tkamd73 

It will be, looking forward to the updates.
Tim

Kabuki12

Nothing wrong with THAT build. Looks friggin awesome! The 500 series Treks were great bikes. I had a NOS 600 series , 1984 in blue, that was given to me and it was super light. Too bad it was too small, I gave it to my short legged son-in-law. I have it at my shop for safe keeping as they live in a very small apartment and ha isn't riding right now. It looks like you have some pretty wide tires on it.

rgvg

What did you use to touch up the paint?

The Golden Boy 

Realistically- it's a 500- not like paper thin tubing on those chainstays.

That looks like a really fun build on a really fun bike!!!

drewfio

Yeah, it fits 700 x 35mm (what is on there now). That’s part of the reason I got it. The other bike I ride the most only fits 25mm tires. So I’ve been looking specifically for a nice vintage steel bike with relatively sporty geometry that fits bigger tires (and fits me). This ticks all those boxes.

drewfio

I used nail polish. In another thread here on BF someone identified a specific one that was a match for Trek’s Pewter Gray color. It didn’t match quite as perfectly as I’d hoped once I got it, but certainly looks better than the gouges and rust. I think with more prep and better application it would look a bit better. The paint is metallic so the application is less forgiving, because the light will play differently if not level and smooth, and similarly glossy. But these spots are behind the chainring and tires so not very visible. If I want to touch up the long scratch on the top tube it will be more challenging to get it looking good.

AdventureManCO 

How are you enjoying the 1x drivetrain? I have that on my PX-10 and it brings a simplistic elegance to the ride that greatly matches the rest of the bike.

drewfio

I’m liking it a lot! I don’t miss thinking about the front derailleur. It’s just shift up or shift down.

But I actually put this on here because the crankset on the bike when I got it—a really cool SR crankset with a turbine shaped spider and chainrings—had two different sized arms. The drive side was 165 for some reason. So I took that opportunity to explore a 1x setup on another crankset I had (with matching length crank arms).

The Golden Boy 

I always thought Suntour should have used THAT crankset for the Cyclone crank.

madpogue 

Not an uncommon adaptation for people with differential leg lengths, or side-to-side differences in mobility/flexibility.

drewfio

That crossed my mind. But I wondered if that was really a good solution to different sized legs, as opposed to say a pedal/cleat shim or something like that which extends the leg instead of shortening the crank arm. It would reduce the distance to the pedal at the bottom of the stroke, but would increase it at the top. But hey, I'm certainly no bike fitter. Maybe that is what makes sense, and the distance at the top of the stroke is unimportant. And whether it is a good solution or not, it may still have been the reason they are different.

My other guess was it was just quality control—they accidentally put it on at the factory or shop where it was initially assembled.

I only noticed it when I took the cranks off to service the bottom bracket. It made me wonder if I would have even felt it while riding if I didn't know. But it seemed like a bad idea to keep it that way. Even if I couldn't feel it immediately, maybe pedaling two different sized circles would lead to some ill effects or discomfort eventually.