trek 420 vs 520

Difference Between 420 And 520 Chain – Factors To Consider While Buying One

The confusing number of bike chains is enough to make you go crazy about which one to choose. All bikers are more concerned about 420 and 520 chains. “What’s the difference between 420 and 520 chain ?” has been the most frequently asked question in this case. 

Primarily, the chain’s pitch and width are the key difference between the numbered chains. Besides, the usage in the type of bikes is also a considerable difference between the two chains.

Keep reading on to learn more about the differences between these chains. With that being said, let’s get into the details.

Comparison Between 420 And 520 Chain

Here’s a detailed comparison between the 420 and 520 motorcycle chains:

• What Does The Numbers 420 and 520 Mean?

The number 420 in a bike chain typically declares the chain size in inches. Therefore, a 420 bike chain means 420 inches but not as a total. Similarly, chain number 520 also says about the size in inches. 520 chain means 520 inches but not as a total.

We’ll learn the simple math for the chain numbers after a while.

• Pitch And Width Size

The pitch in a 420 chain is 1/2  inches, and the width is 1/4  inches. The pitch size of these chains is also accounted as 4/8 inches. In contrast, the pitch in the 520 chains is 5/8 inches, and the width is 1/4 inches. The width of the 520 chains is similar to 420 chains.

• Needed Sprocket Thickness

Chains have a lot of things to do with sprockets. You need the perfect match sprockets for the dedicated numbered chain. Usually, 420 chain requires 0.227 inches thickness sprockets. On the other hand, the sprocket thickness requirement for 520 chains is 0.787402 inches. 

• Compatible Bike Models

A 420 chain goes smoothly and is made to go suitable with 50cc , 70cc, 90cc, 110cc, 125cc bikes , dirt bikes , Go Kart, Mini Bike, Scooter, Electric Scooter , Pit Bike, and Quad. However, don’t mix up electric scooters with kick scooter s.

On the contrary, 520 bike chains from different brands go perfectly with a maximum of 400cc bikes. These chains are specially designed for heavy or bigger bikes.

• Construction Material And Rust-Proof

Generally, 420 chains are made with alloy steel. Raw chain is the most affordable, but it’s going to rust quicker than any other finish implemented chain if you forget to lube it.

You’ll find plated Gold or Nickel Chrome chains in the market, which are best to resist rust. Besides, painted chains are also available if you want something that looks flashy.

On the other hand, the built material for 520 chains has a variety of different brands. Most of them are made with different kinds of durable steel. You should get one that has a durable material and rust-proof coating. 

How To Understand Motorcycle Chain Numbers?

Understanding motorcycle chain number needs simple math for you to understand. Yes, I’ll talk about it at this point.

But first, let’s get an idea about the different measurements (Pitch and Width) I talked about earlier. 

Pitch would be the distance from the center of a pin to the center of the pin beside it. Simply, it’s a center-to-center measurement. On the other hand, width is the narrowest part of the chain, which is the empty place you see between links.

The Math To Understand Motorcycle Chains

There’re two ways to size any bike chain. They’re the ISO, the British Standard, and the ANSI, the American National Standard Institute size for bike chains.

Generally, people know the bike chains with the ANSI size. So, let’s talk about it. The ANSI bike chain sizes are referred to in inches.  

To make the measurements, they took an inch and divided it into eight equal parts. The first number refers to measuring the pitch. For instance, in 520 chains, 5 is the reference here. 

Now, you’ve to take five increments of the equal eight parts of an inch and time it by 5. That means the pitch is 5/8 inches, often stated as. Same in the 420 chains, take four increments of the 8 equal parts of an inch and time it by 4. It’ll be 4/8 inches, often stated as ½ inches. 

The following two number of the three digits marked chain tells you about the width of the chain. Let’s understand this with an example. If the chain number is 520, count it 2.0 times on that rule of eight. It’ll be 2/8, which means ¼ of the inch. 

Similarly, in the 420 chains, again, you’ve to count 2.0 times on the rule of eight, which will bring you the same result. That’s why, despite the pitch being different, the width of the two chains are the same. 

How Often Should A Motorcycle Chain Be Lubricated?

The best time to lubricate your motorcycle chain is when you’ve traveled between 300 to 600 miles with your bike. 

However, different bike models may come with varying intervals of lubrication. That’s why you should check your bike’s user manual and figure out when your manufacturer is recommending you lubricate to be at the safe hand.

What Should You Use To Clean A Motorcycle Chain?

According to GearHonest, the best pick for you is Maxima Chain Wax Ultimate Chain Care for both 420 and 520 chains.

But that doesn’t mean WD-40 or Bel-Ray Chain Clean Spray is lagging behind. There are more affordable and good-quality chain cleaners available to clean chains effortlessly.

The other thing you need besides a chain cleaner is a cleaning brush . Gather these two tools first, then start cleaning your chain and give them a new glossy look.

How Do You Take Care Of A Motorcycle Chain?

Taking care of your motorcycle chain isn’t that difficult, or you need to do extra heavy work. You just have to follow four tasks to care for 420 and 520 motorcycle chains. Such as:

• Clean the chain at least once a month.
• Lubricant your motorcycle chain after riding for 300 to 600 miles.
• Run a quick inspection before you go out for riding, and a thorough inspection once a week.
• Adjust the chain alignment and tension as required.

Will a 520 chain fit a 428 sprocket?

The pitch of a 520 chain is 5/8 inches, and the width is ¼ inches. On the other hand, the pitch of a 428 sprocket requirement chain should be ½, and the width should be 5/16. You can see a great difference in the chain sizes. So, it won’t fit well if you use the alternate chains indifferent sprockets.

