. Thus, the disc-brake model is the only one you’ll see at your local dealer. When I picked up my review bike at the Albuquerque Trek Superstore, manager Mike Humphries had just one lonely V-brake 520 on the floor, which seemed to be where it would stay.

Oh, you can still have one if you must. Studner said both the disc- and rim-brake 520 framesets are stocked as service parts for $660, so if you break yours, or just want one to build to your own specifications, see your friendly neighborhood Trek dealer.

Or you could save yourself the time, hassle, and expense, and go with the instant gratification of the modern 520 to get started on your own midlife escape from the Potomac. The Pacific awaits.  

Patrick O’Grady has written and cartooned about cycling since 1989 for VeloNews, Bicycle Retailer & Industry News, and a variety of other publications. Read more from and about Patrick O’Grady   here .

• Price: $1,360
• Sizes available: 48cm, 51cm, 54cm, 57cm, 60cm, 63cm
• Size tested: 57cm
• Weight: 29.4 lbs with rear rack, stock pedals with toe clips and straps, and reflectors front and rear

Test Bike Measurements

• Stack: 587mm
• Reach: 383mm
• Head tube length: 160mm
• Head tube angle: 71.8°
• Seat tube: 543mm (center to top of seatpost clamp)
• Seat tube angle: 73.5°Top tube:557mm (effective)
• Chainstays: 450mm
• Bottom bracket drop: 70mm
• Fork offset: 52mm
• Fork trail: 59mm
• Wheelbase: 1052mm
• Standover: 794mm

Specification

• Frame: 4130 butted chromoly. Rack and fender mounts, disc mounts, pump peg, chain hanger, three sets of bottle bosses, down tube cable routing, down tube bosses for shifters/barrel adjusters
• Fork: Chromoly with rack and low-rider mounts, and fender and disc mounts
• Headset: VP Slimstak, sealed semi-cartridge bearings
• Rims: Bontrager tubeless ready
• Hubs: Shimano M475, 36-hole, QR
• Tires: Bontrager AW1 Hard-Case, 700c x 32mm
• Crankset: Shimano Trekking M590 with chainguard, 175mm, 48/36/26T
• Bottom bracket: Shimano sealed cartridge, threaded
• Cassette: Shimano HG, 11–32T, 9-speed
• Brake levers: Tektro RL340 aero
• Shift levers: Shimano Dura-Ace bar-cons
• Front derailer: Shimano Alivio
• Rear derailer: Shimano Deore
• Brakes: Hayes CX Expert mechanical disc, 160mm rotors
• Stem: Bontrager Elite, 100mm, 31.8mm four-bolt clamp, 7° +/-, Blendr compatible
• Handlebar: Bontrager Race VR-C, 440mm, 85mm reach, 125mm drop, 31.8mm clamp diameter
• Seatpost: Bontrager SSR, two-bolt head, 27.2mm, 12mm setback
• Saddle: Bontrager Evoke 1
• Rear rack: Bontrager Back Rack Deluxe L, 55 lbs
• Pedals: Wellgo R125 with toe clips and straps

Related Reading

My year of bikepacking: the bucket list, road test: tumbleweed stargazer, cycling the world: a new film about a big journey.

• RIDE YOUR BIKE.
• Video Course Login
• Success Stories
• Give Your Support

No products in the cart.

• Bike Tour Shop
• Search for:

Trek 520 – Touring Bicycle Review

• Pinterest 3

Bicycle touring can be done on almost any kind of bike. After a few 100-mile days, however, having the right touring bike will determine whether your body can live up to the demands of life on the road.

That said, the Trek 520 caters to the touring bike scene with its chromoly steel frame that offers the perfect mix of flexibility, comfort and durability needed for long-distance bicycle touring. The stretched out geometry is just right for staying comfortable on the bike and at the same time allows you to get in a good aerodynamic stance for optimal speed. The 520 is perfect for long-distance bicycle tours or for the daily commute. Its classic touring geometry has stood the test of time and is considered a cult classic by many. Having been around since the 1970’s, The Trek 520 has earned its place in bicycle touring history.

Trek only offers one touring option – the Trek 520, which is altered each year with a new paint color and exterior design. While the paint may change, the components haven’t varied too much throughout the recent years.

The Trek 520 MSRP is set at $1,429.99 USD.

It comes in five different frame sizes: 48, 51, 54, 57, 60cm. I am 5’8” with a 30” inseam and the 54cm fits me perfect.

The included components are great for touring right out of the box. The Shimano Dura-Ace bar-end shifters are low maintenance and easy to fix on the go. If they do break, they’re also inexpensive to replace compared to other styles of shifters. (My friends shifter broke in a minor crash on his Cannondale T-1 and the cost to replace the broken part was almost $500. He was able to switch to bar-end shifters for under $100 USD – including labor.)

The wheel set on the Trek 520 is durable and able to take a heavy load even on mild trails, with Bontrager Race Lite Hard-Case 700x32c tires that are wide enough to add cushion yet able to keep good speed.

The bike also comes with a Bontrager Back Rack Deluxe (a rear rack) that is good for loads lighter than 20lbs.

The stock brakes hold their power and are able to stop your fully-loaded bicycle, even when traveling at high speeds and in downhill scenarios.

The Purchase

I went about purchasing this bike first by spending a good amount of time researching touring bikes online. After hours of research I had narrowed my choices to the Surly Long Haul Trucker and the Trek 520. My next step in purchasing the bike was trying to find a store that had one of these bikes in stock to test drive. I could not find any local stores that had the Surly Long Haul Trucker in stock. I quickly discovered that touring bicycles can be hard to find in many local bike shops.

After calling about 20 stores that carried Trek bicycles, I came across Helen’s Cycles in Santa Monica, CA that stocked the 520, and it just so happens they had my size! I took the bike for a test drive and loved the comfort and stability of the bike. I was sold! I was able to pick mine up in 2010 for just under $1,050 USD (including tax) due to some minor chips in the paint on the top tube.

The suggested retail price of the Trek 520 is a little steep in my opinion, because there are similar bikes of similar quality that sell for less. However, the 520 is specialty bicycle, which somewhat justifies its price.

Experience With The Bike & Upgrades for Long Distance Touring

I purchased my Trek 520 in the spring of 2010 with plans to use it as a touring bike, road bike and commuter. I had never owned a road bike before, as I was mainly an avid mountain biker at the time, so the Trek 520 had a completely different feel for me. After a few longer rides, however, I was hooked! I loved that I could cover 50-80 miles in a day without being exhausted.

