seypat

I picked this up yesterday. The Trek serial database says it's an 82 412. The components don't match up with 412. Could have been late in the model year. The PO had bought it for his wife. Put on a Terry female saddle. He also upgraded the brakes/levers to first gen Dura Ace.

seedsbelize 

If the serial number says '82 412, that's what you have to go with. What tubeset?
I'm bringing a 1980 414 to SOTR. In that same blue.

nlerner

I bought one of those in 1982:



Tubing was Ishawata 022.

TXsailor

I like it. Does it fit you?

The Golden Boy 

What makes you think that it's not a 412?

There was only one model in the 400 series for 1982- the 412.

seypat

It's my size.

seypat

Most of the parts on it are a step or two up from what is listed in the brochure. I realize components are subject to change. The owner did upgrade the brakes himself. But, the crank, derailleurs/shifters, seatpost, hubs, and rims are different. The serial number is 038102, towards the end of the production run. Maybe that is the reason for the factory upgrades.

Look at those rims. I started a thread on them.

The Golden Boy 

That 412 is a really sweet bike. CrMo frame and HiTen fork and stays... and it looks like it's SUBSTANTIALLY upgraded.

It's not just that things are subject to change from the factory- (my 84 420 came with Shimano Z series stuff instead of the Simplex stuff listed in the catalog- that was a case of either Simplex's QC being bad {I think J.Thompson said the Simplex FDs for the 720 were breaking as they were putting them on the bikes- forcing Trek to use Huret FDs** or Simplex couldn't handle the amount of stuff Trek needed). In the case of your bike- it's really clearly a case of a 40 year old bike having parts swapped out.

In 1982- there was only one 400 series bike model- the 412. It wasn't that a component change changed the model designation (like the previous year's 715, 716 and 719- the difference was Suntour VX vs. Shimano 600 vs. Dura Ace). It could ONLY be a 412- regardless of any components on it.

Do a bunch of reading about the 412- you'll see a LOT of people who have a LOT of bikes hang on to and prefer the 412 over other much more expensive and prestigious models and makers.

I didn't say it before- but "Congratulations!" .

79pmooney

I have that bike. I picked it up like yours, no decals save the headbadge. The local manager at the Trek shop said he believed it was an '83 4something (420 as I recall but never wrote it down). Serial 038671. Came with no parts

The tubing is nothing special. Stiffish, not sexy feeling. Not an elegant ride, but capable. It has been my winter/rain/city fix gear from day one, 2008, and has served my very well. It did suffer the crack across the seatstay cap at the seat lug, got a proper repair and powdercoat. I hear on this forum that such cracks are rare but when I called my framebuilder after seeing it he said (having never looked at the bike) to check the other side, it would be cracked also. He was right.

This time of year, I love the bike, Over the summer it spends weeks and months on its hook. The frame is serving as frame #5 of my 42 yo winter/rain/city fix gear and is the best yet and for that application, a real keeper.

Ben
.

seypat

I don't know anything about Treks. I don't know the number hierarchy. Couldn't tell one model from the next. I was just trying to identify it. Without the decals, hard to do. About the only things that matches the brochure specs are the paint color, pedals and headset.

seedsbelize 

Welcome to the vintage Trek club. I was a late comer myself.

seypat

I actually bought the bike to overcome my "no concrete" reason bias towards Trek. I think it comes from the modern Trek fanboys. We all have biases toward certain products/companies. Cycling related, Trek is there along with Schwinn, Raleigh, Bianchi and Peugeot as bikes I have a bias against. Anyway, it was cheap, had no decals and a nice color. Hopefully, it will get Trek out of my doghouse.

The other reason I bought it is because it was/is a gateway to another bike the seller has. I'm supposed to pick that up in about 2 hours. Story on that later. After that one, I won't buy any more until I pare down the fleet some.

The Golden Boy 

seypat

I didn't have the serial number when I was looking at the pics to figure a price. The seller is/was the original owner. The only things that were changed over from when he bought it originally was the saddle, the brakes and the tires. He changed the original tires because they were dry rotted. He needed to sell the bike. The bike was only ridden very little by wife. She did not take to cycling. She also didn't like the decals, so she removed them. The bike has been hanging on a hook in a basement for about 20 years. The dates codes on the components all match up as does the info on the rim thread about the rims. What is rude and disrespectful is you thinking that there is now way the bike could come from the factory with those components. But, that's ok, we are all enthusiasts here. That is the point of the thread.

The owner/seller was/is very meticulous about his bikes. Wait till you see the thread I put up about the other bike I am buying today. The owner updated it through the years. He has every original part in plastic bags neatly organized with his tools in a nice toolbox. Plus any part that was added or removed in the box it came in if it came in a box. It's like a time capsule. The original brakes/levers for the Trek were in that tool box. The saddle might be in there also. I did not dig very deep. Problem is, that saddle and brakes were used on several Treks according to the brochure. Once I saw some of the parts in the top of the tool box, I decided I need to buy the other bike and the toolbox/parts. I didn't have room for the 2nd bike or the money on me for the 2nd bike. Picking it up today.

