Milo

Hi there,
I have always been a low-end bike rider, and i was thinking upgrading all the way to mid-range.
Does anyone know if the Trek 1000 can take much weight, or if it's more of a speedy road bike not made for touring. I've had great experience with the trek 800 mnt bike on a tour. Almost impossible to damage.

Thanks,
Milo

alanbikehouston

Touring bikes need long chainstays so that saddle bags don't hit your heels. The chainstays on the Trek 1000 are very short, as it uses racing geometry. The 7200 FX, with flat bars, does have long chainstays and uses fatter 32mm and 35mm tires which are ideal for touring.

SarahJ

I had a 1000c packed using a BOB trailer because panniers would hit my heels. The first time the bike had a lot of weight on it the frame flexed so much I had to readjust the gearing. The gearing set up was impractical for loaded touring, it was way too high so the big ring was barely used. Thought you might like to know.

SarahJ

Travelinguyrt

I Used a TREK 1000 2 years ago 04 model, 4 months and about 3500+KM in Europe, 2 rear panniers and a bar bag, about 32 lbs total gear and prob a third I didn't need nor use, no prob with heels bumping panniers,bought from our good buddy in FT Collins Col. I believe. One flat entire trip original Bontrager tires
NO ONE SINGLE OTHER PROB ENTIRE TRIP
TREK 1000 HIGHLY recommended by me

I think a lot of folks on these sites are too much involved in technicalities, and specs, rather than getting self on a bike and riding and then finding if it fits

And thin out the gear you carry..........so very much isn't ever used

nm+

Honestly, a mountain bike's better than a road bike for touring.
Geometry is better for touring and they're a bit stronger.
If you're getting a new bike foir touring, why not look at the trek 520? If you find a shop that has one in stock (rather than order), you can get em for like $1000 or less (I paid ~$900)
Its also not a bad bike for normal road riding. Perhaps not as fast, but a fun bike.
Also, I've always been more impressed with Trek's high end steel offerings than ALU offerings. Which is sad, because the 520 is the only high end steel bike they make

SarahJ

Dear Travelinguyrt,
I'm happy the bike worked out for you, I guess you got lucky. My bike was a 1000c (meaning compact frame) and provided little heel clearance and had overlap in the front... I was only carrying 30lbs on the trailer and the frame did flex... This was a frame issue. The 1000 bike is a budget bike not a loaded tourer. It wasn't a bad bike after fixing the gearing and the bike performed adequately, however, unless you are a strong cyclist the gearing is wrong. Almost every post about gearing in this forum recommends lower gearing than what the bike comes with.

KrisPistofferson

Yep, especially if you're not made of money, as touring-specific stuff costs an arm and a leg.

However, if you already have the Trek 1000 and want to tour on it, think about swapping out the cassette and maybe rear derallieur so you can get some low gears, getting the best brake pads money can buy, like Kool Stops, and forgetting panniers in favor of a BOB trailer. Honestly, one of the dirty little secrets of this forum is that you can tour on anything if you're of a mind to, but taking all the factors into account is important. Shoot, they even make bean-shaped panniers to avoid heel strike for people who tour on normal road bikes. Good luck. BTW, that Trek 1000 is a really nice bike for it's price range.

axolotl

I think you make a good point.

markw

What's your budget? Rear chainstays are an issue on a touring bike. You may be limited on the panniers because of the chainstays being too short. Others mention flex, etc. If your spending around $1k, build up an LHT, or get a Trek 520. Yes, people get involved with the technical crap, but there's a reason, if you plan the bike right and do some smart shopping, you won't end up with a compromise. That's why the LHT has become really popular, for about the same price as a 520, you can build it to the right specs with proper gearing and better components. The 520 has 17.7 inch chainstays, the 1000 has 16.4 inch, that's a 1.3" difference which could mean heel strike on panniers or not. FWIW, the LHT has 18.1" chainstays. Trying to fit fenders and other touring gear to a 1000 may be an issue too. If you don't own one yet, and were looking at touring, I'd go either the 520 route, or build up an LHT. Both would be WAY better touring bikes than the 1000.

Milo

Thanks everyone. The 520 seems most suited to me. Though, Mark, what is an LHT?

Nigeyy

LHT = Long Haul Trucker, checkout:

https://www.surlybikes.com/longhaul.html

It's a purpose steel tourer frame, well made and designed. Long chainstays, spoke holders, good clearance for fenders, etc. It's ideal for the person who wants to build up a frame they like with their components. Now and again, you might see a full bike for sale, but usually shops just order the frame.

One advantage is that below 54cm in size the frame is designed around a 26" mtb wheel, whereas above 54cm in size you get the 700C wheel sizes. This feature can help prevent toe overlap. I don't own one myself, but my friend has one, and they are pretty nice. Be warned though, they are no bargain (unless you have many of the components you already need). A nicely built LHT can easily cost $1000+ (optimistic?), so don't think you'll save money if at all.

vik 

Availability on the popular sizes of the LHT are very tight. I started the process of getting a warranty replacement 58cm LHT dark cherry on 8 May. They are talking about 15 July on the surly blog for that size/colour frame to come in.

PiratePete

Trek 1000 will work just fine. I just did 1400 miles with 55 lbs of gear without problems. In a couple of days going for 1800 more to finish the southern tier.