# Should I Buy A Used 2000 Trek 8500?



## maveric (Oct 17, 2009)

Greetings fellow knowledgeable members!  

I haven't owned a bike for about 16 years. My last bike was a 1990 Supergo mtn. bike that I used primarily for commuting to college. So I'm very much the noob now! :lol: 

I now want to get a good mtn. bike for some light trail use and occasional commuting.

I found a used 2000 Trek 8500 with disc brakes and stock components for around $400. Does this price sound fair for a 9-yr. old bike?  I believe the MSRP in 2000 was around $2,000.

Should I consider this bike or should I look for a new bike? I don't want to spend more than $400.

If I should buy used, what are the main things that I should inspect when I see the bike in person. Also, the bike has clipless pedals. Can I still test ride the bike effectively without cleats?

Any assistance/advice would be greatly appreciated! :thumbsup:


----------



## sponger (May 14, 2006)

I found this thread. Looks like a nice bike even though it's old. XT components & SLR frame, which I think is one step below ZR9000. I don't think Trek offered ZR9000 back then, but I remember SLR frames from 5-6 years ago. Pretty nice, IMO.

I guess if everything is in perfect working order and you're OK with hard tails, then it might not be a bad idea. I don't really know, though. I don't frequent craigslist as often as I should to know what the market is like.

Sometimes I'll unclip and ride my clipless like a platform. I don't know if that's bad for it or what, but so far I haven't noticed it causing any problems.

If you do buy it, you want to be sure that he gives you the cleats for the pedals.

I guess it depends. Certainly the bike has a nostalgic value to it. If you feel like the bike is worth $400, then it's worth $400. But, definitely try to bring it down some before you commit.

Also, 6500's from a few years back go for around $400 in good condition, and those have SLR frames. Not XT components, but I'm not sure how XT from 9 years ago compares to entry-level a few years ago.


----------



## JPark (Aug 12, 2009)

The 8500 was Trek's top of the line racing alum hardtail. It is a great bike. If it fits, and is in decent shape, do not hesitate to buy it. It won't last long at that price.


----------



## Squash (Jul 20, 2003)

*Not a bad deal price wise....*

a little over maybe, but only about $50. If it's in realy good shape it would be worth $400.

Things to look for initially are, is the bike clean, does it look shabby. Are all the decals etc. in place, does the paint look good, or is it heavily scratched. Those are signs of heavy use/abuse. Does the bike give the impression that it has been well maintained. First impressions are important.

What to look for in detail, signs of neglect or abuse. Things like rusty chain, fastners, or other steel components. Look for cracks in the paint at major tube junctions, seat stay/seat tube, chain stay/bottom bracket housing, top tube/down tube/head tube junction, down tube/bb housing. Check the paint over the welds and areas adjacent to the welds for crakcs in the paint. Cracks that appear in the paint in these areas usually idicate a crack in the tubing or weld underneath. Turn the bike upside down and inspect the entire circumfrance of the welded areas. Check for major dings or dents in the tubes. A small ding or dent isn't a big deal, something about the diameter of your little finger is probably okay. Anything much bigger than that and you could be looking at a major problem. Check that the fram and fork are straight. Do this by looking at the tires and how they sit between the stays and the fork tubes. They should be centered not off to one side. Check the wheel for true, they shouldn't wobble when spun. Check the wheel bearings for smooth opperation, there should be very little or no vibration felt when they are spinning. Lift each wheel off the ground and with your free hand grasp the tire and try to move the wheel side to side. There should be no play in the bearings. If there is you'll feel it. A little flex from the rim is normal, but if you feel a knock then you have bearing play. Not a big deal with adjustable hubs, but if the wheel was ridden in this condition the bearings are likely toast. It could take anything from a hub rebuild to hub replacement to fix it.

Things to pay attention to on the test ride. Shifting, should be smooth, quick and precise with no hesitation or grinding from the chain and the cogs both front and rear. Do the brakes work properly, little or no noise, squeals etc. They should feel powerful and firm. The bike should feel firm, with no rattles, wobbly feel, creaks or clunks. The fork should work smoothly, with little or no nosie, a kind of liquid squish sound when the fork compresses is normal, or the ligh sound of air movement is also okay, But loud squishy, or heavy air flow sounds are not. Make sure the fork doesn't leak oil. A little oil on the upper tubes after being ridden and the fork compressing a bit is normal. But it should be nothing more than a very light ring or film. Anything more and you likely have a seal problem in the fork. The bottom bracket and pedals should rotate smoothly with no hint of play, creaks, squeaks, or vibration.

From there it's a matter of personal preference. If you like the way the bike fits, feels, and rides then go for it. If not, pass! A bike that doesn't fit or feel right is a bike you won't ride, and is a lousy deal.

If everything checks out and you like it, then go for it. I've got a 00 7000 that I still ride. They are a good quality and durable frame. If the bike has been well taken care of and not abused it should still have quite a bit of life left in it.

Just keep in mind that the components are dated. If they are all original you may well have to replace wear items like chain rings, cassette, chain, etc. The fork may need to be serviced derailleurs may be worn out or on the verge, and so forth. Just depends on how well the original owner has taken care of the bike.

So, Take a look with a critical eye, and good luck.

Good Dirt


----------



## maveric (Oct 17, 2009)

Thanks for the great recommendations so far! They are so invaluable to me! Any more would be very much appreciated! You guys are so great! :thumbsup:

I received some pictures of the bike. Is there anything that can be learned from them, especially any red flags? Click on the thumbnails to see a larger image and then click on that image to see the full detail. Thanks again!