What’s the difference between a 420 chain and a 428 chain?

The difference between a 420 chain and a 428 chain is the width size only. A 420 chain has a pitch of ½ inches. So does a 428 chain. But, the width of a 420 chain is ¼ inches, and the width of a 428 chain is 5/16 inches. So, if you use the chains interchangeably, they might not create a too noticeable difference.

Do I need a longer chain for a bigger sprocket?

The chain length actually depends on the distance of the rear sprocket to the front sprocket. But if you’re using a bigger sprocket, it would require a longer chain to measure the link gaps.

How many links are in a motorcycle chain?

The number of links can vary from chain to chain for a motorcycle. Generally, common options have an even number of links like 110, 112, or 114 links. Here, the most important thing to check is whether the chain comes with a master link (Click/Rivet Type).

What’s the difference between a 520 chain and a 530 chain?

The main difference between a 520 chain and a 530 chain is the width size of the chains. A 520 chain has ¼ inches of inner width, and a 530 chain has 3/8 inches of inner width. Pitch size of both the chains is the same at 5/8 inches.

If you’re still reading, hope that this discussion of the difference between the 420 and 520 chain has helped you to understand it clearly. You can get either of them if you’re looking for a new chain for your bike.

However, according to most real bikers, the 520 chain is more popular and reliable. Besides, when you shop for chains, make sure to get new matched sprockets for it. Otherwise, your performance wouldn’t be excellent with unmatched sprockets to the chain. 

About The Author

1 thought on “Difference Between 420 And 520 Chain – Factors To Consider While Buying One”

Nice explanation. Thanks

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• 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?

Adventure Cycling Association

• Join Renew Donate
• Diversity and Justice
• Organization
• Newsletters
• U.S. Bicycle Route System
• Short Routes
• Guided Tours
• Mini Grants
• Emerging Rider 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.

Subscribe to my YouTube channel for video reviews.

Trek 520 Review: Is It a Good Bike or Waste of Money in 2024?

CyclistsHub is supported by its readers. We may receive a commission if you buy products using our links.

Trek 520 is an affordable touring road bike with a rich history. The question is:

Is it a good bike worth your consideration?

One of the highlights of the Trek 520 is that it comes with front and rear racks, allowing you to equip it with panniers and bags for increased cargo capacity. The stylish yet durable steel frame. The entire bike’s geometry is more relaxed so that you can sit in a more upright position.

Let’s scrutinize this bike in-depth to find out more.

Is Trek 520 a Good Bike?

Trek 520 retails for around $1,829 (the actual price may vary).

So, what do you get for this money?

• A stylish, old-school-looking bike based on a steel frame.
• Front and rear racks for panniers and bags to expand the storage capacity for your long bike adventures.
• Shimano Sora 3×9spd groupset, providing enough gears for all terrains.
• Disc brakes for effective stopping power in all conditions.
• An overall capacity of 275 lbs (125 kg).

The quick description above makes it clear that the Trek 520 is not a standard road bike but a touring/adventure bike designed for touring.

Bikepackers and other adventure seekers love it for its large storage capacity, which allows them to pack everything they need.

The bike’s geometry allows you to sit upright, unlike on racing road bikes. This riding position is more beginner-friendly and suitable for people with limited mobility.

Trek 520 is available in 6 sizes and is suitable for riders from 5’2″ to 6’6″ (from 158 to 197 cm) tall.

Pros and Cons of Trek 520

Below, I summarized the pros and cons of Trek 520.

Pros of Trek 520

• Front and rear racks included
• Timeless look of the steel frame
• 3×9spd drivetrain offering 27 gears
• Disc brakes
• Comfortable geometry, allowing upright riding position
• Available in a wide range of sizes
• Tubeless-ready rims
• High weight limit of up to 300 lbs (136 kg)
• Platform cage pedals included
• Lifetime warranty and wide distributors (support) network

Cons of Trek 520

• Limited color selection
• The higher weight of 31.4 lbs (14.24 kg)
• Relatively low weight limit of 275 lbs (125 kg)

Owner’s Experience with Trek 520

The following part summarizes the experience of the owner of Trek 520 Grando, who was kind enough to provide us with pictures and his insights.

“Trek 520 Grando – the ‘do it all’ bike. Go anywhere, everywhere, on any surface, and in any condition.

Steel frame, aluminum fork with Shimano Tiagra front derailleur and shifters & Shimano GRX rear derailleur.

I’m almost at 3000 miles as of August 7th. I bought the bike on December 29th, 2021.

I’ve added the Bontrager Adventure Boss frame bag, switched out the pedals to Shimano SPD, the handlebars to GR Elite with 13° flare, and the red tape. Also switched out the saddle to the Verse Comp.

The most important and noticeable change was the wheels, which I upgraded to Bontrager Aeolus Pro 3V with a 108 rapid drive hub.

The tires are Origin 8 Wildfire CX 700x38C tires for gravel/sand and Bontrager H2 for the road.

I ride the bike through sandy trails, over gravel, mud, and grass, and on the road. The gearing goes from crawling to maxing out at 34mph (55 km/h) on flat terrain.

The changes I’ve made are all personal things I wanted to upgrade or change for my comfort and performance. The bike stock was perfect, except for the pedals and saddle. It came with toe cages that are not good, and the saddle was not very comfortable (personal preference).

Otherwise, I love the bike so much! I’m averaging about 120-160 miles a week on it. Unfortunately, I am limited because of the 40°C temperatures we have this time of year.

I can definitely recommend this bike to someone looking for a versatile and comfortable bike! “

Main Features of Trek 520

Trek 520 has been in Trek’s lineup since 1983. Below, I focus on the 2023 model.

