# 1987 Trek 560 Pro Series



## West End Rail NJ (Apr 28, 2005)

I have had this bike since I started cycling and would love to get it refinished. Any recommendations?


----------



## Andy M-S (Feb 3, 2004)

I had an '85 560 (purple) that I loved; when I thought about refinishing, I always saw it as a sparkly metallic root-beer brown with light cream panels. Alas, I was hit by a car while commuting to work on it one day, and no longer have it. Lovely ride, through. I would lose the threadless stem/adaptor, though--a Nitto or other classic quill would look great.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Recommendations? for what? where to send it for refinishing or how to do it yourself? Why do you think it needs refinishing?


----------



## Andy M-S (Feb 3, 2004)

froze said:


> Recommendations? for what? where to send it for refinishing or how to do it yourself? Why do you think it needs refinishing?


Good point. Only bike I've ever had redone was reshot beautifully by Spectrum Powderworks...


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Andy M-S said:


> Good point. Only bike I've ever had redone was reshot beautifully by Spectrum Powderworks...


I know powder coating is the in thing these days, but a vintage bike with powder coat instead of the original type of paint in a repaint reduces the value of the bike. If the original paint is still usable I would stay with it because the original paint makes it worth more then a repaint. The pics of the bike the paint looked fine, but of course I couldn't see it real close. You repaint that bike and you will never recoup the cost of the paint job if you decide to sell it.


----------



## Andy M-S (Feb 3, 2004)

froze said:


> I know powder coating is the in thing these days, but a vintage bike with powder coat instead of the original type of paint in a repaint reduces the value of the bike.


Well, yes, it reduces the commercial value significantly, but what's a Trek 560 worth on the market these days? There are a still a surprising number around. The question is not the _commercial _value, but the value to the owner. 

Unless the owner's primary purpose is to sell the bike, in which case, just clean it up, because a non-rattlecan repaint (or Spectrum shot) will almost certainly cost you more than the frame is worth on the market. 

Complete 560s max (with shipping) at around $650 on eBay, and the median seems to be around $300, which seems about right to me.

These are lovely bicycles, but they're more MGB than Ferrari, at least from a price perspective.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Andy M-S said:


> Well, yes, it reduces the commercial value significantly, but what's a Trek 560 worth on the market these days? There are a still a surprising number around. The question is not the _commercial _value, but the value to the owner.
> 
> Unless the owner's primary purpose is to sell the bike, in which case, just clean it up, because a non-rattlecan repaint (or Spectrum shot) will almost certainly cost you more than the frame is worth on the market.
> 
> ...


MGB? I assume you never owned an MGB, those cars were junk and a bad comparison to a 560. MGB is closer related to a Walmart bike...both were and are junk. I owned (note the key word: "owned", past tense) several vintage British cars, they were nightmares. The 560 being a racing geometry was probably closer to a Mustang, cheap to buy, everyone had one, and reliable.

I own a 660, that is a very nice frame, even though the 760 was Treks top of the line racing frame, I thought the 660 was better because I test rode both before I bought the 660 and the 760 on hard out of the saddle sprints I could flex the frame to make the chain rub both sides of the front derailleur, and the rear wheel to rub both sides of the rear brake pads, the 660 I could not do that with. Even the sales rep agreed that the 660 was better for using in the mountains of California where I lived at the time.


----------



## Andy M-S (Feb 3, 2004)

Note, from a _price_ perspective.

My dad owned a '67 (IIRC, but bought used c. 1971) MGB, and we attended a number of local rallies with it. It was a workingman's sports car. Like the 560, it had finesse in steering and handling, and was not ridiculously priced. Sitting in that thing with the top down and 70 or 80 MPH winds going by was a lovely experience.

Now, you _do_ have to take any British car of the period for what it was, particularly the Lucas electrical system (Lucas was not known as "Prince of Darkness" for nothing). The MGB was small, quick handling, and reliable even in Minnesota winters. It was _not _ a muscle car like the Mustang or Camaro. But put it in a rally with Fiats and Triumphs and such like (all of the above and more suffered to a certain extent from kludgy technological horrors), and it was not bad at all. Heck, even the MG Midgets could be fun, if you could fit in one!

The 560, 660, and 760 are all very nice bikes. I loved my 560. I'm just pointing out here that the value is in the bike, not in any money it might bring, and it's _that_ value that has to determine whether or not to repaint it.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Andy M-S said:


> Note, from a _price_ perspective.
> 
> My dad owned a '67 (IIRC, but bought used c. 1971) MGB, and we attended a number of local rallies with it. It was a workingman's sports car. Like the 560, it had finesse in steering and handling, and was not ridiculously priced. Sitting in that thing with the top down and 70 or 80 MPH winds going by was a lovely experience.
> 
> ...


If I was to rate from most to least reliable of the British cars I owned it would be the 73 Lotus Europe JP, 74 Triumph TR6, then the 59 MGA. Because I owned these cars I belonged to a local chapter of the British Sports Car Club, and other people, just like me, had the same repair issues with MGB's...but people that drive cars like that don't care about driving it on a weekend then spend all the next week repairing it, it's part of the charm of a British car. The last generation of MGB (the ones with the plastic bumpers that made the car ugly as hell) was the most reliable version ever made, which wasn't saying much. Sure I knew people who raced them, so did I, but races were short because in long races only about 10% of the starting cars would ever finish it, even in short races a good number would drop out.

And I use to own Italian from a Fiat 2000 to an Alfa Romeo Spider. The weird thing is that the Fiat was a crappy car though not as bad as the British stuff, but the Alfa was far better. Why is that weird? The engine was the same in both except the Fiat used a timing belt and the Alfa a timing chain, and Fiat's belts had a way of breaking before the time to change them came along, there were some other difference too. But the Alfa was a pretty solid car, some repairs but not bad.

The most reliable small sports car I ever owned was a 79 Datsun 280Z, it was faster then any of the other small cars I had, plus I could drive the piss out of it and the car would ask: is that all I got? I sold that car with 320,000 miles on it to some kid, he put about 100,000 on it last I talked to him and still never had any repairs on it.

So no I'm sorry, but I can in no way compare a 560 to any British sports car, maybe an Alfa if I stretched it a bit.


----------

