ldmataya 

$125 plus shipping - which is usually around $60 when I use bikeflights/FedEx.
This was a barn find, where I knew the owner of the barn and remembered he had some sort of Trek tourer. We found it very dirty but with some components left, like the out of round 27 x 1 1/4 wheels. It cleaned up pretty well.
The 614 was the sport touring geometry equipped with a triple crank and Suntour Cyclone derailleurs. I have the derailleurs and shifters that I will toss in if wanted. Retail price of the bike was $439 in 1982.
24 inch means 62cm c-c seat tube and 60cm c-c top tube. 531 main tubes, Ishiwata fork and stays. Suntour GS dropouts. I cleaned and greased the Tange headset - it was in pretty good shape but I had to replace the channel-lock mangled top nut. All threads chased include BB shell.
Worst damage is chainstay chain grind and left front fork. Paint in pretty good shape, I would leave the patina. That serial number is 042339.

Kilroy1988 

Just FYI, if the frame measures 62cm center-to-center then it's a 25" frame, as Trek used traditional center-to-top measurements. 24 inches is exactly 60.96cm so a 24" frame measured center-to-center is slightly under 60cm.

Good luck with the sale!

-Gregory

romperrr 

Lovely frames. I have one in my size and its a true "sport-tourer" in terms of ride feel. Sportier than my Miyata 1000 yet Tour-ier than my Lemonds.

ldmataya 

Thanks for the clarification. The geometry charts in the 81-82 catalogs describe measurement "A" as center to center but yes, they clearly rounded up to get to the frame size in inches. I had forgotten that they built 24 and 25 1/2 inch frames. This would be the larger one.

Kilroy1988 

If the catalog says center-to-center and you get around 62cm on that then I think 25 1/2" sounds right! Trek must have switched to or started off using C-C while I'm thinking of something else. Could have sworn their 24" frames measured 61cm center-to-top but what do I know? Cheers!

mountaindave 

Serial number also confirms that it is a 25” made in 1982. The interesting thing is that the charts indicate that it’s a 613, not a 614. The difference is only in the components. And a 614 would have come with Cyclone MkII; the 613 came with Blue Line.

Regardless, the frames were the same, and if it were my frame, I’d throw on 700c wheels anyway, which would allow wider, supple tires… not that I’m considering it - I need another Trek like I need another hole in my head - just thinking out loud.

GLWS!

seedsbelize2

I wouldn’t mind having an entire fleet of classic Treks. They just fit so perfectly, and ride so nicely. My fleet lacks a 531 frame set.This one is too big.

mountaindave 

Reading further on the Vintage-Trek site, the frame is listed as a 613 in the database, but Trek often listed the lowest model number only, meaning the frame could be built up to a higher level. Hence it was built up and sold as a 614, not as a 613.

madpogue 

^^^ Right, it's not known whether a 61x frame is gonna become a 613 or 614 initially, so the log refers to it as a 610.

ldmataya 

This one is now sold. Thanks for all the interest.