2002 Trek 5200 as intro carbon frame?

[johnnylarue]

Howdy folks,

My bargain alarm is sounding at a very reasonably priced early-2000s Trek 5200.

I understand the caveats of buying old/second-hand CF and will do my due diligence when I check it out to the best of my ability, but this model does seem to have a pretty good track record on the internets.

Paint has wear and one significant chip on the rear fork, but the seller reassures me the frame is structurally sound, no crashes, etc., and the frame has been ridden a lot since that chip happened fwiw. Not too worrisome, on spec.

The clincher (and no, not talking about its Vista SL wheels ;)) is that it sports 1-year-old 105 front & rear derailleurs, crank, shifters and cassette, so even if the frame were to disintegrate tomorrow, killing me instantly, my heirs would likely be able to recoup my $250 in parts.

TL;DR, this is a no-brainer for $250, right? I've been actively shopping for an old Litespeed. Wrote off CF without even having tried it 'cuz I'm like that, but this seems like a really good way to try it out and potentially have a decent commuter I don't have to be precious about. Current daily rider is an early 80s Tange Champion touring frame, moustache bars, bar ends. Heavy, but integrity to spare. (I'm sick of it.)

Thoughts?

[ultraman6970]

IMO theres nothing wrong buying used carbon, just check it out all over the place for cracks.

[dave thompson]

Fit, fit and the fit are the 3 main things to consider when buying a bike. Everything else comes fourth.

[johnnylarue]

IMO theres nothing wrong buying used carbon, just check it out all over the place for cracks.

Thanks, ultra. That's the plan--I'm already budgeting for a daylight viewing in a stress-free circumstance to take my time go over the frame properly. (I agree that the paranoia about used carbon is probably exaggerated.)

Other than that, is the general consensus that a 5200 is still worth riding or is it so obsolete as to put me off carbon frames for life? Really just putting the feelers out there because carbon wasn't on my radar at all, and this bike will require some effort to try out as it's in the 'burbs.

[bikinchris]

I hate saying this, but Trek had the second highest frame warranty rate in the industry with that era carbon bike. But of course, they didn't ALL fail.

[kramnnim]

So it has 11 speed (5800) 105?. If so, then yes, it's worth $250...

[kgreene10]

Carbon has come a long way in the last 15 years. Add a couple hundo more and you could probably find something much more recent that would ride better.

[ultraman6970]

Some obsolete carbon frames are just legendary for reliability and performance, not a fan of trek but I never said that their frames sucks or ask LA :D The old giant TCR that T-mobile used are really hard to come.

The carrera karma I got that pretty much nobody wanted here in the forums, that thing was fantastic... sadly was tad big :/

Hmmm the ridley damocles is a super nice frame aswell, the issue now a days is that everybody wants BBXXXXXXXX bottom brackets and super aero stuff, and honestly for the ride many of us do, a 10 years old technology frame does the work perfectly.

Then this take me to high end aluminum... which now a days you can get for really good price.

[Frikki]

Get it!

I'm riding a similar vintage 5500. (White USPS paintjob)
It was my first carbon bike, coming from a long series of alu Cannondales (made sense to me at the time) and before that serious vintage steel.
It rides better than it has any right to, i started off with the original 7800 dura ace and dura ace hubs laced to open pros. (Obviously, it's not fair to compare to alu frames ~20 years it's senior, but beggars can't be choosers)
I've swapped out every part of my 5500 at least once, most twice and every once in a while getting a new frameset crosses my mind, but the thought of selling this one never crosses my mind (also, i'd get like $50). I'd be more likely to get a spare for when this one finally gives up the ghost to be honest.

My bike experience pales compared to most of the people on these forums, but I'm sure that if it wasn't for Lance, these bikes would super romanticized.
That horizontal top tube, those weird amphibian joints, everything about the design is 100%.

[Bentley]

I bought one and built it up and gave it to my little brother. He loves it. The bb sleeve threads had to be chased and the Octalink BB/crank creaks a bit, other than that all good. My LBS suggested I check the BB sleeve , the aluminum/carbon encourages corrosion if not looked after.

I'm not sure early carbon is much of an improvement to a quality steel frame, but that's just me.