After many long rides to train for my month-long Canada tour that I did in the summer of 2010, I invested in some upgrades. While the bike is set up for touring, I made some upgrades to meet my specific riding/touring needs. The biggest upgrade for comfort I have made was the saddle. The Trek 520 comes with a decent stock saddle, fine for 60-mile rides, but after doing a few 80-100 mile days in a row, I decided an upgrade was a worthy investment. After doing my research I decided on leather Selle An-Atomica . It is the best seat I have ever sat on! After proper adjustment and wear-in it feels like riding on air.

Soon after that I added Shimano 520 SPD pedals . Next, I installed a set of Kevlar lined Schwalbe Marathon Plus 700 x 35c tires . With the new tires I have only had one flat in 3,500 miles. My friend bought the same tires for his Cannondale touring bike and was able to ride over 6,000 miles on one set before replacing them. I also upgraded the stock fenders to SKS fenders . They give a lot better coverage for riding in the rain and dusty conditions.

The stock rear rack is good for carrying 20lbs or less. I carry my tent and all my gear on my bike while touring so I decided to upgrade to an Axiom rear rack and purchased Axiom Low-rider front racks to carry my 35-40 lbs worth of camping gear and clothes. To hold my gear I invested in the Axiom journey series panniers – front and back. Everything mounted very well, and the bike has sufficient braze-ons and welds for mounting heavy duty racks.

The one upgrade I have always thought about is lower crank gears. The stock gear ratio of 48/36/26 is a little high if you are using the bike to carry heavier loads on longer trips with mountains. My full load including the bike weighs in at close to 70lbs, while the bike itself weighs in at 27lbs. On long mountain passes, it sure would be nice to have a lower gear to switch into.

If I had to say one thing negative about the bike, I would say the paint job is not without its flaws. In 2010, when I purchased the bike, a rusty root-beer color was the only color option. For some, the color along might have been enough to turn them away from the bike. The brownish color of my bike has grown on me, however, and the metallic brownish/orange high gloss paint really stands out in the sun.

The problem that I have noticed, however, is that the metallic paint chips off easier than any other bike I have ever owned. An easily chipped paint job, of course, is not what you want in a touring bicycle that can be exposed to the elements for long periods of time. While the paint may be chipping, there isn’t a single spot or chip that has started to rust. You should also remember that the current models paint is different and I have not heard if it still suffers from paint chipping.

Would I Recommend The Trek 520 Touring Bike?

I would highly recommend this bike if you have the money to invest, and are serious about bike touring. You definitely get your moneys worth. The bikes durability, style and comfort definitely justify the price. I also get comments on the style of the bike frequently; a lot of people enjoy the classic look of it. This is the most comfortable bike I have ever ridden. The steel frame and geometry of the bike minimizes the bumpiest of roads and can take on some mild dirt trails – even when fully loaded.

Conclusion and Rating

Looking back I have had no regrets or any major technical issues with the Trek 520. I have also yet to come across any major complaints from fellow bikers that own this particular bicycle. On a Scale of 1 to 10, I would give this bike a 9. The durability of the paint and the fact that the bike is slightly overpriced when compared to similar bicycle models are the only things holding the 520 back from being a perfect 10. The Trek 520 is and will continue to remain a classic choice in the bicycle touring world.

About The Author: Justin Bernstein is a 23-year-old student at Cal State Channel Islands where he works part-time as a bicycle technician. Justin says he enjoys anything that has wheels and notes that bicycle touring has allowed him to see some amazing places and meet some great people. “I love touring by bike and plan to never stop riding!”

Justin Bernstein

40 thoughts on “ trek 520 – touring bicycle review ”.

I too have a 2003 520, has been an awsome bike…lots of miles touring with 0 problems. Great article!

I have someone telling me that a 30 year old trek 520 made in the USA is superior to a new one. What is your opinion?

ha. I don’t know about that.

I also love the 520, but there is or was for me toe wheel clip or what ever we call it when your shoe’s clip the front wheel…what do you think about using butterfly handle bars on the 520, with a 650 wheel you can add a little wider tire?

Rodney, I’m not quite sure I understand you. Are you saying that when you ride the Trek 520 that the front wheel clips the front of your toes when you turn? If so, that could indeed be the right of the bike… or it might just be the way you have the toe clips set up.

As for butterfly bars, this is a personal decision and it is quite a lot of work to change out the handlebars on a touring bicycle like this. If you want to make that change, then yes, it can be done. But the drop bars that come on the Trek 520 are great in my opinion and most people will be quite happy with them.

I had toe overlap….

I’d really like to get one of these for my own touring but they don’t seem to be available in the uk?

Yes, the Trek 520 is available in the UK. You will probably have to special order it, however. You just need to search for a Trek dealer in your area. You can do so by searching for a dealer on this page of the Trek website https://locator.trekbikes.com/locator/search?lang=en

It may be a good touring bike but as any Trek it is just ridiculously too short for tall people. I am 6.8″ and I would never buy Trek (except for Garry Fisher of course – shame they have a Trek label on it now…). So if you look closely you will see that the geometry of Trek bikes is really stupid where the tall people are concerned. They make some bikes up to size 25″ but still only about 10 cm longer then the 15″ version – what is that about. Plus you end up paying too much for the label, I’d rather go for Surly or something else.

I have enjoyed my 520 since 2010. I tour about 6,000 miles a tear and the 520 is very dependable and comfortable. The only negative has been the 3rd bottle holder. When you add the detachable fenders the 3rd bottle holder cannot be used because it hits the fender. I have recommended the 520 to others but it can be difficult to find in stock. Most bike stores want you to purchase before they order….without a test ride. If you do not like the bike you are stuck with it or you can return it but you are committed to buy something else.

Wow, thanks for your help there was actually a dealer 2 miles away. Going to make a trip down tomorrow.

The inability to use the third bottle cage is quite common. There just isn’t that much room under there. A normal 21 oz water bottle is too long. But the cage is still useful for other things. If you use a stove that feeds off of traditional liquid fuel bottles, you can fit a half-liter fuel bottle in the third cage. I have a half-liter storage bottle down there that holds a spare tube, rag, patches, and wrenches. It makes sense to put something heavy down there. It wouldn’t be a great place for an actual water bottle anyway–it’s difficult to access while riding and it tends to pick up a lot of road grit. This is the storage bottle that I use: https://www.amazon.com/Pro-Storage-Bottle-500cc/dp/B004MGICFS

“there are similar bikes of similar quality that sell for less” could you name some of them for us, the budget tourers? 🙂 I’m currently touring on an aluminum trek 7.3FX, is steel really much more suppler than alu?

