Older Trek Geometry Questions

[pjmsj21]

I am looking at a older Trek 5020 for my daughter and need to try and find out the specifics on the geometry and dimnesions. I am looking at a 50cm model and cant seem to track down any info. Any suggestions as to where to look?

Pat Mc

[Keith A]

Do you know what year this is from?

[pjmsj21]

Do you know what year this is from?


Yeah....I know but my daughter isnt a died in the wool serious rider. She graduated from college a year ago, and even an older Trek would be a significant upgrade from the mid-eighties mountain bike she is riding now.

Pat Mc

[bike22]

vintage-trek.com if she has an 70s-early 90s model..

[eltonbalch]

I am looking at a older Trek 5020 for my daughter and need to try and find out the specifics on the geometry and dimnesions. I am looking at a 50cm model and cant seem to track down any info. Any suggestions as to where to look?

Pat Mc
Here is a link to older Trek catalogues dating 1995 and older. If you have no success there, I'd suggest e-mailng Trek directly.

http://www.vintage-trek.com/TrekBrochures.htm

[Keith A]

Here's the geometry for the OCLV bikes from 2003. At some point, there was a slight change in the geometry some where along the way and it may have been when they went to 1 1/8" headtubes. Anyway, this should be close enough to give you an idea.

[palincss]

Yeah....I know but my daughter isnt a died in the wool serious rider. She graduated from college a year ago, and even an older Trek would be a significant upgrade from the mid-eighties mountain bike she is riding now.

Pat Mc

I think the point of asking what year is that the Trek brochures that are online are organized by year. So you start with the year, find the appropriate brochure, find the model in question, and hopefully Trek included the information you're after.

BTW - that's dyed in the wool.

[pjmsj21]

Thanks everyone for all of your help. The 5020 is a 97 with a 52cm top tube.

Pat Mc

[Keith A]

I think the point of asking what year is that the Trek brochures that are online are organized by year. So you start with the year, find the appropriate brochure, find the model in question, and hopefully Trek included the information you're after.

BTW - that's dyed in the wool.Bingo!

Pat -- I may have some older Trek catalogs and will see if there is any difference in the geometry from what I posted.

[ultraman6970]

A lot of other brands around that could be better than the old carbon trek thing. After reading and seeing some epic failures in trek carbon frames i would not even think in one, an worse, that old.

At that size if you have money (less than 2000) to spend probably the best thing is get a willier or a pinarello at CC, they were basically giving them away a few days ago. You will get a new carbon bike and the warranty.

http://www.bustedcarbon.com/2011/07/jra-trek-asploded.html

[Keith A]

Hey ultraman6970 -- I've ridden and raced an Trek OCLV (pre-Madone) for many years and while it isn't the best or certainly the newest, it is a decent bike. I would also suspect that the pre-Madone Trek were probably more durable than the current stuff. I haven't ever seen or heard of an issue with these frames...but I have heard of numerous issues with some of the new Madones including a report on Velonews a while back.

[Frankwurst]

Yeah....I know but my daughter isnt a died in the wool serious rider. She graduated from college a year ago, and even an older Trek would be a significant upgrade from the mid-eighties mountain bike she is riding now.

Pat Mc

Why not a nice older lugged steel bike of some sort that will fit chubby tires?
Just askin. :beer:

[ultraman6970]

Ok man, :) np :)

[oliver1850]

Hey ultraman6970 -- I've ridden and raced an Trek OCLV (pre-Madone) for many years and while it isn't the best or certainly the newest, it is a decent bike. I would also suspect that the pre-Madone Trek were probably more durable than the current stuff. I haven't ever seen or heard of an issue with these frames...but I have heard of numerous issues with some of the new Madones including a report on Velonews a while back.


Not to dispute this opinion in general, but I know a former pro rider who has broken more than 1 of the 5000-5500 series frames. He still likes them, but they are do fail. Sorry, I neglected to ask where they broke. I have a 1992 5500 with a lot of miles that has no issues, but I'm not capable of a 32mph 10 mile TT, like this guy is.

[oliver1850]

Now to address the OP:

From the 1997 Trek catalog:

HTA 72 degrees
STA 75 degrees
TT 51.8 cm
chainstay 40.8 cm
crank CL to ground 26.6 cm
fork rake 47 mm
wheelbase 97.9 cm
standover 74.9 cm

[Keith A]

Not to dispute this opinion in general, but I know a former pro rider who has broken more than 1 of the 5000-5500 series frames. He still likes them, but they are do fail. Sorry, I neglected to ask where they broke. I have a 1992 5500 with a lot of miles that has no issues, but I'm not capable of a 32mph 10 mile TT, like this guy is.I would certainly expect there to be some failures of these frames too...especially given the fact that this was Trek's first all carbon bike. I do know that somewhere along the way, they beefed up the bottom bracket to make it stronger. I just hadn't heard of any issues of frames breaking like I have from their most recent all carbon Madones. However, I do know that the 5000-5500 series frames had a common problem of the paint cracking where the tubes were joined together.