Maybe the owner had the LBS he bought the Trek from install the upgrades before he bought it. I didn't/don't want to ask because it might have driven the price up.

BTW, I noticed you are from Waukesha, WI. The Bodeans came through here back in May. They sounded just as good as when I saw them in the early 90's.

fliplap

Desertdweller

madpogue 

Late in the model run, probably a lot of substitutions. I know Trek put those Blue Lines on a number of models BITD, so no surprise to see them.

Those early '80s Trek seat tube panels are just so iconic, I'd be tempted to look for a replacement. 'Course, I'm a bit biased TOWARD that generation of Trek; my first "not a POS" bike was a brand new '82 613. Granted, the panel makes it more of a theft target.

Chr0m0ly 

Road Fan

The number hierarchy is not a strict guide to "level" or quality. In those days, Trek made a point of giving you the same very high brazing and joining quality in all their frames.

The 4xx were generally double-butted Ishiwata, in this case Ishiwata 022. The 5xx were often dB Reynolds 501, the 6xx were Reynolds 531 main tubes butted, and the 7xx were Reynolds 531 fully butted tubeset frame and fork. Ishiwatas, the Reynolds 531, and Columbus SL are all conventional CrMo with no particular heat treating, and all three have butting .9/.6/.9. The three tubesets should make frames with essentially the same performance and durability, especially with the same Trek joining technology applied to all.

The Reynolds 531 have a metallurgical advantage over CrMo, that the strength of the 531 steel after brazing is greater than that of CrMo after brazing, so the 531 makes a stronger finished frame with equal tubing. 531 as Trek used it has a thinner-wall top tube (.8/5.5/.8) than the Ishi 022 (.9/.6/.9), and the Trek 531 has a thicker down tube (1.0/.7/1.0) than the Ishi 022 and other CrMo, using (.9/.6/.9). Whether anyone can consistently feel the difference will probably never be resolved. Among the aged racy crowd or vintage racey crowd the debate over Columbus SL versus Reynolds 531 has gone on at least 50 years.

Reynolds makes (and made) similar tubes in different thicknesses, which enabled other users of 531 to order lighter down tubes. Other bike manufacturers used a .9/,6/.9 or even .8/.5/.8 down tubes in their products, resulting in a little more flexy frame that perhaps their customers liked better.

Bottom line: That 412 from 1982 was and is one of the screaming good deals in a low-priced, high-quality bike frame. Put any kind of parts you like on it, you can even weight-weenie it if you like.

Road Fan

It could also be that the bike was received at the bike shop with all the original parts as called for in the Trek brochure (I'm assuming that matches Trek's internal build instructions) and for some reason of his own, the buyer requested that many of the original parts be upgraded. 35 years later the original true tale could have been forgotten or lost. For me, I think what is significant is that you got a very good frame with very respectable durable components, and the frame has a minimum of paint issues though it is not perfect as photographed. I would just take it and ride it. As far back as 1982, anything could have happened, and an LBS owner could have made any deal he saw fit in order to make a sale. Certainly Trek did not have enforcers or catalog police.

If you generally don't like Trek, Peugeot, and Raleigh, (and I think you mentioned one other as well) what bikes do you like and would seek out for yourself? Personally I don't think any bike company is perfect, not even Masi and Mondonico, which I love to ride. But I don't feel dislike for any of them - they just make bikes.

cinco

I just finished a 1981.5 614 (probably) which matched the spec sheet except for the crank. Everything was date-coded from mid-'81 and the bike didn't look like it'd been ridden much so I think everything was original, but the catalog lists a Super Apex crank and this one had a Super Custom. Guess the '82 parts showed up early and they ran out of Apex cranks. The point being, yeah, they did some mysterious stuff back then and I wouldn't bet against OP's frame being mis-stamped or someone grabbing a frame off the wrong rack at the factory for any number of reasons.

hokiefyd 

I like the Suntour BL (Blue Line) groupset on it. The rear derailer looks pretty "art deco" to me. I had that groupset on an '80s Motobecane Jubilee Sport and really liked the classic look of the derailers and shifters.

Does anyone know if there's a close match to this Trek's color in rattle can?

seypat

Back from getting the other bike. Give the guy credit, he was thorough. He did still have the original saddle and brakes.

seypat

That's what is funny, there is no real reason for the biases. I have never ridden any of them. For Trek, maybe it was ties to Lance and indirectly, Nike. But that should have no bearing towards vintage Treks. I can't put a finger on it. So, I saw my chance to buy one and get over the bias. This one is in such good shape. Some lube and maintenance is all it needs.

mgopack42 

Well, what is it? you know we have a hard time waiting after a tease!