Durable Steel Frame

Trek 520 is based on a timeless steel frame with a relaxed geometry.

This is good news for bike packers because they can sit in a more upright riding position that is less demanding on their flexibility and core strength.

Steel is also a bike material that is relatively easily fixable on the go (unlike carbon).

Its other benefits include high durability, affordability, and the iconic look of the rounded tubes.

29-Inch Wheels

The 29-inch wheels are a standard size on road bikes. Those on the 520 are tubeless-ready, so you can use tubeless tires.

They are made of aluminum and use stainless steel spokes, providing great durability while keeping reasonable weight.

NOTE : The wheelset in the following picture is not stock. The owner replaced it with the Bontrager Aelous 3V carbon wheels.

The 520 offers tire clearance for up to 2″ wide tires (without fenders). So, depending on the terrain you want to ride, you can replace the stock 38mm tires.

Trek 520 is equipped with Shimano Sora/Alivio (shifters, derailleurs, cranks, cassette), Bontrager, and other 3rd party components.

The Grando has a combination of Shimano Tiagra and GRX and easier gears. It also has wider tires but doesn’t include the rear rack.

I am sure you will appreciate the mechanical disc brakes that are more effective in tougher conditions (like in the rain).

Some owners report the stock saddle is uncomfortable, but everybody has different preferences. You can always replace it later.

One of Trek 520’s main highlights is its aluminum racks, which can hold up to 55 lbs (25 kg).

Remember, the Grando only comes with the front rack. The rear rack is not included.

NOTE : The rack is not shown in the pictures because the owner took it down and uses frame bags instead.

These racks will allow you to expand your bike’s storage capacity, so you will pack everything you need for your trip.

The current generation of Trek 520 has a 3×7spd drivetrain with 21 gears, while the Trek 520 Grando has a 2×10spd drivetrain.

This range is wide enough for various terrains. Just make sure you avoid cross-chaining.

The disadvantage of the 3X drivetrains is their complexity, more complicated maintenance, and higher weight.

More expensive mountain bikes come with 2X or 1X drivetrains that are much simpler than 3X.

You don’t have to think about the cross-chaining as much. That’s why they are more popular.

Trek 520 Specifications

Below, I summarize the most important technical specifications. Remember, they differ based on the year:

• Frame material: Steel
• Trek 520: ±14.24 kg (31.4 lbs)
• Trek 520 (Grando): ±13.28 kg (29.27 lbs)
• Wheel size: 29-inch (tubeless-ready)
• Brakes: Mechanical disc brakes
• Trek 520: Shimano Sora/Alivio
• Trek 520 (Grando): Shimano Tiagra/GRX
• Trek 520: Front and rear included
• Trek 520 (Grando): Front only
• Trek 520: 3×9spd
• Trek 520 (Grando): 2×10spd

What Trek 520 Size Do You Need?

To choose the correct size of Trek 520 (Grando) for your height and inseam, refer to the following Trek 520 sizing charts.

Trek 520 (also available in the ‘Grando’ option) is a reliable touring road bike worth buying if you want to undertake long bike adventures.

It has racks that allow you to equip the bike with panniers and bags to extend your storage capacity.

Thanks to the durable steel frame, you will stand out in the flood of carbon road and gravel bikes.

It also offers a wide enough gear range (3×9spd) suitable for various gradients.

There are really not many downsides, except for the limited color selection and weight limit of 275 lbs (125 kg).

Trek 520 FAQ

Yes. Trek 520 is a worthy touring bike for people seeking bike-packing adventures. It has a durable steel frame with a relaxed geometry, racks for extending storage capacity, and a wide enough gear range to tackle any terrain. Read this entire article for more info.

The Trek 520 has narrower tires and front and rear racks. Grando has wider tires, only a front rack, and different gearing and components (Shimano Sora/Alivio vs. Tiagra/GRX). The 520 Grando is also about 1 kg (2 lbs) lighter.

Trek 520 weighs ±14.24 kg (31.4 lbs). Trek 520 Grando weighs ±13.28 kg (29.27 lbs).

Trek 520 has been in Trek’s lineup since 1987. ( Source )

About The Author

Petr Minarik

5 thoughts on “trek 520 review: is it a good bike or waste of money in 2024”.

I loved this bike, but after about 1,500 miles the crank bearing were worn and the ultimate disappointment, the frame cracked. It was my ideal touring bike up tao that point. Trek cannot even replace the frame, but offered an aluminum gravel bike frame which does not meet my needs. I’ll keep looking for a frame.

Hi Kurt, I am sorry to hear that. I am also surprised that Trek didn’t offer the same frame as a compensation. What frame did they offer? And why it doesn’t meet your needs? – Petr

Luckily got Trek 520 from Dbyke store, Pune, India. Weight factor is a concern as it weighs pretty 14 Kgs. Should weight could be compromised by Al alloy speed could also have picked up as its not designed for speed. Should have come with fenders and a dynamo. I didn’t find the stock pedals effective and got it replaced. Overall tough bike and didn’t face any issue from 9 months. No bike is complete but have to accept the reality.

I have owned 520 since 2020. In that time I have driven 8000 km (end 2023). I happened to weigh over 135 kg. The Shimano hardware and paint is poor, a gentle bump is a chip. I have HeadSet bearings to replace. The 520 has not let me down in Switzerland, Italy, Germany, France, Holland, Belgium, Austria, Hungary, Poland … Is it worth buying? I can’t think of anything better in Europe at this price. The Koga is two, three times more expensive.

Have a good trip

Hi Dominik, Thanks for sharing your experience! I wish you a lot of kilometers ridden. 🙂 – Petr

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Start typing and press enter to search

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.