Ray

[pdmtong]

Carbon has come a long way in the last 15 years. Add a couple hundo more and you could probably find something much more recent that would ride better.

echo this^

the cost isn't the $250 spent...it's the time you just used up riding something that could be sooo much better than a delorean ride back to the days of carbon infancy.

I dont get to ride everyday. so when I ride, I want it to be on a great (IMHO) bike.

[John H.]

This bike will be fine- but ride quality is not on par with any "nice riding" carbon frame made in the last few years.
Frame is somewhat dead, feels more stiff and chattery in the rear end than the front.
Fork is not so hot either- I am guessing it is the fork with the aluminum crown.

Fit- fit can be a challenge for these bikes. Bike was measured center to top of seat collar- it has a really short headtube, and long top tub for the stated size.
But if you can ride something long and low it could work well.

But the bike is fairly light and fairly stiff, probably just as many people like the 5200 as not.

[johnnylarue]

Thanks--lots of really good stuff here, folks. I admit I come here for the proper bike snob's perspective and you guys never disappoint. ������

The local used market is such that full carbon frames aren't exactly cheap yet, and the ones that are generally get snapped up immediately. In that context I wasn't expecting to come across a full CF bike at a beater/commuter-friendly price, so that's really the main draw. It *is* distracting me from the lovely Litespeed Tuscany I have lined up, mainly because it's 1/3 of the price and I wouldn't be so heartbroken if it were to get stolen. (I still worry that I'll like that Litespeed *too* much to want to leave it in a bike rack at work...)

Anyway, I think for the asking price I should probably just check it out. It'll be an easy flip if it's solid and I decide I don't like it.

Also of note: my sunny day ride is a minty '80 Colnago Mexico, so I'm up for trying something drastically different if only for the novelty of it.

Thanks for letting me air out my neuroses in public! ;)

[johnnylarue]

This bike will be fine- but ride quality is not on par with any "nice riding" carbon frame made in the last few years.
Frame is somewhat dead, feels more stiff and chattery in the rear end than the front.
Fork is not so hot either- I am guessing it is the fork with the aluminum crown.

Fit- fit can be a challenge for these bikes. Bike was measured center to top of seat collar- it has a really short headtube, and long top tub for the stated size.
But if you can ride something long and low it could work well.

But the bike is fairly light and fairly stiff, probably just as many people like the 5200 as not.

Appreciate the run-down, John. This is the kind of thing I was looking for. Thing is, I realize this frame is somewhat sad relative to recent ones, but I just wonder if I'd have the same revelatory "wow" moment that a lifelong steel-rider would have had trying one for the first time 15 years ago... (since I really have no other point of reference myself.)

The long top tube could be a deal-breaker for me. It's currently set with, I think, a +17 stem, with the bars fairly even to the saddle height... but if the geometry means I'm in for a stretched out Merckx style riding position either way, I think I may have to reconsider.

[John H.]

5200 of that vintage is basically the same as the OCLV you could buy in 1997- so more like 20 years old in terms of technology.

[weisan]

bargain aside, does the bike call on you to go out and ride more?

[Clean39T]

Pretty sure GCN did a video on the Gen 1 Trek OCLV - should be able to find it on YouTube - its propaganda for new Treks, but still worth a watch..

[Clean39T]

bargain aside, does the bike call on you to go out and ride more?



+100000

Even a great fitting bike that "everyone loves" won't get ridden unless YOU fall in love with it...and cultivate the relationship over time once the initial glow wears thin...

[KidWok]

I hate saying this, but Trek had the second highest frame warranty rate in the industry with that era carbon bike. But of course, they didn't ALL fail.

I de-bonded the BB shell out of those things every three years...crick crick crick.

Tai

[johnnylarue]

I de-bonded the BB shell out of those things every three years...crick crick crick.

Tai

Okay, that might be the thing that officially scares me off. I'd be riding this in the rain a bunch and BB/crank noises absolutely drive me insane. I had to take my Colnago to the fanciest shop in town to get rid of a pesky 'tick' from my BB a few years ago. I'd pay that $75 five times over not to have to hear that infernal sound on every downstroke...

Definitely taking a step back from the ledge--thanks for the insight.