Excellent review….I am in the process of looking around for a tourer, the top of my list was the Cannondale Touring but I understand these stopped being produced in 2010..Will be following your advise closely

Keep up the good work

Nice review. I picked up a 2010 520 (barely used) this March and put 1200 miles on it over the summer. Never a problem. I really like the metallic root beer color and haven’t had the chipping problems you experienced. The bike rides smooth and shifts smooth. I also put SKS fenders on mine as well as a Brooks B-17. I’m still on the Bontrager Hardcase Race Lite tires that came on it and have not had a flat yet. The updated gearing has the granny necessary for the steep 13-14% grades that we routinely face in our area. The longevity of this particular model speaks volumes. Maybe more have crossed the continent than any other single bike model.

The Trek store sized me and sold me a 57cm Trek 520. They said I was borderline between the 57 and the 54. After 3 years I have to say the bike is too small. I’m 5’9″, and to get it to fit right the seat has to be way up, and Trek had to order a new uncut fork to get the handlebars way up – to get almost level with seat. It looks funny. Another local bike store, that does not sell Trek, told me it looks too small. REI put my wife, at 5’4″ on a “medium” Novara Randonee touring bike (often compared to the Trek 520). Her bike is bigger than mine!

I think Trek sizing works for guys with really short legs, and people who like that “seat post up in the sky” look you see with racers. The old Trek 520s, with less compact geometry, look far better to my eye.

I’ll probably swap the parts to another frame. Big $ loss.

Other than that, it’s a great., flawless bike.

Howdy. 🙂 Nice review, but I’m not sure what sort of rack your 520 had to have come with to only carry up to 20 lbs. o.O That seems really low. The current model of the 520, which you have pictured at the top, comes with the “deluxe” back rack from Bontrager, which is rated to hold up to 25 kgs, or about 55 lbs (and even their smaller rack is rated for the same weight). Anyway, I’ve had my eye on the 520 for a while now, dreaming about the day I finally manage to get myself set up for touring! 🙂

I just bought the 520 and I did a lot of research before I made the purchase. I will stay in touch with all and tell you my thoughts as soon as get the bike this sunday.

I bought the Trek 520 this year for a 3 day tour through the Rockie Mountains. The bike performed well and was able to carry my 20 lb. panniers with ease. The steel frame was heavier than my other bikes but did not feel heavy riding. The smaller frame size fit my short torso although I had to raise the seat quite a bit for my long legs. That being said the 520 is the most comfortable bike I have ever ridden.

I purchased my Trek 520 about 20 years ago and used it for many touring trips. I have always taken good care of it, and today it still remains to be one of my favorite bikes to take day rides on. I paid about $500 for it 20 years ago and has proven to be a great buy.

In Europe Idid use for self supporting tours mind condition Cannondale 1000X . My brother try it and he was also hooked … When return to Canada I did buy new Trek 520 . About 20000 miles fully loaded touring on my trusted and comfortable burgundy red Trek 520 was poore pleasure and I do not complain at all. Set up: Brooks , Shimano SPD , Satori stem and stem riser , AC Lowrider , Axiom rack just slightly modified , Voyager heavy duty paniers front and rear + Voyager handlebar bag , ( you do not buy those quality anymore). Czech made Pigeon framebag is superior quality also so by Bilenky Bicycle Work installed S&S couplings for reason . This Trek 520 is last series proudly build in Wisconsin USA .

Thanks for the great review and information. The Trek 520 is on my short-list of bikes and this is helping me make up my mind!

Wondered if you still have the 520 or gotten rid of it? I see the CoMotion now with S&S couplers. I am purchasing a 520, and building it with components equal to the Americano, along with S&S couplers, a SON28 hub and Luxos U headlight. Your thoughts on this set up?

This bicycle review was written by a BicycleTouringPro.com reader named Justin Bernstein. I don’t own a Trek 520 and I never have.

You are correct about me owning a Co-Motion Pangea , however. The Pangea is the touring bicycle I have been riding since May of 2012.

I’ve never heard of anyone buying a Trek 520 and totally transforming it the way you say you plan to do. It sounds like a lot of work and money. Why did you decided to do this rather than just keep the Trek 520 the way it is… or rather than just buying a touring bicycle with the parts/components that you want?

I’d be interested in hearing how that hub works out for you and what you end up charging with it (besides the headlight).

This review reads too much like a brochure from Trek, at least the first half. Today’s 520 is a relatively more compact geometry than the original. My 2002 is a completely different bike than the current model in both geometry and stock components. Trek has finally figured out what parts a touring bike should have, however, for years they were putting a standard road triple (52/42/30). While it’s a solid bike, I’m critical of the idea that it hasn’t changed over the years. Also, given this review was written two years ago, I should mention that Trek is adding disc brakes for 2015 (mentioning this for the sake of anyone reading the above review and considering the 520).

Where are you getting that the rack (Back Rack Deluxe) can only hold 20#? Trek lists it at 50#. I’ve upgraded to this newer version and I’ve had no issues fully loaded with somewhere in the area of 50# of gear. It’s a well made rack.

I purchased a 2013 Trek 520 earlier this year and enjoy riding it regularly. The bike rides smooth and steady and, while not necessarily built for speed, can sail down the road quickly. I chose to replace the stock Bontrager seat with a Brooks Flyer (springed) saddle which is almost broken in now – it works great to reduce road vibrations. I added a Light and Motion headlight for night-time daylight and a Bontrager pannier which easily mounts to and disconnects from the back rack. This is the second Trek touring bike I have owned – I love it!

My 520 has over 46k mile on it. It’s a fine bike but I have one beef; the SD-7 brakes that came with it were noisy crap. On a wet loaded downhill I had to reach round to the drops to get any stopping power at all. I replaced the front brake with a Single Digit Ultimate and replaced both brake levers with Tektro RS520 levers. Braking is much better now although I couldn’t launch myself over the bars if I tried, they still require effort but I can now brake from the hoods. If I replace it I’ll get the disc brake version.

I bought a new green 2015, without the disc brakes. Love the ride. Very stable. Digging the bar end shifters. I certainly am not doing well with the forward position. I added a Dimension stem extender that raised the bars about 3 inches and that had helped, but I still need a shorter stem. I ordered the Bontrager Elite in the much shorter 7 rise, 70mm. Hope it will take away the pain in the lower part of my neck in back. But if need be, I will add either the tried and true Nitto Albatross I have been using for sometime on a old GT Nomad hybrid, or a set of Jones bars since they are back and will pair well with the stem color. Otherwise, I do hope to make the drops work.. even consider some wider ones along with the shorter stem and any needed stacking like I see on many Surly LHT bikes. Planning a Fit at a bike shop to rule out my options.