Trek 520 vs. Fuji touring: Which is the best touring bike?

It was not long ago when cycle travelers were stuck with the custom-built bike for pedaling for long distances. Luckily, with top performance touring bikes such as the Trek 520 and Fuji touring bikes, cyclists now fully enjoy exploring the beauty of nature. This Trek 520 vs. Fuji touring bike review will reveal which is the better touring bike. As a lover of the road, there is nothing that beats the thrill and adventure of seeing the world from the saddle of my touring bike. Bicycle touring allows me to interact with people from all over the world while exposing me to new experiences

. If you are looking to venturing into touring bikes, consider purchasing the Trek 520 or the Fuji touring bikes . The following Trek 520 vs. Fuji touring bikes comparison review provides an in-depth look at the specifications of these two popular bikes. What are the differences between the Trek 520 and the Fuji touring bikes

• Lightweight construction frame which allows comfortable riding
• A reputable touring bike as it is known for its maneuverability, versatility, and reliability
• Replacements parts are inexpensive
• Its all-weather disc brakes and puncture-resistant tires offer more grip and traction on gravel terrains

What we do not like

• Metallic paint on the bike easily chips off

Table of Contents

View price here

• Lightweight and sturdy steel frame
• Easy to accessorize due to the additional attachment points
• A wide range of gears for more grip, traction, and a smoother ride
• Easy to repair in case of damage
• Not easy to find in local shops

  Frequently Asked Questions What is the best way to avoid buying the wrong touring bike? Before purchasing a touring bike, it is essential to determine the terrain you will be riding on and research on the most appropriate bike to use on that particular terrain. Similarly, taking the bike on a test ride helps you get an actual feel of the bike before you buy it How do I pack for my cycle tour? When cycling, it is best to carry light cargo as carrying hefty loads affects the stability and comfort of your ride. If you are touring with panniers, keep your total load between 15 and 45 pounds. By putting more weight in the front panniers, the bike becomes more stable. Test ride your bike while it is fully loaded to ensure the smoothness of the ride. What is the difference between a touring bike and road bike? Due to their strong frame, comfortable features, and extra mounts for panniers, cargo cages, and mudguards, touring bikes cover long distances on the road. On the other hand, road bikes are a fast solution if you are looking for a quick way to get to work. They are not the most comfortable but are lightweight and have aerodynamic specifications.  

2023 Trek 520 Grando Review

Thinking about how the bike will handle long trips with multiple luggage bags? Look no further – The Trek 520 is the ultimate road bike for any adventure!

The Trek 520 Grando is designed to be an all-around reliable and durable adventure bike. 

With its durable steel frame, powerful brakes, and wide range of gears, it allows adventurers to cover longer distances with ease and comfort. 

Its carefully chosen wheelset adds extra stability without compromising speed. 

All these features make this one of the most popular adventure bikes on the market.

For those looking for an affordable yet quality ride, investing in a Trek 520 Grando could prove to be one of the best decisions you ever made. 

Check out this comprehensive review that gives insight into its construction, performance, pros and cons and much more related information!

The Trek 520 Grando is an amazing all-terrain touring bike that is perfect for long distance rides. 

The Grando has a light and responsive frame, comfortable geometry and a wide range of gears to take on any hills you may encounter.

It’s designed to excel in all weather conditions, with big mudguard clearance, strong disc brakes and extra mounts for racks and bottles. 

All this makes it ideal for cycle touring – whether it be loaded up with camping gear or simply enjoying the scenery at a leisurely pace.

The 2023 Trek 520 Grando is an adventure bike designed for the open road. 

This rugged touring machine features a reliable steel frame, Shimano components, and a wide-range of gears for tackling those challenging hills and trails. 

Its components ensure a secure fit for cyclists of all sizes and the included rear rack allows for convenient carrying of gear on overnight tours or extended journeys.

Whether you’re riding to the store, around town exploring nearby sights, or taking a long journey across Europe, the Trek 520 Grando is up to every challenge and ready to show you what adventure cycling is all about!

– Durable Trek butted chromoly frame

– Shimano Tiagra and GRX components providing smooth shifts over long distances

– Wide range of gears; suitable for biking on both flat terrain and hilly areas

– ProWheel forged alloy, 42/28t chainrings up front and a Shimano HG50, 11-36t, 10 speed cassette

– Front rack with attachment points for gear such as panniers or water bottles

– Bontrager Affinity Disc, Tubeless Ready rims offering increased flexibility and strength over gravel roads or other terrain

– Fender and mudguard mounts

Frame & Geometry

The Trek 520 Grando’s frame is constructed from Trek butted chromoly tubing that is highly corrosion-resistant and incredibly durable throughout its lifetime. 

It also has a relaxed geometry which adds to its comfort level on longer rides – allowing full control when fully loaded with bags of camping gear. 

The lightweight design ensures that you won’t be slowed down by the additional weight when cycling uphill either.

Gearing System & Wheels

To make life easier when hauling up hills or dealing with strong headwinds, the Grando offers a wide range of gearing courtesy of Shimano Tiagra 2×10 derailleurs – giving you plenty of control over your speed along different terrain types without sacrificing traction or stability on long-distance treks. 

Additionally, thanks to its 700c Bontrager wheels paired with wide Bontrager GR1 Expert 40mm tires, the 520 offers an extremely smooth ride without compromising grip on slick roads or letting any bumps be felt through your handlebars!

The Trek 520 Grando offers an excellent blend between low maintenance components and endurance features that make it a reliable companion on every cycle tour you take it on. 

Its relaxed geometry ensures ultimate comfort while its powerful brakes give riders peace of mind in hazardous weather conditions – making it a great choice for anyone looking to tackle long distances aboard two wheels!

