Author Topic: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW  (Read 4910 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ryo69

2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« on: March 15, 2010, 02:42:54 pm »
Hi all!

I'm looking for my first road/touring bike after a few years of mountain biking and came across a "new" 2002 Trek 520 at one of the LBSs around here.  Apparently I'm the only 30" inseam aspiring tourist in the central Illinois area because this bike has never been out of the store.

A few quick questions I had for the experts:

1.  What should I expect to pay for this bike? 

They're asking $699 US, but I thought I could work the price down a bit further.

2.  What are the strengths/weaknesses of this bike? 

Since the bike is eight years old, I figured at least a few of you would have some real world experience on this bike.

3.  What should I expect to replace on this bike?

If a bike has sat for as long as this one, I assumed that I'd need new rubber.  Other than that, what technology is/was on this bike that I should reasonably expect to replace?  Shifters?  Chainrings?  Derailleurs?

Any assistance you could give would be a big help.  I'm sort of flying blind into the touring world, so I could use some sagely advice.  Thanks!

Offline John Nelson

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2010, 04:35:36 pm »
Yes, I'd say there's plenty of room for wiggle in the price considering its age. It's clearly not moving fast. But you might be better to negotiate for thrown-in merchandise rather than price. Maybe a front rack, panniers, water bottle cages, helmet, blinky light for the rear, a dozen spare tubes, some clothes, chain lube, better fenders, a pump, a bike computer, shoes, etc.

Not much on a bicycle deteriorates just sitting there indoors. You might not need to replace anything. If you plan to do a lot of loaded and hilly touring, you might want lower gears. Otherwise, it might be fine as is. Ride it for a while (at least six months, maybe even a few years) and see how it goes. See how well you can adapt to the saddle.

What else you might want to do depends on what you plan to do with it.

Offline whittierider

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2010, 05:17:25 pm »
+1.  If it's sitting indoors and not even in the sun, even the tires may still be fine, although tire technology has improved since then.  There's not nearly as much profit margin in bikes as there is in the accessories, so like John says, it's more reasonable to expect the "deals" on the latter.  If you look into the history of a given bike, sometimes you'll find that the older one is better.  For example, the bike I ride most is a 2005 Trek 5000, with an OCLV carbon frame made in Wisconsin.  Back then, the 5000 was closely related to the Madones.  It no longer is, because the very next year, the manufacturing of the 5000 went to China, a cheaper form of frame was used, and cheaper components were installed, all in an effort to get their low-end carbon offering down to a much more affordable price point.  To this day, the 5000 is a lesser-quality bike than it was in 2005.  I don't know that this is particularly the case with the 520-- I'm just saying it might be good to look into it before automatically concluding that somehow it's not as good just because it's from an earlier year and should be heavily discounted.  The 520 has been a popular touring bike for a long time, with very few changes over the years.  I just looked at it on Trek's website and I see they're still using 9-speed, which I like because 9-speed chains and cassettes are far cheaper and last longer than than 10-speed.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2010, 05:23:21 pm by whittierider »

Offline DaveB

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2010, 10:12:50 pm »
 
Quote
I just looked at it on Trek's website and I see they're still using 9-speed, which I like because 9-speed chains and cassettes are far cheaper and last longer than than 10-speed.
They are probably using 9-speed because the largest cog Shimano offers on their 10-speed cassettes is a 28T.  To get the more common touring large cog of 32 or 34T you have to use an MTB cassette and they are only available in 9-speed.   

Offline Ryo69

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #4 on: March 16, 2010, 12:05:10 pm »
Thanks for the advice.  I didn't really think about angling for some gear.  That may save me some money in the long run anyway.  I'll post back if I end up with the bike and let everyone know how I fared in the deal.  Thanks!

Offline dab

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #5 on: March 16, 2010, 02:19:07 pm »
Quote
I just looked at it on Trek's website and I see they're still using 9-speed, which I like because 9-speed chains and cassettes are far cheaper and last longer than than 10-speed.
They are probably using 9-speed because the largest cog Shimano offers on their 10-speed cassettes is a 28T.  To get the more common touring large cog of 32 or 34T you have to use an MTB cassette and they are only available in 9-speed.   

this info is not correct.  my 09 cannondale T1 has a 10 speed setup: 50/39/30, 11x32.  now, i did find that the 10-speed setup does NOT allow for gear down-sizing; in order to get lower gears, i would have had to replace the entire drive-train.  ended up just going for another bike, the trek 520 !!  9-speed, 48/36/26, 11X32 MTB setup.

Offline valygrl

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2010, 01:33:57 am »
In 2004 I picked up a 17" (XS) 2001 or 2002 520 for $650.  I had them put the smallest granny gear on it possible - i think it was a 26, and later swapped to a 34-tooth cassette.  If you want, you could try to get them to swap in a mountain bike crank, but you can get away with the 26x34 low gear most places.  Also, if the shop won't go for that, you can just ride it as is until you decide if you want lower gearing.

I don't think you need to replace anything but maybe the tires as you said.   The rest of the drive train is still pretty much production stuff.

Great bike.  Have fun. 

Is it blue?   Mine was blue, I loved that color.

Offline whittierider

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2010, 03:34:28 am »
If the crankset has the common 74mm BCD for the innner ring, you can go down to a 24T.  24/34 makes for about a 19" gear with tires whose nominal outside diameter is 27".  24/34*27 is 19.  (Note the expression, because the gear ratio is proportion to the number of front teeth divided by the number of rear teeth, not multiplied by the number of rear teeth; so it's 24/34, not 24x34.)

Offline Ryo69

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #8 on: March 19, 2010, 11:51:15 am »
$650 sounds reasonable, and that's when the bike was only a couple of years old.  I was hoping to get this one for $600.  Did they swap out the gears for the $650 or did you pay extra to get them to make the change?  I had been thinking about going the route of having them replace gears and whatnot if they wouldn't budge on the price.

The one I am looking at is green.  To bw honest, I'd probably rather have blue, but it's not a deal breaker.

Offline Ryo69

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #9 on: March 20, 2010, 08:48:50 pm »
Well, the bicycle negotiation didn't go quite as I had planned it. 

Not only did the bike shop refuse to move on the $699 price or change any of the components, but the owner actually called me after I left the store (I gave them my name and number with an offer in case they changed their mind) and told me that after today, the price will be going up to $899!  I've never really heard of that before.  It's like I was getting an ultimatum...buy this bike at what we ask or else!  Wow.  Luckily, I have never spent a dime in this store previously and I won't be after the experience I had.

If anyone on this board is in central Illinois and wants to PM me, I'll let them know the name of the shop.  I won't do it on a public forum.

Offline whittierider

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #10 on: March 21, 2010, 12:21:11 am »
They might be figuring on the fact that the last of the 2009's is about gone, and with only 2010's available, it will cost them more to replace it when it's sold.

Offline bogiesan

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #11 on: March 21, 2010, 10:13:07 am »
Well, the bicycle negotiation didn't go quite as I had planned it. Not only did the bike shop refuse to move on the $699 price or change any of the components, but the owner actually called me after I left the store (I gave them my name and number with an offer in case they changed their mind) and told me that after today, the price will be going up to $899!  I've never really heard of that before.  It's like I was getting an ultimatum...buy this bike at what we ask or else!  Wow.  Luckily, I have never spent a dime in this store previously and I won't be after the experience I had. If anyone on this board is in central Illinois and wants to PM me, I'll let them know the name of the shop.  I won't do it on a public forum.

I'd suggest this is exactly the place to post the name of the shop and the name of the proprietor. We discuss specifics—routes, cities, brands, models, shops, and opinions—the time. You might want to call your local consumer protection office or Better Business Bureau.

The practice of squeezing a customer is a sign of the times, no? They see a chance to unload a bike they should never have purchased. Unfortunately, they lost a potentially long-term relationship not just the one-time sale; short-sighted behavior characteristic of a shop on the skids. I hope you find your dream bike soon, blue ro green.

david boise ID
I play go. I use Macintosh. Of course I ride a recumbent

Offline MTNGator

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2010, 12:25:58 pm »
I fail to see how this shop owner has harmed anyone - he has a bike for sale and has set a price. If you don't like the price, don't buy the bike - not every retail business is eBay. Not every price is open to negotiation. If his price is too high he will have to continue to "eat" this bike but remember it is up to him to decide how he wants to market HIS merchandise. If he wants to raise the price after a specific period of time (probably the result of how he perceived the price negotiation attempt), that is his right as well - things go "off sale" all of the time.

I am not a bike shop owners nor do I know the identity of the owner in question here.


Offline Ryo69

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2010, 10:58:06 am »
Your point is well taken, and you are correct.  No harm was done to me in the process.  The issue I have is twofold:

1.  I always hear that you're supposed to support your local bike shop.  They're in it for the love of the product, and they'll help you out when you come in when you're a regular customer.  That's why some people frown on ordering bikes (and parts) online.  You lose the customer service.  I feel that in working with this shop, I was not getting the customer service that you should expect from a bike shop.

2.  I had no problem with them refusing the offer that I made (which was $50 less than what they were asking).  That's the reason I left my information in the first place.  If they changed their mind and determined that I was the only person interested in the specialty bike in an unusual frame size that was eight years old that they were offering, they could call me back.  I had a problem with the fact that the owner felt that he needed to call and let me know that not only was he not planning to accept my offer, but he was going to raise the price the next day.

These prices were posted on the bike shop's website, and the 520 was not the only bike with a lower price on the website's sale sheet than in the store.  I understand that sites get neglected and aren't updated as often as they should be, but what is the logic in increasing the price on a bicycle that you're obviously stuggling to sell at the lower price anyway?
« Last Edit: March 24, 2010, 11:18:20 am by Ryo69 »

Offline MTNGator

Re: 2002 Trek 520 - NEW
« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2010, 11:28:08 am »
Okay - You have handled the situation fairly and the bike store owner chose to be hard-nosed about it. It's a shame - he lost a customer and you missed out on a fair deal on a great bike. Good luck on finding a replacement for that 520.