[johnnylarue]

Ex post facto update: the bike sold today before I could go look at it.

Judging from the (largely) less than enthusiastic response it got from you lot, I suspect I may have dodged a bullet. Or at least, that's what I'm telling myself...

I guess I'll go back to hemming and hawing over that Litespeed. Sure wish it was cheaper... :(

[likebikes]

$250 for a complete bike, 1 year old 105 parts? buy in a heartbeat.

is it a usps model frame? in 56 or 58? sell it to me!

[johnnylarue]

$250 for a complete bike, 1 year old 105 parts? buy in a heartbeat.

is it a usps model frame? in 56 or 58? sell it to me!

Where the heck were you yesterday when everyone was like, "5200? Gross."

It's gone. I missed out. But it's okay. This way I get to maintain my no-carbon ultra-pure steel-rider status for a while longer. :p

[benb]

You certainly got the bike snob version of things here.

I might suggest going on Youtube and looking up the video from GCN where Simon (can't remember his last name) does a comparison of a Trek OCLV bike from that era against a modern Madone. He rides them back to back on the same roads, sets them up to fit the same, etc..

The Summary of his opinion was that the old OCLV bike was a lot better than most of us here would think.

A lot of Pro Tour races were won on those bikes and lots of pros rode them > 10,0000 miles per year, they didn't suck. Maybe some did have warranty issues, but they were also built like tanks and are probably less likely to grenade in a crash than modern frames.

[johnnylarue]

You certainly got the bike snob version of things here.


The Summary of his opinion was that the old OCLV bike was a lot better than most of us here would think.



Thanks--I'll hunt down that vid out for future reference. I know a lot of people are still riding these frames and gather they aren't junk, even by today's standards. I think a lot of posters here chose to overlook that I was getting a legit pro-grade bike (from a bygone era) for a price closer to what craigslist sellers typically ask for a 70s department store Schwinn with shredded tires.

That being said, while I was hedging towards going to see this bike in the evening, I still felt like it was distracting me from the ride I'm genuinely interested in. I just got sucked in by the combined bargain/novelty factor, thinking it would be an easy re-sell if it didn't work out. Alas!

[FlashUNC]

Had a 2000 5200 for over a decade as my main road bike. I beat the snot out of it. Sold it to a buddy who's now beating the snot out of it.

People, including me, bag on Trek for a lot of reasons, but I've always thought their carbon road stuff was legit.

[mhespenheide]

Ex post facto update: the bike sold today before I could go look at it.

Judging from the (largely) less than enthusiastic response it got from you lot, I suspect I may have dodged a bullet. Or at least, that's what I'm telling myself...

I guess I'll go back to hemming and hawing over that Litespeed. Sure wish it was cheaper... :(

On the other hand, you said that you'd pay five times over not to have a creaking bottom bracket. So you're not bottom-feeding, as attractive as that price was.

I know a lot of people who ride carbon, and -- if pressed or examined critically -- the consensus seems to be that carbon made a pretty significant jump somewhere between '11 to '13, depending on the company.

Fuji, Felt, and older Cervelo ('11-'12, or maybe back to '08 depending on your size and build/body type) tend to be really good values. And if you already have another bike, it can be really nice to have the same type of components on your second bike, as tempting as new 11-speed is. So if you're already running 9-speed Shimano, look for 9-speed Shimano or SRAM.

Plenty of deals out there if you're patient.

Or put up a WTB in the classifieds here and bikes will come out of the woodwork.

[johnnylarue]

On the other hand, you said that you'd pay five times over not to have a creaking bottom bracket. So you're not bottom-feeding, as attractive as that price was.

I know a lot of people who ride carbon, and -- if pressed or examined critically -- the consensus seems to be that carbon made a pretty significant jump somewhere between '11 to '13, depending on the company.

Fuji, Felt, and older Cervelo ('11-'12, or maybe back to '08 depending on your size and build/body type) tend to be really good values. .

Plenty of deals out there if you're patient.

Or put up a WTB in the classifieds here and bikes will come out of the woodwork.

Cheers to that. The frame looked like it had some proper mileage on it, so I wasn't optimistic with regards to noise--which would have certainly triggered my OCD in the worst way possible.