Order online and have it shipped to your local dealer for final assembly!!

Related Posts

REI Co-op Cycles ADV 2.2 Review

2023 Trek Dual Sport+ 2 Review

Trek Émonda SLR 9 Review

Surly Wednesday Fat Tire Trail Bike Review

The Retrogrouch

Old is Good

Friday, March 18, 2016

Old vs. new: trek 720, 33 comments:.

Those 720s from the mid-80s certainly are great lookers and riders. Plus, whatever the new 720 is intended to do, the old 720 probably does better. I find it interesting that from about 1979 to 1986, Trek and almost every other manufacturer offered at least one fully-loaded touring bike in its lineup. But then they abandoned the genre altogether in 1987 or 1988. If you went into a bike shop and asked for a touring bike, if they didn't have leftover stock, they'd try to sell you a "hybrid" or convince you that you'd be better off on a mountain bike.

Yes, isn't that the truth! In fact, as I recall, road bikes of any kind were being pushed off the showroom floors in those days to make more room for mountain bikes -- many of which probably never left the pavement.

I hated the old 720's. They were way too flexible and couldn't handle a load. In fairness, I'm 6'3" and had the biggest frame they made and carried 50lbs. of gear, still though.. I loved riding it lightly loaded or unloaded but as a loaded touring bike not so much.

I bought a used 25" 720 way back when and found it way to flexible for loaded touring also. The larger sizes should have had stiffer tubing. I stepped down to a univega straight gauge touring bike and found it to be perfect. Many years later I have a Miyata 610 with center pulls and the aforementioned Dunapar derailleur and half step plus granny. That's my retrogrouch bike. I use a 87 Klein with a 21 speed indexed barends as my "modern" touring bike. It's a lot like the ST 1000.

I rode the trek 720 touring bicycle fully loaded across the United states in 1987. I had bought it new in 1985, I believe it was a leftover 84 model. It was a great ride and I still own the bike today. Time to rebuild it. I'd suggest this bike for touring to anyone who likes to go the distance.

Damn, now I want to go work on that old black and red lugged Trek I have sitting in the back room at the shop. Build some Camp wheels for it or sumthin', hmmmmm.... What would I choose? Old, all day long. I have litte love for the new Trek brand, the price is something that we as a nation, should be ashamed of. Thanks for the smidgen of Cannondale love there too. They were close to the last big US companies to shutter their US factories (what Trek's doing at this point could hardly be considered US production). Not that I'm happy with the new Cannondale either, but they at least have that going for them. And they did build an awfully pretty bike frame BITD, too. http://imgur.com/3bz1RPM

Cannondale made a pretty impressive tourer back then, too, in their 1000 model, which came with everything a person needed, including fenders and C'dale's own racks. All one needed to do was get the C'dale bags, tent, and sleeping bags, and they were ready to take off cross country. The welds on those bikes were smoothed very nicely.

The new 720 isn't perfect, but walking into a shop and seeing 520s, 720s, 920s, and Specialized AWOLs is a sight better than seeing a row of slammed carbon fiber road bikes with 23mm tires.

Yes -- you are definitely right there.

Just looked at the Trek website, they are still selling a steel framed 520 tourer. Is is list priced at only $300 more than I paid for my 520 18 years ago, not bad. The Bontrager components don't look nearly as interesting as the Shimano 105/DX/Avid mix that was on the '98, but all of the original components are long gone...

You're right about the 520. I think I read somewhere that it is one of the longest running models still available today (they've offered the 520 since the early 80s -- so 30+ years?) - though very different from what they were back in the day. A fine bike, I'm sure, if someone wants a new bike that has a lot of versatility, and isn't hung up on nostalgia for lugs, Reynolds tubing, level top tubes, and shiny silver components.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, I'll now go down the internet rathole researching the 520! I see the current version has a sloping top tube, just doesn't seem right on a touring bike (sorry my first was a third-hand Dawes) but great to see that Trek has commitment to its roots.

My everyday bike is a 1984 Trek 830 Mountain bike with an Xtracycle bolted on. It's a very good frame. I can imagine the 720s were marvelous also. I have yet to see a contemporary production frame I would want, which I guess makes me retrogrouch, though I despise the term "retro." Is it retro if you never moved away from it?

I have one of those 1984 720's. It's my main commuter bike. I keep it in mint shape, but alas, the only original equipment on it is the frame, seat post, cantilever brakes and levers, Simplex front derailleur and saddle (Brooks Professional - lasts forever). The 27" wheels (indestructable Wolbers) have been replaced with 700C for tire selection. I have Schwalbe 700 x35 Marathon Supremes with VO fenders. It's a little tight but works, and the original brakes reach just fine. The original chainrings were a half-step, not a triple. I've swapped them for and old Ultegra set (still polished aluminum). Handlebars are VO Grand Randonneur, with the original gumby brake hoods and Brooks leather handle bar tape. It's truly a classic bike. The frame is in great shape and it rides like a dream on the wider tires.

Dawes still makes the Galaxy and Super Galaxy which I believe has been in production for over 300 years with only a break to allow the production line to be used to make Spam cans during the war. Maybe not though... You can even buy a Galaxy Classic with steel tubing, a HORIZONTAL toptube and a quill stem(!). It might even have an umbrella clip for all I know. It makes one wonder if there are more grumpy old bike geeks per capita over there than over here... Spindizzy

Yep - the Dawes is another long-running model. Not 300 years long (I get it - that's a typo) but longer even than the Trek 520. Can't remember the last time I saw a Dawes here in the U.S. though.