I currently have a Trek 8000 mountain bike. For riding around town, neck pain is my main complain. I also have a trike that totally gets rid of any seat or neck pain but it is only good for perfect roads. I am considering Trek 520 and would be interested to know about the changes to the stem that you made to get remedy you neck pain.

I had similar neck and shoulder pain riding in a peloton with this bike, particularly on roads that are not great quality. The underlying cause was that the hoods don’t have much padding (like most bikes), but you need to rest your hands here to brake or use the drops the entire time. The solution was to install in-line brake levers so I could also brake from the padded handle bars while drafting. The levers were ~$30 and are cheap/easy to install when you are replacing your brake cables and bar tape at the same time.

I’ve ordered a 2015 disc model which I’m pickng up this week. Planning an epic tour from Ireland to Turkey and will enjoy training rides around N. Ireland. Slightly concerned about the “small” sizing of the bike but hopeful that the 57′ will fit my 5.10 height.

Hey Darren, im a huge fan

Im planning a long trip to South America, I preffer the less travel or off road path. Im from Colombia and here the obly two touring bikes avaliable are the Giant Thoughroad slr 1 and Specialized Sequoia. Im not sure about this bikes, because the giant have an aluminium frame and carbon fork and the Sequoia have a 48/32 crank. My dream bike is the Surly Troll but is out of my reach. What can I do?

It is possible to have a bicycle shipped to you from the United States or elsewhere in the world. It’s just more expensive when you do this, of course.

After getting my Surly LHT stolen two weeks before my XC trip… A friend of a friend got me a brand new Trek 520 for a good price. Along with the bike being stolen (I live in NYC), the racks went with it… so two comments I’d like to make.

1. During my 5,019 mile ride, I used the stock rear rack and only the rear rack the whole way to stow everything (panniers, tent, sleeping bag and sleeping mat). Per Adventure Cycling Association, my total weight (bike included) was 89lbs. The only issue I had with the rack was after getting off a rocky road, the rack started to squeak. I simply tightened the screws and no more squeak. So I’d hardly say that was a problem.

2. I believe this was the article that solidified my decision to go with the LHT and Trek 520 was my back up option while I price compared stores in the area. Having ridden both bikes, I would say they are just about the same, comfort wise. Jumping on the Trek 520 for the first time felt no different than the LHT. The difference may be the size and how Trek and Surly measure their frame size. I got them both in a 54 and for whatever reason the Trek felt just a little more comfortable. Whether it’s because it was bigger or smaller by a fraction I am not sure.

Anyway, Darren your resources were an incredible help to making me feel comfortable before leaving for my first touring trip. I am not the person to just jump on a bike and leave, so I can’t thank you enough!!!

I purchased a 54cm Trek 520 in September of 2015 and have put over 1500 miles on it to date. I ride on my days off and have done two over night trips. The second trip I took was around 110 mile round trip and about 20 miles was gravel roads. I do wish Trek would design the lower water bottle holder so it would clear with fenders. I recently replaced the the tires after four flats on the original tires. Little things I am changing to fit my riding styles to make the bike more comfortable for me. Over all I am very pleased with the bike and am happy with my purchase. I will be using this bicycle on my New Mexico trip in September of 2018. I know this is along way off but I have other obligations that come first. I am however doing small trips here in Mo. and one trip to my uncles in Oklahoma. I am also getting ready to do the entire Katy Trail in Missouri. Other than the flats I have had zero issues with my 520 but I am only 5’8″ and quite stocky . I would recommend this bike to anyone in my size range.

I considered the 520 because it was a light touring bicycle and a Trek – however, I opted for a Jamis Aurora (more bang for the buck) and have not been disappointed. I added a front Surly rack and clipless pedals – the bike came with fenders, good 9-speed triple crank gearing, bar end shifters, and a rear rack. When shopping, I noticed many shops in the Baltimore area did not stock steel frame touring bicycles. After riding my touring bike around – I seem to prefer the ride of steel frame bicycles.

Hello. I’m looking into purchasing a 2018 Trek 520 for bike touring. I have a Specialized CrossTrail that I use for touring and it is very limited for what I can haul. I took this bike for a road test and it was wonderful. It was very responsive and comfortable, indeed. I liked the fact that it was a 27 speed. The multiple, lower gears, are a plus for heavy load climbing. The bike dealer is asking 1100.00 dollars for this Trek. Am I getting a good deal, thanks!

I have a Trek 520. Bought in 2004, upgraded to Rohloff rear gear hub and schmidt generating front hub in 2010. Repainted at the same time. Does about 6000km pa. Brilliant.

Had mine for 7 years now, best bike I ever owned 🙂

It seems you can buy a good used steel frame and build up the bike to your choosing just fine. Just check out a bike shop which sells used bikes of on CL for old steel, many with classic lugs.

I have a 1984 Miyata 210 which I bought new and it is in fine shape, albeit ridden very infrequently as I have a number of bikes. It still has the original Araya wheels and are still perfect after all these years, original brake pads too! I have thought of adding a Rohloff internal gearing and taking it for an extended tour.

As for the Trek 520, they are good, them and Surly LHT’s are everywhere, can’t go wrong with either.

Comments are closed.

Username or email address  *

Password  *

Remember me Log in

Lost your password?

• MAGAZINE OFFERS
• BIKE INSURANCE
• Best Products
• Maintenance
• Accessories
• Long-Term Reviews
• BikeRadar Podcast
• First Look Friday
• Bike of the Week
• Tech Features
• Routes and Rides
• Bike Galleries
• BikeRadar Bargains
• Buyer's Guides
• Fitness & Training
• Sizing & Fit
• Mountain Biking UK
• Cycling Plus
• Bike of the Year 2024

Trek 520 Disc first ride review

BikeRadar gets world’s first test of Trek’s revamped steel tourer

Robert Smith / Immediate Media

Simon Withers

The Wisconsin-based company has been making its steel 520 bike since 1983 — making it a couple of years younger than Specialized’s Allez and a decade or so younger than the Dawes Galaxy, probably the standard bearer for steel touring bikes, at least in Britain — and started out as an all-round road bike. But in the years since 1983 the bike has flitted between all-rounder and full-on tourer.

The 2019 incarnation is very much the latter beast, having gained even more touring-friendly features than the 2018 model, and it now has some serious expedition chops to its name.

