gab11

Hi all,

I've ordered myself a 2022 trek 520, and it should be arriving any time now. The bike is priced at $1899

Since placing the order, I've come across a 2010 Kona sutra which has done less than 100kms. It presents as brand new.
It's in immaculate condition. The seller wants $1300.

My question is, should I op for the Kona and save $$$
It's older, but will do the job I need it to do, or should I just go with modern tech and enjoy treks lifetime frame warranty?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

shelbyfv

i don't think you would gain much from the Trek other than LBS support. The 520 price seems high for a Sora bike with outdated axle specs. However, if you aren't confident you can get the Kona to fit and work properly, LBS support is a major plus.

Cdst

I assume you’re getting the fully equipped Sutra, fenders, racks and all. The two bikes are both 3x9 drivetrains and mechanical disc brake equipped. The trek has integrated shifters while the Kona has bar end shifters. The trek can fit 2” tires and comes with 38mms. the Kona’s rims can’t take wider than 32mm tires but if you swap wheels the frame can fit wider… at least that was the limit on my 2012 Sutra’s original wheel set.

are either of these a big deal to you? Kona spec’d the bar end shifters to simplify maintenance when you’re touring in the middle of nowhere. The narrower tires however, are falling out of favor. If you want wider tires then the cost of a new wheel set will eat up most or all of the $600 you save.

Iride01 

The Kona Sutra probably didn't cost that much new in 2010. I'd be hard pressed to want to pay more than 300 for it.

Though everything looks good on it and might be running well, you'll need to accept that it might be a money pit if stuff needs replacing after you put it to work for you. So if you feel you want it, then make an offer realizing that it's old, with old components.

alcjphil

By any measure, even in showroom condition, the Kona is overpriced. It sold brand new in 2010 for $1200, it shouldn't sell now for any more than half that price even given current scarcities.

biker128pedal

Which Trek 520? There are two offered for the same list price. One has a rear rack and lower grade shifters. I think. I have to look.

The Trek will come with a warranty and has newer components. Both have disc brakes which is good. It really come down to the shifters.

Cdst

Your profile shows your country as AU. Are the numbers you have given in AUD?

veganbikes

Probably none of the above. The Kona maybe has a little better drivetrain components and is at least a steel fork instead of some silly aluminum thing but it is very expensive for such an old bike that wasn't a really high end bike. The Trek has a few advantages at least warranty wise and maybe some parts are slightly improved or at least a little more tire clearance but I don't know that either one would really be a top contender.

What are your plans for the bike? That might help someone find a bike suitable for you? Also if you do plan on touring or doing some heavy duty commuting, I would find something already set up with a dynamo, I cannot speak the praises of generating your own power and powering lights anytime you are moving. No more charging batteries (unless you go for a Plug V which has a small bank so you can effectively charge a modern smartphone via dynamo without causing issues) and you will always have light so long as you are moving and usually will have a stand light for a bit when you are not. I said "I don't want it, it will add weight blah blah blah" and ended up spending more and a lot of time to get it set up afterwards than if I had just done it the first time on my Co-Motion. Granted there are a few things I wish I had done from the get-go which I didn't but I wanted to save a small bit of money and it was my first custom (semi) frame and I really didn't have the knowledge I have now.

Trakhak

People buying bikes for touring tend to buy one bike and stick with it longer than people buying racing bikes. Given that fact, and that touring with heavy loads is hard on bikes, Trek's warranty alone would sway me in favor of the 520. The 520's greater tire clearance is a definite benefit as well.

As to Trek using an aluminum fork for the 520, they are following the lead of long-established European touring bike manufacturers in that regard. Quoting from this article:

"Aluminium is a dirty word in the bike travel world, but the thing is – broken aluminium forks that are designed for the purpose of touring are about as rare as hen’s teeth. Almost all European touring bikes employ aluminium forks on their builds, and it follows that if this material was inherently unreliable or dangerous, manufacturers would’ve switched back to steel over a decade ago."

Finally, in addition to the proven durability of aluminm forks (and the undeniable weight savings of 318 grams compared to the 520's previous steel fork), the increaed torsional rigidity means that the loaded bike will have much less of a tendency to "wallow" under you while climbing out of the saddle or descending at speed. That sounds like a small factor, but it'll loom large on extended trips with heavy loads.

ColonelSanders

It would appear so.

https://www.trekbikes.com/au/en_AU/b...?colorCode=red

rekmeyata

Actually, the Kona is BETTER spec'd then the Trek is! The Trek comes with crappy Sora/Alivio, the Kona comes with Deore which is a better touring derailleur system. Both the Kona and the Trek weigh darn near the same as well. If I had my choice of just those 2 bikes, I would get the Kona in a heartbeat over the Trek due to the amount of money I would save, which I then could spend on better camping gear, or make improvements on a bike to customize it for my needs better than factory stock.

Erzulis Boat 

As stated above, the used Sutra is priced too high, and the cost disparity might not be enough to justify going that route. If you could get the seller to around 1000 (AUD/$/?) on the Kona, then I would go that way.

rekmeyata

By the way, I have a steel Masi Giramondo with a steel fork, the fork does NOT "wallow" under load. New forks on bikes these days are built for disk brakes, they have beefed up the fork to handle the disk. I use to have an old 85 Schwinn Le Tour Luxe, and that also had a steel fork, much skinnier steel fork then what they use today, it didn't "wallow" either with 60 pounds of load. They use to tour all over the world on those now vintage bikes with weights approaching 100 pounds and I've never heard of a touring person back then experiencing wallow. What did happen back then if they didn't use 40 spoke wheels was to get wheel flex but the 40 spoke option took care of that; they also had some problems with the rear stays swaying at high speed, but on my Schwinn I switched out the aluminum rear rack for a Tubus steel rack and never had any more issues with swaying, today's bikes use beefer rear stays which eliminated that issue, but my Masi came with steel racks anyways.

I don't think aluminum is much of a problem these days, Koga makes a world expedition bike for hauling very heavy loads and it's all aluminum; but I doubt the Trek AL fork is up to the same standards as the Koga, in fact just looking at the two forks you can tell the Koga is better, but that doesn't mean the Trek is a bad fork however Trek knows it cannot handle a load well so there is only two eyelets (one on each side) for carrying a smaller rack intended for lighter loads on the front, whereas the Koga is design with 6 eyelets (3 on each side) for carrying larger front rack and full size panniers, just as the Kona and my Masi is equipped as well. Both the Kona and the Masi

More reasons why the Kona is better than the Trek, that steel fork on the Kona will never remotely wallow, just as mine hasn't.