Charles Wahl

Or, "Do these pants make my butt look too wide?"

Seriously, as someone said above, why bother with a bike that has had questionable treatment that's admitted, especially if you're not there to investigate it first hand? Who needs the aggravation? There's very little going on in this thread that's conclusive WRT the subject bike.

For my own part, and being completely aware that there's a lot of love for them, Treks are one of those whistles I don't hear, like Colnagos. I've had a few pass through my doors, been very negatively impressed by the paint/corrosion protection of the 80s examples (unaccountable chipping and rusting), don't think their graphics are "all that". In that vein (Ford vs Chevy), I've always found Specialized models to be more attractive, and seemingly better made.

When our kids were younger, we bought them each their first serious bike; they got to choose a 26" wheeled model. My daughter bought a really nice indigo Specialized, and my son (2 years younger) went for a bright orange Trek. I'd say that in quality they were as close to equal as you could wish. One day, when we'd been cycling around Central Park, and had stopped to rest, sitting on a bench beside the loop road, my son said "Have you ever noticed how all the girls are riding Specialized, and the boys Trek?" We thought that this was a bit sexist, and told him so. As we sat there, of course, we began counting, and after awhile, it became embarrassingly obvious that he was right. Maybe it was just that day, that time . . . we still laugh about it.