• Best gravel and all-road bikes of 2018
• This Pinion-equipped touring wagon is unashamedly practical

Trek 520 Disc spec as tested

• Frame : TIG-welded butted chromoly steel
• Fork : Alloy disc touring with lowrider mounts
• Handlebar : Bontrager Comp VR-C
• Stem : Bontrager Elite ‘Blendr’ with computer and light mounts
• Seatpost : Bontrager 27.2mm alloy, 12mm offset
• Saddle : Bontrager Evoke 1.5
• Shifters : Shimano Sora
• Front derailleur : Shimano Sora
• Rear derailleur : Shimano Alivio rear
• Brakes : TRP Spyre C2.0 mechanical disc
• Brake levers : Shimano Sora
• Cassette : Shimano HG200, 11-36, 9-speed
• Chain : KMC X9
• Chainset : Shimano Alivio triple 48/38/26T
• Bottom bracket : Shimano external cartridge bearing
• Wheels : Bontrager Affinity TLR tubeless-ready 36-hole rims, Shimano M475 hubs
• Tyres : Bontrager H1 Hard-case Ultimate, 700x38mm with reflective sidewall
• Extras : Bontrager 15kg-max capacity front rack and 25kg-capacity rear rack
• Weight : 13.97kg (57cm including racks but not pedals)

Trek’s 520 ups its touring chops for 2019

Most notably for 2019 the 520 has gained a 15kg-capacity Bontrager front rack and a much lower bottom gear — the all-important one — compared with the 2018 model. It has also moved from bar-end shifters to more familiar Sora STI levers.

Trek’s original 520 was lugged, whereas today’s model has a neatly TIG-welded chromoly steel frame with an alloy thru-axled fork; the rear wheel has a standard quick-release.

There’s a peg at the rear of the head tube to fix a frame pump under the top tube and a chain peg on the driveside seatstay. There are three bottle bosses on the down tube, allowing you to fix the bottle cage at different points, and further fittings on the fork, so you can adjust the height of the rack or carry more bottle cages if you forego it altogether.

Triple the fun

Most significantly for 2019, and a sign of its more adventurous ambitions, is that the gearing has gone even lower than before. Make no mistake, this is a good thing.

If your bike is carrying a 70kg rider (okay, nearer 75kg in my case) and approaching 40kg of kit, and you reach the bottom of a long or/and steep hill, you can never have a bottom gear that’s too low. This is where the very-rarely-seen-on-a-road-bike triple chainset comes in.

Trek should also be praised for making it a 48/36/26t Alivio mountain bike chainset, with a teeny-tiny 26t inner chainring, rather than a Shimano 105 road bike 50/39/30 or similar.

Trek really makes the most of this with the saucer-sized 36t sprocket, which delivers a very low bottom gear (under 20in). The 48x11 top gear (around 120in) is more than adequate for powering down hills, and the Sora gear lever and Alivio rear derailleur pairing works well, even with the large jumps necessitated by the 9-speed 11-36 cassette.

Is that bailout/granny gear too small? Not if you find yourself on an unsurfaced road at the foot of a 2,000ft / 600m peak, which happened to me touring in New Zealand years ago.

The front thru-axles help you get the most from the TRP Spyre brakes, which are among the best mechanical disc brakes around with the advantage of being easier to fix and fettle than hydraulics when off the beaten track. Okay, they require more effort through the brake levers than even low-end hydraulic disc brakes, but they work in all weather conditions.

That said, the 36-spoke Bontrager Affinity rims give the impression they’d survive the apocalypse. The 38mm Bontrager Hard-Case tyres ride well on tarmac and were fine on the light gravel of my local canal towpath, and the rims will take wider rubber too, so you can fit more gravel-specific or off-road-flavoured tyres.

Go low, go slow, go long…

The geometry is touring leisurely, with long chainstays, a wheelbase well over a metre and a slack head-tube angle. This creates a very stable, comfortable, semi-upright riding position, ideal for both touring and commuting.

Contact points are good and you can rack up those miles comfortably, albeit slowly. Where it really comes into its own is in its ability to carry considerable quantities of kit, which is where the super-low gearing helps.

My 16-mile commute ends with a few hundred metres of climbing at 10–12 percent, which usually requires out-of-the-saddle honking or even zig-zagging on the steepest section.

Not with the Trek 520. Even with bulging panniers I could stay seated in the bottom gear and spin-spin-spin. On a tourer you want to twiddle and maintain a high cadence rather than crank a knee-crunching gear. If you are loading the 520 up to the gunwales, split the load between the 25kg capacity rear rack and 15kg front, which will balance the handling better.

Trek 520 Disc early verdict

The 2019 is £100 / $215 more expensive than last year’s model, but I think it justifies the extra cost (in the UK at least) if you fancy tackling some full-on, continent-traversing treks.

The front rack ups carrying capacity to the max, with more bosses for greater adaptability, and while Sora STI may nominally be a lower spec than 2018’s bar-end shifters, the move to a much lower bottom gear more than makes up for that.

Upping tyre spec from 32mm to 38mm adds weight, yes, but increases comfort, which can be further added to by going tubeless or to even chunkier rubber.

If you carry heavy loads you could use Trek’s 520 for tough commuter runs but the 520 is most at home on the wide-open road. Thirty-five years of history so far, and we reckon you could get a lifetime of trekking adventure on this well-specced, attractively priced bike.

Share this article

Contributor

• Terms & Conditions
• Subscribe to our magazines
• Manage preferences

2005 Trek 520

• Serial: WL3175616
• Manufacturer: Trek
• Name: Trek 520 Touring
• Primary colors: Red
• Frame size: 57CM
• Wheel diameter: 700 C
• Frame Material: Steel
• Handlebar type: Drop

Distinguishing features

Trek butted Cro-Moly Touring bike

Frame and fork

Additional parts, drivetrain and brakes.

• Headset Cane Creek BL, sealed
• Saddle Bontrager Race Luxe, hollow Cro-Moly rails Custom (red) lycra seat cover
• Aero Bars/Extensions/Bar Ends aero bars added to bike. Elbow rests for the aero bars have custom made red lycra covers. (LeMond)
• Front Rack Front: "low rider" rack (Blackburn)
• Computer VDO M3 bike computer
• Fender fibre plastic, black color, front and rear
• Handlebar black color cork handle bar tape
• Lights Front: Lumina OLED 1200 Boost Rear: Hotshot Cygolite LED
• Seatpost Serial number is engraved on seat post hidden in the seat tube.
• Water Bottle Cage 2 cages, blue anodized aluminum
• Cog/Cassette/Freewheel SRAM 970 11-32, 9 speed
• Pedals Shimano 520, clip
• Front Shifter Front chain-ring shifter was relocated from the bar end to the down tube (Shimano)
• Rear Brake Custom made cantilever brake cable supports were added to this bike
• Chainrings VXM, red color, 50T and 40T
• Derailleur Deore XT (Shimano)
• Wheel Rims are 700 cm, Mavic A319, silver color (Mavic)

A note about Trek road bike model numbers: in general, higher model numbers mean higher original prices. This is especially true of models within a particular year.