I'll keep watching my local market like a hawk and see what turns up. And I've still got that Tuscany waiting in the wings (for about $700 USD), which I should probably just buy so I can do more riding and less craigslisting.

[rustychisel]

...so I can do more riding and less craigslisting.

C'mon, that would be setting a dangerous precendent. You'd have to consider handing in your Paceline membership, too. :beer:

[Ken Robb]

This bike will be fine- but ride quality is not on par with any "nice riding" carbon frame made in the last few years.
Frame is somewhat dead, feels more stiff and chattery in the rear end than the front.
Fork is not so hot either- I am guessing it is the fork with the aluminum crown.

Fit- fit can be a challenge for these bikes. Bike was measured center to top of seat collar- it has a really short headtube, and long top tub for the stated size.
But if you can ride something long and low it could work well.

But the bike is fairly light and fairly stiff, probably just as many people like the 5200 as not.
I tested one of these when they were new and agree with John's review. I was VERY happy to get back on my Litespeed and ride away.

[johnnylarue]

C'mon, that would be setting a dangerous precendent. You'd have to consider handing in your Paceline membership, too. :beer:

Did I really write that? I was probably still feeling emotional from my almost-score.

In fact, if anything this experience has convinced me that I never want to ride a bike again unless it's a victory lap following a successful craigslist heist.

Man, it's nice to feel understood... :D

[johnnylarue]

I tested one of these when they were new and agree with John's review. I was VERY happy to get back on my Litespeed and ride away.

Ken, could I derail this convo to ask: do you still ride that Litespeed?

[Ken Robb]

Ken, could I derail this convo to ask: do you still ride that Litespeed?

No. I sold it long ago. My Legend ti and Hampsten Strada Bianca by MOOTS were much better ti bikes but they were also much newer. My Litespeed was about a 1999 model.

[johnnylarue]

No. I sold it long ago. My Legend ti and Hampsten Strada Bianca by MOOTS were much better ti bikes but they were also much newer. My Litespeed was about a 1999 model.

Cheers. I obviously wouldn't kick either of those bikes out of bed for eating crackers, as the saying goes, nor would I feel especially great about locking one up outside a grocery store. I'm trying to decide if the 2002 Tuscany I'm looking at could be a suitable beater in that way. Perhaps only one way to find out...

[oliver1850]

Local ex-pro (and Trek dealer) told me he loves the OCLV frames, also that he'd broken several of them. That said, he's a big guy that averages 30 mph on a 10 mile time trial. I have a 1992 5500 - don't ride it often but it's a nice bike. One of my triathlete friends had a 5200 that he put about 10,000 miles on with no issues. Traded for a Bianchi 928 when he was on a bike trip out of state and the 6400 STI failed. He was wanting to ride the next day so took the $300 the local shop offered in trade on the 928. I really don't think you can go wrong with one of these bikes in good shape for $250.

[mhespenheide]

And I've still got that Tuscany waiting in the wings (for about $700 USD), which I should probably just buy so I can do more riding and less craigslisting.

The more I ride, the less time I spend worrying about bike parts. :help:

[paredown]

If we are 'bagging on Trek' as far as an entry level carbon, if you all (Virginia inclusive) were looking at used affordable carbon, what do you think is the best deal out there? (Undervalues, underappreciated and likely to be widely available?)

[benb]

Yah you can't talk about an older Trek without realizing the Paceline is going to bag on the latest and greatest Trek too, it MUST be inferior because it's not bespoke, even if Armstrong/Cancellara/Contador/whoever had great luck with them.

I think it's really ridiculous to even say "Carbon made a big jump between X and Y".

Not all Steel bikes are the same, not all aluminum, Ti, or Carbon frames are the same.

I had a 2004 Giant TCR Composite that I felt had really poor torsional stiffness, it was worse than almost all the metal bikes I've had... my later carbon bikes (a 2011 BH and a 2016 Trek) have vastly better torsional stiffness. But that doesn't mean all bikes from 2000-2008 that were made of Carbon had poor torsional stiffness. I know for a fact the Treks around 2004 had better torsional stiffness than my Giant did. (The Giant fit better though!) And in the end it didn't really matter.. I had my best season racing that giant.

