justcynn

I have the '87 Voyageur Frame and components on hand, all torn down ready for rebuild but ts a bit crusty - but only paid $50 for it. Having nice paint is important to me so I would prob strip/powder coat it if I build it

There is a 60CM Trek 520 that is in very good condition for $400 for a 3 hour drive (6 hour round trip). I had 24"/60CM trek once and liked the fit as well or better than the 25"/63CM Schwinn frames I ride. I know the Trek is 531 and the Voyageur I believe is 4130, both are right around 25 lb bikes though.

is the Trek 520 Cirrus worth $400? anyone have any opinions on which is the better bike? ( I also have a Nishiki Cresta GT of the same era - it will be sold though as I have more connection to Schwinn and Trek)

my goal with bikes is to collect, fix up/maintain bikes that are pleasing to ride, pleasing to the eye and long term when I get tired of it (or my wife gets tired of it)- liquidate for the investment I have in. A steel is real savings account if you will that probably loses a little bit of money over time

Pemetic2006

The Voyageur is Columbus. I believe just the main tubes on the Trek are 531. The components on both, if original, are the same (Shimano Deore).

https://www.vintage-trek.com/images/t...rekCatalog.pdf

rhenning

Very similar bikes and the only way to know which is best for you is to ride both. You will not make a bad choice. Roger

cudak888 

Just to clarify, the Voyageur is 63cm, and the 6-hour-drive Trek is 60cm, correct?

What's your inseam and intended riding goal? "Pleasing to ride" for touring? Commuting? Putting on the miles, locally? These are all classic touring bikes with cantis, so I'm having a hard time getting panniers out of my head, but I don't want to assume that.

I'd venture to say neither are too far removed from each other. I wouldn't assume the three main tubes frame would have a disadvantage over the full butted tubeset - there's always a possibility that the ride quality doesn't match the tubing lore.

I voted for the Voyageur as I believe it's more advantageous to throw together what you already have with some spares. Try it out and see if you like it. If that sounds like too much work, just remember the alternative is a six hour drive for an arguably overpriced wildcard.

That said, given local options, I'd lean towards the Trek only because of the potentially problematic Ishiwata fork crown on the Voyageur.

-Kurt

justcynn

mostly recreational 20-50 mile rides locally. My state is building more bike trails and designating highway bike routes so light touring is possible. But I’m a collector/hobby mechanic and recreational rider for fitness mostly.

My inseam is 34”. The 25” Schwinns fit but I have a lot of them and they ride pretty tall. The 24” trek with the right stem and seat post was a pretty good feel in a 370 trek and regret selling it. Not cause it was a high end bike, but the fit was pretty good

definitely don’t need another bike but I like original paint that is in good condition which the trek ia too. Mostly wondering if I can get hurt on $400 for that bike

cudak888 

If that's the rationale, go and get it. Sure, $400 is too much, but you'll only get hurt if you ever try to flip it for a profit or to break even. Just remember you'll be hurt in gas too.

-Kurt

polymorphself 

Well, I have a 1986 Voyageur (which is Columbus, like the 87 amd 88) and a friend has the 1987 520. The 87 520 is a nice one in the 520 lineup because it features mid fork eyelets unlike the 520s before it. The Schwinn does have the third set of water bottle braze ons. The Voyageurs fork is not Columbus and the Treks is not 531, although the Trek doesn't have 531 stays either, but I think this is pretty inconsequential. Clearance should be the same for both. up to 27x1/14 with fenders with 27" wheels, likely up to 35mm with fenders for both with 700c. Both should convert easily enough with their stock brakes. Seat tube is a little steeper on the Schwinn.

If I recall correctly she picked up her 520 for around $350, but it was in very nice condition and overhauled.

The two bikes are very, very similar and I don't imagine you can go wrong. You've already got the Voyageur and you get to start with a brand new color of your choosing if you repaint, so that's nice (although if it were me on a touring bike I'd be glad for the already rough paint and patina). I prefer the lugs on the Voyageur. If it came down to the two original colors I prefer the Trek grey to the Schwinn red, but both look great. Photos really can't do the Trek paint justice, it's beautiful up close. Here are photos of both my friends 520 and my Voyageur:





Cresta's are really awesome though. Lets see it.

due ruote 

I have ridden the 520 Cirrus, and it is aptly named. Very cloud-like with the 700 x 32 tires I had. I have not ridden a Voyageur, but I would imagine it is a similar ride.
In your shoes I would probably go with the Schwinn, get it coated, buy really nice tires for it and still come out considerably ahead.

btw I sold my 520 for $400 a couple years ago (Chicago area). I would think that’s pretty much top dollar, but worth that if it’s in great shape.

The Golden Boy 

I prefer the Trek geometry to the Schwinn geometry.

I had an 86 Voyageur, and currently have an 84 Voyageur SP. I have a whole bunch of Treks.

Classtime 

That's too much for that 520. Especially if you anticipate tiring of it and later expecting to get your 400 back. There is another later model 520 for $100 that you should get and put all the bits on your voyager. Meanwhile wait for a 610 or 710 keeper Trek.

justcynn

Thanks for all the replies. Update- the seller of the trek is a collector like many of us, sounds like I may be able to trade a bike or two in the herd that I’m not as exited about for it. Looking more likely to get the Trek and maybe just keep the voyageur frame for a rainy day. Having TOO MANY bikes is not a concern, to me anyway.

justcynn

So this 520 just popped up on Craigslist in my area. $100. Going to get it in the morning. Don’t like the look as well as the
87 but seems like a great deal for $100! Any idea what year it is?

Classtime 

If you hang out a bit on the Touring subforum, you'll find a lot of love for the later 520s (lugs are meh over there.) The 700c wheels and the LX will hot rod your Voyageur.

beicster 

If that is the original rear derailleur, that should be somewhere around a 93-95.

justcynn

I missed this suggestion, but I did go get the 1994 Trek 520 this morning. Its in decent condition, many miles on it but I rode it this afternoon for 15 miles to get a feel for it. Just prefer lugged frames and I like your suggestion of taking the drive train, bars and stem and maybe wheelset and using them on the Schwinn Rebuild and selling the Trek Chromo Tig Welded frame on Ebay. That would be one cool voyageur. Stay Tuned!

I am going to get the 1987 Trek 520. the owner happens to be a BF member and is meeting me half way, it may be on the higher end of the value chart - but they are gorgeous and this one appears to be in really good shape.

thank everyone for your input, happy new bike day!

justcynn

Nishiki Cresta GT

here is the nishiki cresta gt. its in pretty good shape and could be for sale at cost + shipping if anyone is looking for one. I saw this somewhere else, but these touring bikes keep following me home. 1985 Nishiki Cresta GT, 1987 Schwinn Voyageur, 1987 Trek 520 (getting tomorrow) and 1994 Trek 520 (picked up today), plus (2) 1980 Scwhinn Voyageur Chromes and a 1978 LeTour if that counts a touring bike.

ricardoglopez

Hi, can you tell me what brand and model are those mud guards in the Schwinn bike? Thnks

polymorphself 

Assuming you mean the one I posted. They are 45mm Velo Orange hammered fenders.