----------



## Bikinfoolferlife (Feb 3, 2004)

First and most important, is it going to fit you, i.e. is that frame size suitable to your dimensions?


----------



## maveric (Oct 17, 2009)

Bikinfoolferlife said:


> First and most important, is it going to fit you, i.e. is that frame size suitable to your dimensions?


Well, I'm 6'0" and I measured my inseam to be 31". The frame is 18". I haven't seen the bike in person yet, but it sounds like it should be suitable, correct?

Thanks!


----------



## Bikinfoolferlife (Feb 3, 2004)

maveric said:


> Well, I'm 6'0" and I measured my inseam to be 31". The frame is 18". I haven't seen the bike in person yet, but it sounds like it should be suitable, correct?
> 
> Thanks!


Somewhat depends on how you like a bike to fit, and off the top of my head I'd say you're possibly on the tall side for that size, but if you like a smaller than larger frame, might work fine. The top tube would be a more important dimension than the seat tube length, Trek's current 8500 is apparently sized differently (in that they now have an 18.5) so hard to know. Is that a cycling inseam or your pant measurement? Are you a longer torso kind of guy? Long arms? My cycling inseam is longer than that (82cm/32.25") and I'm probably closer to 5'9" these days (shrinking with age from 5'10") otherwise fairly average; my bikes tend to be 18-19" seat tube, 23-23.5" effective top tube.

Of course, YMMV and a test ride would be a good thing (or actually go test ride a few different new bikes, too, taking note of the dimensions of not only the top tube and seat tube specs but also what stem and seat position setups they have, which also play a role).


----------



## maveric (Oct 17, 2009)

Bikinfoolferlife said:


> Somewhat depends on how you like a bike to fit, and off the top of my head I'd say you're possibly on the tall side for that size, but if you like a smaller than larger frame, might work fine. The top tube would be a more important dimension than the seat tube length, Trek's current 8500 is apparently sized differently (in that they now have an 18.5) so hard to know. Is that a cycling inseam or your pant measurement? Are you a longer torso kind of guy? Long arms? My cycling inseam is longer than that (82cm/32.25") and I'm probably closer to 5'9" these days (shrinking with age from 5'10") otherwise fairly average; my bikes tend to be 18-19" seat tube, 23-23.5" effective top tube.
> 
> Of course, YMMV and a test ride would be a good thing (or actually go test ride a few different new bikes, too, taking note of the dimensions of not only the top tube and seat tube specs but also what stem and seat position setups they have, which also play a role).


That is my cycling inseam. Thanks for your recommendations!


----------



## JPark (Aug 12, 2009)

Definately close enough in size to warrant a look. Try it out for a true sense of fit, then, check for signs of neglect/abuse. Even if it needs a new drive line(chain, chain rings cassette) still worth it IMO.


----------



## maveric (Oct 17, 2009)

Well, I inspected the bike earlier today. I followed Squash's inspection recommendations and the only problems that I could see are several areas of chipped paint and that the handle bars aren't perfectly aligned with the forks.

Are these major areas of concern?

I was able to get the price down to the mid $300s, but I didn't pull the trigger. I wanted to hear members' thoughts before I make the purchase.

Thanks in advance for your opinions!


----------



## maveric (Oct 17, 2009)

Are there any good negotiating tactics that I can use to get a better price? It's so hard to value a used bike! :???:


----------



## JPark (Aug 12, 2009)

From your previous post it seems to me you already got him down to a very resonable price. As I stated above this was a great bike, if it is in reasonably good condition, it still is. Just ask him the bottom line price. If the bike fits you, and you like it, buy it.


----------



## ASpot13 (Apr 4, 2007)

I have a 2000 8500, the shorter travel model. The only things changed on it from stock are that I use Rolf Propel wheels (instead of the Dolomites) and Avid Mag brakes. I think it is an excellent bike, and I would not hesitate to spend $350-400 for it. If it were located in Florida you wouldn't have had that much time to debate with they guy, I would have shown up cash in hand. Don't let a good deal pass you by. I'm also 6'0 and weigh 170 lbs riding an 18" bike. I love the way the medium frame fits when riding xc, but it's a matter of preference.


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

Just so you know, it is a 1999 model.

The 2000 model had more desirable components for sure (graphite crankset, Marz Z3 fork, Hayes hydraulic brakes, Rolf hubs, XT instead of LX, etc.).

It's OK, but I would have been more excited for an actual 2000 model.

1999 Trek 8500: http://www.bikepedia.com/QuickBike/BikeSpecs.aspx?Year=1999&Brand=Trek&Model=8500+LT&Type=bike

2000 Trek 8500: http://www.bikepedia.com/QuickBike/BikeSpecs.aspx?Year=2000&Brand=Trek&Model=8500+LT&Type=bike

I see the models years on used bikes either not actually known or outright fibbed about all the time.


----------



## ASpot13 (Apr 4, 2007)

I would take information from Bikepedia with a grain of salt. I have the 2000 which they quote as having an XT rear derailleur, and the bike came with an XTR.


----------



## maveric (Oct 17, 2009)

jeffj said:


> Just so you know, it is a 1999 model.
> 
> The 2000 model had more desirable components for sure (graphite crankset, Marz Z3 fork, Hayes hydraulic brakes, Rolf hubs, XT instead of LX, etc.).
> 
> ...


It is the 1999 model! Thanks for the keen observation! :thumbsup:

I too am much less excited about the bike. I was already concerned about potential issues from a 9-yr. old bike and now it's actually another year older! I'm glad that I was patient and didn't buy it. Interestingly, the seller just informed me it's still available...


----------