1993+ RETAIL PRICES FOR TREKS

Suggested retail prices for Treks from 1993 to current are included in the specifications at BikePedia.com . These are listed under "Sugg Retail" for each bike. This database is a great resource.

The Trek Bike Archives , covering 2003 and newer Treks, also contains suggested retail prices.

LISTING OF TREK RETAIL PRICES BY MODEL AND YEAR

Visitors to this site have submitted the following pricing information for various Trek models at the time they were new. The prices are a combination of list prices and selling prices. (If you have any pricing on Trek steel road bike models, please send it along so it can be added here.)

WHAT IS MY USED TREK WORTH? (If "PRICELESS!" is not sufficiently accurate for you.)

eBay.com is the best practical guide. It can tell you what similar bikes recently sold for on eBay. Try search/ advanced search/ check "completed items only". This way, you get the final prices paid. Search for words like "Trek road" with words to exclude "aluminum carbon". You also can search more specifically, such as for "Trek 400". You might need to try for a few weeks to find a bike similar to yours, if it is not a common model.

To compare a local sale to an eBay sale, you should add the cost of shipping to the eBay price. A low value bike can be hard to sell on eBay for top dollar if the bike is to be shipped, as that can add $50 or more to the price.

Craigslist.org can provide some information about current prices. However, these are asking prices, not the actual price for which the bike was sold. One can search by region on the Craigslist.org site. One can search for an item on Craigslist overall (not just by region). Use a search engine (Google or Yahoo etc.) and include "Craigslist" as the first keyword. Follow this by what you are looking for. For example "Craigslist Trek 760".

A very rough measure of current selling price is to multiply the original selling price by a percentage. See the price information above for prices of many Treks when new. For bikes 1976 to about 1983, one can use a range of 40% to 70% for a bike. For bikes from about 1984 to 1990, one can use 33% to 50% of the original selling price. This is for bikes with good to excellent paint and in good to excellent overall condition. Condition is very important. A bike in mint condition will sell well above these ranges, perhaps at or above the original price when new. A bike in poor condition, especially one with significant rust inside and out, has little value.

The percentage for selling frames is higher than for bikes because the frames are less outdated than old components. For frames 1976 to 1983, one can use a range of 40% to 100%. For frames from about 1984 to 1990, one can use 33% to 80% of the original selling price. This is for frames in good to excellent overall condition.

The bike values above are useful only if the potential buyer is a person who appreciates a vintage lightweight or specifically, a vintage Trek. A vintage road bike offered at a garage sale might never be sold, even for a ridiculously low price, because it is unlikely the right buyer will come along. See Selling Suggestions for help in finding the right buyer.

Value can vary by season . Road bikes typically sell for more money and more quickly in the Spring and early Summer. An exception is for local sales in regions that don't have cold or rainy Fall and Winter seasons. Another exception is high end collector bikes, which tend to be season independent.

SMALL VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHT BIKES SELL FOR LESS?

Smaller vintage road frames/bikes often do not sell for as much as a larger version of the same frame. This is true of the 21” (54cm) size and especially the 19” (48cm) frames. Nineteen inch frames/bikes can sell at a discount of up to 40% over their larger brethren. The lesser value is easily demonstrated; for example, by looking at eBay selling prices. (An exception to this general rule is for classic French and Italian bikes, which are highly valued by [older] Japanese collectors.)

Why would this be? Certainly Trek sold bikes of these sizes to willing buyers in the late 1970s and early to mid 1980s at the same price as for larger bikes. There must have been the right number of smaller men, women and kids to buy them. Are Americans that much bigger now? A recent scientific study says no. Certainly most kids, as they grow up and need larger bikes, will pass through these size ranges.

I believe older bikes are bought and kept by people interested in fixing or working on them. These owners need a bit of expertise to get the bikes properly back on the road or keep them on the road (or even just to keep them in a collection). It also takes effort and knowledge to locate replacement parts. New riders tend to buy new bikes and only slowly (if at all) learn how to repair them. For parents to buy a used bike for their (smaller) children, requires that the parents be bike savvy, which eliminates lots of potential small bike users. Bike repair and maintenance generally do not interest women (there are major exceptions to this rule), who are a major fraction of people who would use the smaller bikes.

Even if a person wanted to have a shop maintain their classic Nuovo Record, Super Record, or SunTour Superbe-equipped bike, the shops with that knowledge are rare and the parts cannot be bought from their typical suppliers.

The good news, for those of us built close to the ground, is that we can buy vintage lightweight bikes at favorable prices.

Brochures | Price Lists and Values | Trek History | Trek Timeline | Serial Numbers Component Dates | Gallery | Contact | Buy/Sell Suggestions Refurbish/Upgrade | Bike Resources | Home

*Trek is a trademark of Trek Bicycle Corporation, Waterloo, WI

All copyrights in the TREK brochures, pricelists, owner's manuals and photographs displayed on this website are the sole property of Trek Bicycle Corporation, Waterloo, Wisconsin.

All materials in this site not copyrighted by others are Copyright © 2001-2014 Skip Echert Web Associates , All rights reserved.

Adventure Cycling Association Forum

Your username and password for these discussion forums are unique to the forums. Your forum login information is separate from your My Adventure Cycling login information. Also, please note that your login information for the forums is not connected to your Adventure Cycling membership number. We apologize for any inconvenience caused. We have blocked registrations from several countries because of the large quantities of spam that originate there. If the forum denies your legitimate registration, please ask our administrator for an exception. Send an email to [email protected] and we will follow up with you.

• Adventure Cycling Association Forum »
• Bicycle Travel »
• Classifieds (Moderator: ACA-Admin ) »
• 2005 Trek 520 With Campy Ergo 21"

Author Topic: 2005 Trek 520 With Campy Ergo 21"  (Read 8297 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Indianacharlie

• Road Warrior
• View Profile
• © Copyright 1997-2024 Adventure Cycling Association SMF 2.0.19 | SMF © 2021 , Simple Machines

Page created in 0.196 seconds with 23 queries.