You are seriously off on the dates of the Dawes Galaxy. A still ride-able Galaxy (no lugs, just hammered together in a process archeologists call "cold welding") was found in one of the pyramids at Giza. New rubber, it was good to go.

too funny, tjan.

A "touring" bike with 43 cm chainstays? 43 cm?! My 1973 and my 1960s racing bikes have 43 cm chainstays!

What's wrong with round tubing?

After I graduated from college and got my first “real” job, I looked longingly at a Trek 720 but instead bought a 614. It was a great bike, and equipped with Blackburn low-riders on the front carrying Tailwind panniers and standard panniers on the back made a fast, stable touring machine. I eventually sold it (regrets, I have a few...), and still would love to have a 720 — an old one, that is.

It's not even a competition, in my mind, between the classic and the new version. Though I will say that I am happy with any effort for a new bike to marketed as anything other than race- or mtn- biking. Those old Trek 5xx,6xx,and 7xx series touring bikes are so nice. Actually any old Trek is pretty hard to beat. Wolf.

Ah, the 1980s hay day of touring cycles. I have a Gitane Tourer bought new in 1986; long chainstays and wheelbase, lots of room for 35mm tires with fenders. Rock steady handling with 55 lbs of camping gear on front and rear racks. It was fitted from new with the Huret Duopar Eco derailleur. I had heard they were short-lived so picked up a spare new one when they were being closed out. Sure enough, recently the rear shifting deteriorated. After getting the dropout hanger alignment checked, it was OK, I decided to install the 'spare' Duopar. That did it, back to fine shifting again. And to think, the original only lasted 30 years! Cheap French junk. I love my Gitane and my similar vintage Bertin Cyclocross bike.

The old Trek 720 was a POS. My frame broke after a lousy 20 or 30,000 miles :o) And at the worst possible time. Fortunately a bike shop in Fairbanks had a 520 frame that fit me in stock.

Trek 720's back hidrolic disc brake was frozen in the low tempture (mines c grade) I rode this cycle from barcolana to turkey I took 3514 km and 16 days. Trek 720 Bycle was very fast but ıf you ride rainly days. Water fill the back brake cable. and then the brake is frozen.

What is the largest tire with fenders you can fit on your 1984 Trek 720?

I ride a 1984 Trek 420 sport touring model that I bought new in Norfolk, Va. when I was in the Navy. It feels light weight and nimble in spite of its high tensile steel fork and stays. I have enjoyed it as a commuter bike and now as a daily respite from my stay-at-home existence during the pandemic.

More to the point, I bought the inexpensive 420 instead of the 720 because someone had just stolen my cherished Centurion, and I didn’t want to risk losing another expensive bike. I didn’t test ride the 720, but I suspect its handling is not as lively as the 420’s, or am I praising sour grapes?

Hello good day! May i know what is the speed or cassette of the vintage trek 720? Is still possible to find it? Thank you!

Hi, would anyone be able to tell me the stack and reach height on a 48cm trek multitrack from the 1990s?

Could be a tough one -- that kind of info isn't often in the catalogs, and is most accurately measured first-hand off a frame you might have in your possession.

https://milwaukee.craigslist.org/bop/d/milwaukee-trek-maroon-bike-frame/7320295170.html Here's a brand new one posted May 11th if anyone is interested. I'd say $200 for a brand new unused frame is a great bargain. Of

My 60cm? (actually measured as 23.5") '83 trek 720 weighs in at 22.5 pounds... with midweight (32mm) tubular wheels. Lots of extra room for fenders or larger tires. If I take the rack off and put on my light wheels, it saves another pound... Best production bike I've ever seen, I do anything with it, I even brought home a steel, double kitchen sink on the back of it today. Wish I could post a picture of it here.

Cycle Travel Overload

Bikepacking & Adventure Cycling

Trek 520 vs Trek 920

The Trek touring bike battle! So which bike is better? We are going to compare each of these well established touring bikes side by side and see what the difference is between them. When it comes to price the Trek 520 is $420 cheaper at $1679 when the Trek 920 is $2,099. But what really is the difference and which one is best for you and your riding goals?

To start off the Trek 520 comes in two new models for 2021. Either the 520 disc (which comes with a 3 x 9 Alivio, Sora groupset) or the 520 Grando (which is 900 grams lighter then the 520 Disc and comes with a 2 x 10 GRX 400, Tiagra groupset) we will go into detail about gear range, ratio and inches later to see what really is the difference for climbing. But that is the main difference between these two. Then Trek 520 Disc is their longest running bike in the lineup and has been a work horse for years when it comes bike touring, the more traditional touring bike if you like. With stable touring geometry that make it the perfect choice for loaded multi-day trips.

We will get into the detailed differences soon but essentially, the Trek 920 is consider a “go-anywhere adventure touring bike”. One would say more suited for bikepacking adventures than traditional road touring. Where this bike has 29er mountain bike wheels for balance and capability on any surface. Allowing you to explore those tracks less travelled.

Trek 520 Disc

The Trek 520 Disc comes weighs in at 31.4 lbs / 14.2 kg which is rather average for a touring bike made from steel but this bike has a Aluminium fork. It does come out of the box with front and rear racks which has to be a huge plus. Not all touring bikes are sold with rack systems.

However the differences we start to see between this bike and the Trek 920 is that. the 520 has Mechanical Disc while the 920 runs Hydraulic Disc. That leads me onto the gearing. Again the Trek 520 comes with the 3 x 9 Alivio, Sora groupset. With the Shimano Alivio T4060, 48/36/26 crank with 175mm length. And a Shimano HG200, 11-36 rear cassette. Rolling on some Bontrager H1 Hard-case Ultimate, 700x38c tires. So what does this mean for the bikes gear range?