Modern Carbon frames with the gigantic BB junctions and the tapered head tubes are inarguably better than what came before if you're strong enough to feel the difference. But you can't go claim the older ones are terrible. Cause a lot of the custom steel/Ti bikes that everyone would say are amazing and perfect here have stiffness a lot more comparable to those old carbon bikes than the new ones.

Last year I test rode a demo Ti Seven that had it's lateral stiffness maxed out on their scale.. it was rated 10 out of 10 for drivetrain stiffness. Biggest/thickest chain stays and downtime they offered. It was a great bike. But it was nowhere near as stiff in those areas as my Trek Domane. The Seven was way more comparable to those older carbon bikes. Same thing with the Serotta Concours I had.. it was built stiff but it still flexed a ton more than these modern carbon bikes, it was way more like the older carbon bikes.

I haven't rode a Ti bike with the oversized (1/4"-1/2"?) head tubes that some builders are making now to try and catch up with the front end handling of modern carbon. I can tell the difference between the tapered carbon front ends and everything else I've ever put a leg over. I prefer those tapered carbon front ends. But that doesn't mean the older carbon/ti/steel front ends are deficient.. plenty of them are totally stiff enough and will never hold back performance. They just don't make you grin quite as much when you aggressively turn the bike in. And if everything else was right I'd happily buy a bike with a standard 1 1/8" setup.

[Keith A]

I've owned and raced several of the OCLV Treks and still have one of the last versions before they went to the Madone series. It has been ridden much lately, but I'm in the process of upgrading a few things on this and will back in duty soon.

I think it's still a solid bike that handles well. My only qualm, which has been mentioned before, is that they do have longish top tubes and short head tubes. This is exaggerated by the fact that the bottom bracket is actually behind the down tube and seat tube junction -- which effectively elongates the top tube.

I'd have no problem suggesting someone purchase one of these to ride today...especially if it was a great deal.

[johnnylarue]

I think it's still a solid bike that handles well. My only qualm, which has been mentioned before, is that they do have longish top tubes and short head tubes. This is exaggerated by the fact that the bottom bracket is actually behind the down tube and seat tube junction -- which effectively elongates the top tube.

I'd have no problem suggesting someone purchase one of these to ride today...especially if it was a great deal.

The geometry was a source of hesitation for me as well. I'm 6'1 and typically ride a 59/60 frame, but with a shorter top tube. The bike I missed out on was a large-looking 60, which makes me think I might be better off on a 58 for commuting and ergonomics.

And I don't really blame the haters re: Trek. Overexposure, unfortunate endorsement mishaps and overseas manufacturing aside, I can't say I've ever loved the look of a Trek road bike since they moved away from their rather neat art deco-inspired logo in the early 80s. There's a sort of All-American blandness (banal garishness?) to a lot of their paint schemes and decal designs that I just can't get behind--with all due respect to those who love them.

That said, enough time has passed that I can appreciate the lines of the 5200 frame. Vintage CF is probably less likely to be fetishized the way steel has been, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if these became at least semi-collectible at some point in the near future--assuming they don't all start to crumble into toxic plastic dust in the next 5-10 years. :D

In any case, I'll be more proactive about checking out the next bargain-priced 5200 that pops up. I'm officially curious enough to take one for a spin.

[benb]

I've been here defending them but realistically they are a bad fit for me, and if you're not cool with the longish TT/shortish HT for a given size then there isn't that big of a reason to go look for these older bikes.

Besides IIRC the "H2" geometry that is a bit better for longer legged riders has been around 9 years now.. there should be plenty of them on the used market too, although then you're into all the modern stuff.

[bikinchris]

Yah you can't talk about an older Trek without realizing the Paceline is going to bag on the latest and greatest Trek too, it MUST be inferior because it's not bespoke, even if Armstrong/Cancellara/Contador/whoever had great luck with them.

.

Sean Kelly rode an Alan aluminum bicycle in the pro peleton. He broke 7 frames in one year. But since it was a pro tour bike, it HAD to be great?

Trek makes great bikes. As long as you have the lifetime warranty, you are set to go. If you buy second hand, you have to weigh all of the information.