• 520 Disc Frameset

• ALL (67 Forums)
• WHEELS & TIRES
• SPECIALIZED
• CYCLOCROSS BIKES
• TIRES & WHEELS

Trek 2000 520 Older Touring Bike

touring, Touring Mix components, Trek fork

• USER REVIEWS

Stable, comfortable, strong, dependable, great ride, works well for everything

Slightly heavy? None really

I found this bike in my ex gf's dad's backyard, sans wheels, in a pile of junk. Somebody had thrown it away and he had picked it up. I never figured out why, as there was absolutely nothing wrong with it. It's a 2000 model. I got it some Mavic Ksyrium Equipes and threw some Kenda Cross Plus 38c's and an 11x32 PG-850 cassette on it, and it hasn't needed anything but brakepads, chains, and cassettes since. I've probably ridden it 10,000 miles at least. I keep trying out other bikes, but this thing is just the best all-around bike I can find for commuting, touring, adventuring on mixed terrain, rides like the D2R2, and grocery-getting. The only things I don't use it for are fast road rides (I have a Ti Habanero for that) and singletrack (I have a Trek 8500 for that), but it's definitely the bike I ride the most, probably by an order of magnitude. What a great random find! I'm so happy with this bike. Sometimes I consider getting a Rivendell or something, but I think the improvement over this bike would be incremental and not worth it.... and nobody's going to steal this one, with how beat-up it looks by now :)

finish; durability; ride quality; paint

can't think of any

I bought my 520 in 1993 with 10% chopped of the new price. It is a dark green version that came deore LX equipped with 50-40-30 front and 12-24 cogs.The bike has travelled many miles through the south of france over many mountains including Galibier and Alpe d'Huez. It was a bit heavy , but a tremendous good bike for descents. (stable with wheelbase some 5 cm more than a roadracer) The original wheels were replaced first, then the drivetrain and the steering. It now sports a flat bar with unique shifters. Apart from a few scratches, the paint is still as new; perhaps the best finish ever on a bike. Dura-ace components fitted where possible. Wheels are currently fitted with Rigida (bom-proof) dpx rims.

Similar Products Used:

Giant TCR; Bianchi 1885; Trek OCLV 5500 2003

The ride is fantastic and the upright posture are perfect for long commutes or touring.

All stock saddles suck.

I've ridden several RAGBRAI tours and commute 45 miles 2 - 3 times a week. I've done this for years on a Cannondale road bike. The problem with the road bike was that I felt like I was beaten with a board after 60 - 70 miles in the saddle. The 2007 Trek 520 solved this problem on the first ride! Now miles are only limited by the time I have to spend on the ride. The forgiving steel frame and the "giant" 700x32c tires make it ride like dream. I hesitated buying the bike for months because of the bar-end shifters but the adjustment was complete in the first few miles.

Scott MTB with 1.25 inch slicks and Cannondale R600

Strength of frame, paintwork, fantastic tyre clearance

Firm ride in the rear

1993 model? Bought as-new second-hand in 1995 and still riding it. Done over 10,000km of loaded touring and at least as much commuting and light touring. The frame is 2" too small but the top tube is the right length for me and the extra crotch clearance is a godsend when the going gets rough. The handling of this (lugged) model strikes a balance between the demands of touring and commuting - whereas the more stable geometry of the welded frame introduced around 1996 makes for a better loaded tourer, but at the expense of quick handling when lightly- or unladen. The welded frame had a more subtle rear fork and gives a softer ride than mine, and also has braze-ons for low-riders (mine doesn't). I've made numerous equipment changes over the years, and swap out tyres and chainrings when switching between commuting and loaded touring. I'm impressed that I can run any 700C tyre I can buy on this bike, with ample clearance for mudguards. I'm also sold on bar-end shifters, which can be operated while you've got a thickly-gloved hand full of food or map. The rear rack had to go (couldn't fit my panniers) and the cantilever brakes never worked well - V-brakes fixed that. The brake lever springs died in 2003. The paint has an enamel base that is very resilient. The lateral stiffness necessary for loaded touring helps for those commuting sprints from the traffic lights, and I can track-stand on it, so I love riding this bike to work. Photo here: http://www.users.bigpond.com/moblet/Places/Images/Tibetan%20family%20on%20Daxue%20Shan.jpg

Previously toured on (steel) road & mtn bikes. Also ride good steel road bikes.

Fast, strong, fairly affordable, great looks, useful in many situations. The 520 has an extremely loyal fan base. It is very well liked by many riders of all types and once you ride one, you'll be a fan too. My 1998 model has never let me down. I have ridden it in suburban Orlando, fl, a small Iowa town, RAGBRAI, off road many times, Mesa, AZ, open desert, Wisconsin's Elroy- Sparta trails, Harmony, Minnesota Trails, and now to work and about. NO problems and always brings a smile to my face.

On my 1998 520 the Shimano LX cantilevers are pretty worthless. I plan on upgrading to some XTR v-brakes soon.

This bike is simply the best touring bike and makes an all around great bike. I use it to commute, race, even off road because my Trek 6700 was stolen a few months ago. The 520 is a fast bike. Mine is stock, and have never had any troubles except with the brakes (Shimano LX cantilever) they have no power, and a bad lever feel. Trek now uses v-brakes. This bike is bullet proof too. The other day I was flying across this open desert, and come around a corner to find a chain fence right in my way. I coundn't stop and prayed for the best, and I pulled the chain clean out of the concrete wall! All that happened to the 520 was a couple of scratches to the headtube. Great all around bike, and you can find one at a great price. Plus you get Trek Quality, good looks, and a close dealer.

This is my first road bike.

Tough, fast, smooth. Good components.

Cannot be upgraded to threadless stem.