Using these details above, the Trek 520 has a huge range from a 19.79″ climbing gear all the way up to 119.81″ for the highest gear . So for example if you are riding downhill on the smallest cog and largest rear ring at 90 RPM you could reach a speed of 51.6 kph or 32.1 mph. But the best part about the gearing is the climbing gear. You want something this low for a bike that is going to be loaded with gear. Allowing you to climb effortlessly. If you plan to ride fully loaded with 20kg or more gear on the bike anything under 20″ for the granny gear is ideal. This bike can do that!

Consider the Trek 520 Disc as a bike ideal for fully loaded road touring. Priced at $1679.99 If you want something that is a bit lighter and you only plan to carry a lightweight touring gear setup then the Trek 520 Grando, might be your cup of tea!

Trek 520 Grando

The Grando fits somewhere in the middle between the like of the 520 (traditional touring bike) and the 920 (off adventure bike). It is considered a “steel adventure bike made for off-road excursions”. Trek coined the terms “gravel randonneuring” to describe this bike. Bringing back the spirit of the classic rando bikes . This rig is ideal for bikepacking and gravel riding.

The only real difference between the Grando and the 520 Disc is the obvious aesthetics, groupset and saddle. Plus you only get the front rack with the Grando but it is more suited to lightweight adventure cycling. So that leaves room to fit a saddle bag and other bikepacking bags.

The Grando is lighter at 29.3 lbs / 13.3 kg you get the same Steel frame and alloy build. But just different colours and frame aesthetics. The gearing though? Isn’t the 2×10 GRX 400, Tiagra groupset more limiting? Let’s take a look! So you get the ProWheel forged alloy, 42/28 crank which is a 175 cm length. And the Shimano HG50, 11-36 cassette. With slightly wider tires more suited fro gravel grinding. The Bontrager GR1 Expert 700x40c tires. Which gives you a 21.56″ climbing gear and 105.58″ highest gear . So this means when riding downhill at 90 RPM you should hit around 45.5 kph or 28.3 mph.

Yes it is slightly more limited then the 520 Disc but you are not carrying as much gear. If you are running say front panniers and up to 10 kg of gear anywhere around 25″ on the granny is ideal which is what I would recommend for this bike. The Trek 520 Grando is priced the same at $1,679.99

However if you plan off road touring you want something around 18″ climbing gear which this bike doesn’t. Which leads me to the Trek 920!

The Trek 920 is an adventure touring bike that is capable at taking you just about anywhere. A lighter bike out of them all coming in at 28.4 lbs / 12.9 kg, thanks to the all aluminium frame and fork build. With Hydraulic Disc and 29″ wheels and with the Bontrager XR1, 29 x 2.00′ tires. It is the most preferred bike of choice if all you want to go is off-road!

The 920 comes with the Bontrager Duster Elite, Tubeless Ready, 100x15mm thru axle rims compared to the Trek 520’s Bontrager Affinity Disc, Tubeless Ready, 36-hole, 21mm width rims.

The main difference again comes in the groupset with the 2 x 10 GX, X5 option on the 920. Which is considered a high-end component level compared to the 520’s mid-range component level. The Trek 920 has a ProWheel forged alloy, 42/28 crank with 170 mm (5mm shorter then the 520 crank arms) and a SRAM PG-1030, 11-36 cassette. Resulting in a 22.22″ climbing gear which actually in theory is not any better than either the 520 Grando or 520 Disc when it comes to climbing. And a 108.82″ largest gear . Yes the Trek 920 has better quality components but their range is not better. If you are wanting to save money, I really think the 520 Grando is a capable bike. When it comes to riding at 90 RPM downhill on the largest gears you can expect around 46.9 kph or 29.1 mph. Priced at $2,099

Tire Clearance

But wait we have not discussed tire clearances. If a bike has room for wider tires this can allow your ride to feel more supple and gain you access to rougher roads with ease. And we have not discussed geometries yet. From my research the Trek 520 has clearance for up to 29 x 2.0’’ tires of 700c x 50 mm . While the Trek 920 can fit up too, 2.3″ without fenders or 2″ with fenders.

Geometry – Trek 520 Vs Trek 920

Want to learn more about understanding bike geometry? Read this article which goes through all the jargon and what it means for a comfortable ride!

Geometry can play a big part in the difference of how I bike rides and feels. It is definitely something to consider when buying a bike. On first impressions the Trek 920 seems to have more of a MTB geometry and the 520 has a dailed in touring geometry all the way back to 1983. But after looking at the specs the 920 has features of a touring bike geometry with upright positioning and long wheelbase and chainstays.

So I have compared all geometry measurements for both bikes to see where they differ. Please note that both the 520 Disc and the 520 Grando have identical measurements. But all the measurements below are in mm and are for both 54 cm sized bikes.

Looking at the numbers above you can see Trek have been able to match some of the 920’s measurements with their classic touring geometry of the 520. With the same 1.49 stack/reach ratio. Making it a rather upright riding position. Not as upright as something like the Surly Disc Trucker which has 1.57. With the same seat tube and head tube angles. Then we start to see some slight differences in the numbers. What does it mean? I will try and break it down for you.

The trails are fairly similar with a 3 mm difference. The 520 is on the edge of feeling predictable and stable with a 65mm trail which is what you want in a touring bike. The 920 has 68mm which makes it more stable but it is still not sluggish.

The chainstay has a 15mm difference. The 520 being shorter with 450 mm which makes it feel more chill in the rear. While the 920 has 465 mm which is on the long end, making the rear feel more stable. This results in a longer wheelbase on the 920 by 31 mm and a wider front centre by 20 mm. Meaning more weight distribution if you plan to load up the 920 and help you stay upright on some rougher road conditions. Also that 20mm extra room allows more room from toe striking the front wheel. Also the bottom bracket drop is lower on the 920 by 15 mm which lowers the centre of gravity to help even further for staying upright on the rough stuff.

