sloar 

I’m deciding which one to keep for a do it all bike. I love both but one has to go, so which one stays?
1983 Trek 520, Salsa 9 speed wheels, 9 speed indexed barend shifters, great bike. Or this new 2018 Marin Four Corners? Thanks

djb

I think you should just ask Meryl Streep.

what are your thoughts, tell us about the Marin and why we should keep it, or even consider it to stay on the island?

Leebo

N+1.

BobG

I'd choose the Marin. All of my pre'90s touring bikes had traditional diamond frames with level top tubes. All of them were somewhat noodly handling when loaded heavily. I've been riding a Bruce Gordon Rock&Road for the past 25 years. It has a sloping top tube similar to the Marin and handles much better loaded.

Also, being a little guy, nothing makes me feel smaller than a bike with a high standover height. The sloping top tube with more exposed seat post makes me feel like a big guy! Yes, less real estate for water bottles but you'll find a way around that. The Marin has a taller head tube than my BG bringing the bars up to a comfortable touring height without much stem/riser extension.

You may wish for lower gearing than the stock 30x34.

fietsbob

I don't have either of your bikes, I'd keep the ones I have..

LBS sells Trek , we had a 520 there.. have a 920 in stock now..


Do Tell, what are your touring plans ? where are you planning to go?







...

robow

If you really really have to rid yourself of one, and you can't make up your mind, then IMO, you should keep the newer Marin since it will be less frustrating to find parts in the future. (And I'm a brifters kind of guy)

seeker333

Keep newer bike. Sell the Trek to someone looking for a "classic".

Andrew R Stewart 

I would be careful in associating a sloping top tube with creating a stiffer bike, or a bike with less shimmy. It's the tubing specs far more then their being level, or not, that impacts ride quality.

I do agree with smaller bikes and stand over though. Andy (who's 5' 6")

fietsbob

the 520 could be a fine commuting bike too.. .

BobG

Just speaking for the previous old frames I've owned Andy... a '65 Schwinn Paramount, a '68 WB Hurlow and a '82 Bill Vetter. They were all basically Reynolds 531 road racing frames with more relaxed touring geometry made for light hostelling type touring.

Yes, I'm sure the modern level top tube frames (such as Surly) have addressed the stiffness issue. I believe I can make out a Reynolds 501 sticker on the '83 Trek in question (slightly heavier than 531) so indeed, it may not be a noodle!

dgodave

Marin.
More versatile for different types of roads.
Better riding position for touring, imo.

acantor

I have two touring bikes, one purchased 34 years ago, other 16 years ago. Both are awesome for touring and commuting. But if I had to choose between the two, I would opt for the newer one. Now that both bikes are old-ish, it's becoming challenging to find replacement parts -- but moreso for the 1985 model!

veganbikes

I like the look of the 520 and some of the parts on it are quite excellent for touring however probably the Marin is going to be a more practical bike as it is more modern. I wouldn't get rid of either bike or if I was keeping the Marin I would do a lot to it to work well for me.

katsup

I have had similar thoughts about my 1990 520 and 2017 Vaya. It came down to where I live and ride. If in a rough area with lots of theft, or if I need money, I'd keep the less expensive 520, otherwise it's the newer Vaya.

I did purchase the Vaya first and copied a lot about it when I restored the 520 so the fit is similar on both bikes.

nesteel 

The only thing the Marin has going for it is the disc brakes. Otherwise it's all about the Trek.

sloar 

I decided on the Marin, steel Treks are easy to pick up later. I got the Marin from Performance Bikes closing sale for $450. Thanks for
the replies.

djb

thats a really good price for what the bike is.
If you actually tour on it, you can look into if its possible to change the 30 granny to a 26 or something, this change makes a big difference if carrying a moderate load and in hilly terrain.

I just dont know if this crankset can do it, its all about the bcd and bolt pattern-which determines if a smaller granny can be put on.
Ive done this on a few bikes with 50/39/30, and an experienced mechanic will be able to give you a proper answer, although I would get more than one opinion and inform yourself about the details before asking, some stores and mechanics are notorious for not bothering with something "non standard" and or are not knowledgeable and or misinformed and or just dont want to spend the time.

enjoy it, nice bike. The spyre disc brakes are supposed to be good, and at least are not no name low end brakes.

sloar 

Right now it will mainly be used for high mile all day rides. I love the 6 bottle cage mounts. Most my miles are in the country away from water supplies. The gearing will be fine for my flat area. Touring plans later this summer, not sure where.

CliffordK

My old Colnago never handled well when fully loaded.

I've been riding a Tricross and a Coda conversion a bit lately, and both seem to do much better with at least moderate loads.

I'm planning on doing some more experimenting this summer, but my guess is that the flex comes from several sources from a vintage rack to thinner tubes. And, perhaps tubing specs not designed for loaded riding.

The bike choice will really depend on where one is riding.

My riding seems to do well with narrow tires. So, I'd lean towards the Trek (depending on how it actually rides).

However, the Marin is quite an interesting bike.

nesteel 

Correction: low and mid level steel Treks are easy-ish to pick up. The high end stuff still is, and will remain "keeper" worthy. I plan to pick up a new Trek 520 later this year, but none of my good steel Treks are going anywhere, including the 720.

sloar 

I seem to find a lot of them. Also I own a few others as well.

djb

I would also add that the sora shifters have improved a great deal compared to the previous generation that had the thumb shifter. The paddle ones feel very very similar to my older 9 spd tiagra sti shifters, ie have a nice smooth, low friction action, where the older ones had a cheaper feel to them and more friction involved with shifting.
It would seem that this is a good example of the "trickle down" thing with shimano, and hopefully the should last a good long time if taken care of properly.

the shifting is "soft" compared to 105 and up, but I certainly cant complain about using my tiagra shifters from 2010 (touch wood)

have fun learning the new tricks with disc brakes, not overly hard, but still, new tricks to learn and to get used to the few foibles that come with very good braking.
But all learnable if you have the interest.

alan s 

Surly LHT. Always a safe answer, no matter what the question is.