The moment I tried out this bike (even though it was a small size for me), I knew I was going to buy it. I was sold after thirty seconds on it. Extremely smooth, fast yet stable, powerful brakes, cool shifters. I bought a good-fitting, larger size three days later. It's been nearly two years since then, and I haven't once regretted buying it. Some people think it is over-geared and say they would prefer a 44-32-22 chainring combination, but I disagree. This bike easily doubles as a performance road bike (it's fast and comfortable, yes?), and with large diameter wheels, thin tires, and drop bars, you need (and want) big gears so you can go fast. After all, how many huge hills that the 30:30 ratio can't deal with will you be climbing anyway? The one adjustment I would make, in order to solve (at least partially) the supposed gearing problem, would be to add a 34T ninth cog. The 2001 and 2002 models go up to 32T, but 34T would be even better. All in all, a very nice bike. It's very efficient, cuts down a lot on road chatter, climbs and descends well, handles well. An excellent touring companion (only a little on the quiet side). Solid, sturdy ride -a car cut me off and I crashed: the frame was all right. The paint chipped in two or three places, a crank arm got scratched, and that was all. I, however, required seven stitches. Component-wise, it's a very good value - people are amazed that I got a True Temper frame, Deore LX rear derailleur and hubs, Icon parts, and Avid brakes for only $1200 (regular price is $1500, but I got it on sale). Unfortunately, I missed an opportunity to buy it for only $1000 two months earlier at the same store, but oh well. Spilled milk. One "fault" I can find is that the handlebar & stem part of the bike (including shifters and brake levers) is too attractive and rare: someone stole mine and it cost $300 to replace everything. The over-attractiveness is not a serious problem though (is it ever?). :) I still haven't really gotten over having such a beautiful bike, and I sometimes find myself admiring it. The only problem I can think of stems (no pun intended) from the fact that the headtube is 1" instead of the now-standard 1&1/8", so there can be no upgrade to a threadless stem. According to the store people, it "could" be done, but some special (read: expensive) insert is needed, together with a new fork. Unless you have money

Strong frame and wheels. Good components. Fast. V-Brakes!!!(stops on a dime). Nice colour

Front chain ring is too big which is unnecessary. That's it :)

During the 2000 summer, I was commuting 60km to and from work on my Raleigh Tarantula and it was awefully. I also used this bike as a touring bike and found it too tiring. So I decided to get myself a decent commuter/ touring bike. I searched through local bike stores and catalogues and found that the Trek 520 was the best choice. Well, there were not many to choose from other than the Canondale T2000, the Lightspeed Blueridge and the Norco Terrene. The 520 was affordable, solid and had decent components. The only downside is that the gearing is too high. The 52 teeth chainring is hardly used. I cannot believe that other bike companies equipe their bikes with cantilever brakes and now caliper. I cannot understand the logic behind that when v-brakes provide the strongest braking power. How do you stop with caliper brakes when you're travelling down hill with a fully loaded bike? Bottom line is that this bike rocks. This can take potholes and the wheels remain true. It is fast with little rolling friction and superb shifting and handling.

My first touring bike

A fine, affordable touring bike. A real old fashioned randoneur

Not widely available in Europe

Since I ride long distances, sometimes off-road, I always have ridden mountainbikes. With racks front and rear, and (semi)slicks. After a serious crash, I decided to change to a real touring bike. Or a Cannondale T2000, or a Trek. There is little alternative, or you shoult built one yourselve. I choose a Trek 520, 1997. Only thing was, it was a bit small. Putting a larger seatpost did the trick, but it did look not very nice. The ride though, was SUPER! The bigger wheels were rolling so much better than those of a mountainbike. I rode on it for one year, and even on the bad Eastern German roads, the fully-loaded bike feld like a fish in the water. I made some modifications; put my own saddle on it; a classic Rolls, the longer seatpost ( a cheap Acor, does what it supose to do), thicker tires (Vredesteins), Blackburn front and rear racks and some SPD’s. Rest was standart. The bike is a very good touring bike, and cheap compared to a Cannondale, not to mention the custom build ones. I liked it very much, unfortunaly it was stolen after a year or so. This gave me the oportunity to buy a new one, in the right size, but in that year the bike was not in production, for Europe. In very thrilled to see they make the bikes again (I like the old fashioned randoneurs, not those pseudo-trekking bikes, with multi-position-butterfly bars), but unfortuanly I did buy a titanium mountainbike, which I moddified for touring, and was espected to ride for the rest of my life…. Now I looked at Trek’s site, and I must admit I am thinking of buying this beaty again. I like the bar-end shifters, only change the brakes; Magura HS66 are the best!

Super cushy ride, really nice components for the money, feels like it'll last forever, and (I think) it's kinda' handsome.

I would have preferred a taller stem to sit me more upright, but that's probably 'cuz I'm just getting back into bikes after a long absence.

On my first day of ownership I dropped the bike against a utility pole, scratching the top tube. And I'm one of those really anal guys when it comes to scratches on my machinery. I emailed Trek to inquire about getting some touch-up paint, and was pleasantly surprised that they offered to send me some right away and at no charge! I wasn't expecting this from such a large company. Unfortunately, they sent me the wrong color, but it's the thought that counts. I've been really happy with my decision to buy the 520. It's exceeded all my expectations so far. I would recommend one to anyone looking for a comfortable road bike that will likely last for years, and who isn't too obsessed with having an ultra-lightweight machine. And kudos to Trek for their excellent customer service.

Schwinn Supersport GLX

Bomb proof frame & components, stable handling, steel frame ride quality

I feel that Trek should have spec'd a mountain triple crank up fron rather than the 105 crank that comes stock. I rode with a good 70 lbs of gear and found the low gear not low enough and the large chainring was virtually unused. Putting an LX crank on would have given me a better range of useable gears and saved my knees on some of the long climbs I rode.

I was originally going to buy A Bruce Gordon Rock N Road Tour but couldn't convince myself to spend that kind of money on a touring specific bike. I found the Trek 520 to be the best deal for the money and bought it. I rode it for a couple weeks in Alaska and then took it from Vancouver B.C. to the Mexican border along the coast and was very glad I chose it. I carried about 70 lbs of gear and the bike handled it with no problems. Handling was great and the parts pick (Shimano LX & 105, Ultegra bar-end shifters, Avid brakes, Bontrager rims, Continental Top Touring tires) was functional and reliable. In about 3,000 miles of use I had no mechanicals and didn't even have 1 flat tire. I rotated the tires half way through and they are still in decent condition. This bike was everything you want a touring bike to be - stable and reliable. It isn't flashy but it gets the job done. I highly recommend it. As mentioned above I would put a mountain crank on it for a better range of useable gears but that would be the only change.

Get the latest road bike reviews, news, race results, and much more by signing up for the Roadbikereview Newsletter

Hot Deals See All Hot Deals >>

Get the latest roadbike reviews, news, race results, and much more by signing up for the Roadbikereview Newsletter

• EDITORIAL REVIEWS
• CLASSIFIEDS

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

• TERMS OF USE
• PRIVACY POLICY
• ADVERTISING

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2024 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.

• Rider Notes

2004 Trek 520

A steel frame gravel bike with upper mid-range components and rim brakes.

For This Bike

View more similar bikes →

A bike with lower gearing will be easier to ride up steep hills, while a higher top end means it will pedal faster down hills.

Similar Bikes

(descending)

Add custom gearing

Last updated June 29 Not listed for 2,508 days