Overall they are all great bikes and I highly recommend them for touring and adventure biking. But it really comes down to what you will be using your ideal bike for? Are you planning to road tour on tarmac and have front and back pannier setup (traditional touring)? Then the Trek 520 Disc is a good choice. If you want a taste of traditional touring but want to dip your toes in off-road adventure cycling, then the Grando might be your choice. But if you want to go full out bikepacking off-road and nothing else then the Trek 920 is the best option.

Honestly for the type of riding I like to do. Off-road adventures with some road riding. The Trek 520 Grando is my favourite. With the decent climbing gear and off-road capabilities. However it is not the lightest. If weight is most important then the Trek 920 is going to be your best best. But if you are looking for value for money and want to save $420 I recommend the Trek 520 Grando!

About The Author

Codey Orgill, a seasoned bicycle adventurer, has been exploring the world on two wheels for over 10 years. Since embarking on his initial cycling journey, Codey Orgill has traversed numerous countries, experiencing a series of epic adventures.

See author's posts

• Bikepacking Videos
• Adventure Stories
• Latest Arrivals
• Bikepacking Bags
• Camping Gear
• Accessories
• Rigid & Plus Bikes
• Drop Bar MTB
• Full Suspension
• Folding Bikes
• Cargo Bikes
• Commuter Bikes
• Bike vs Bike
• Bike Builds
• Handbuilt Bikes
• New Zealand
• United States
• Bikepacking Guides
• Bikepacking Gear Lists
• Bikepacking Food / Hydration
• Navigation & Route Planning
• Capturing The Adventure
• About Codey
• Work With Me

Related Post

Gravel bikes are not 90’s mountain bikes here’s why, fat tire bikes – should you get a fat bike, 5 best fat bike trailer ideas, best budget hardtail mtb for bike adventures, 11 best adventure gravel bikes, trek checkpoint alr 5 review, overview, and summary.

Based on frame geometry and build specs.

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.

Disc Trucker

(descending)

Based on build material and quality level of the frame, fork, wheelset, groupset, suspension system, and more.

• Lawn & Garden
• Outdoor Living

Trek 520 vs the 520 Grando

Outdoor Living , Sports

0    comments

If you want to get away from the traffic and pollution in the city and just explore your local trails in a new way, the Trek 520 and 520 Grando gravel bikes will provide a fun and fast adventure on your next off-road ride. 

While both the Trek 520 and 520 Grando share the same frame, fork, front, and rear Shimano hubs, steel spokes, and tubeless-ready rims. However, the 520 has better shifters than the Grando and has a backpack rack that you’ll not find in the Grando. The Grando on the other hand has more versatile tires and is much lighter than the 520.

Table for the differences between Trek 520 and Grando 520

Trek 520 vs the 520 grando. how do they differ.

Both bikes have very different tires. The 520 tires are thinner with a harder casing that can’t be easily pierced by sharp rocks or thorns on the trail. However, the Grando tires are wider and nubby which makes them more versatile to provide more traction on both gravel and pavement. 

The Grando has better, more versatile tires.

The two bikes use very different Shimano shifters with the 520 using the Shimano Alivio M4000 for the rear derailleurs and Shimano Sora for the front ones. The Grando uses the Shimano GRX RX400 for the rear and Shimano Tiagra for the front derailleurs. 

The Grando has better, smoother shifters than 520.

Trek 520 vs the 520 Grando. A comparison review

• 【Durable Bike Design】Durable Hiland Hi-Ten steel frame and fork brings more comfortable riding experience. The double aluminum rims and 700*25C road bike tires reduce resistance when riding on gravel, city road or other terrain.
• 【Shift Gears Smoothly】Shimano 14-speed shifter combo with brake lever provides quick gear changes. Double wall aluminium rims gives strong tensile force so you can adapt to your terrain with ease.
• 【Precision Speed Control】Front and rear caliper brakes deliver for superior stopping power and speed control that you can ride relieved in a variety of conditions.

A great road bike with a rugged, simple design and a steel frame that you can comfortably ride on your all-day adventures and road trips. It features mudguard and rack mounts, stable geometry, and a wide range of gears for climbing. The tubeless-ready wheels, puncture-free tires, and powerful Shimano Sora brakes will provide enough power and stability on different terrain surfaces. 

• All-weather disc brakes
• Rack mounts for luggage
• Tubeless-ready wheels

No products found.

An excellent gravel bike that is great for bikepacking and gravel riding on less-traveled roads. It features a steel frame, alloy disc fork with ThruSkew, a wide-range Shimano drivetrain for climbing, smooth shifting rear derailleurs, all-weather mechanical disc brakes, and wide tubeless-ready wheels. It also comes with a durable front rack for carrying your luggage on your adventures.

• Lightweight bike
• Versatile tires
• Great traction
• No backpack rack

Verdict. So, which is better?

The 520 Grando is a better bike because it’s lighter, has GRX rear derailleurs for better chain retention and smooth reliable shifting on rough terrain, and off-road-ready parts for a great trail adventure.

Is the Trek 520 worth it?

 This is a classic touring bike that is comfortable, stylish, durable and has convenient features that make it a great investment.

What does Trek 520 weigh?

The Trek 520 weighs about 13 kg and has a rack weight of 38 kg so the rider should be under 74 kg to meet the requirements of the bike. 

You may also like

How hot does a pressure cooker get, how to stop pressure cooker burning on bottom: tips and tricks, leave a reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked

Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy