Reynolds 853 Steel Gravel Frames?
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 658
Bikes: Norco search xr
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked 146 Times
in
90 Posts
There is a perhaps key wording that allows this to make sense- the design was to be vibration reducing, which is why 853 wasnt use. I am not aware that 631 reduces vibration better than 853. There has to be some abbreviation in the reasoning as listed on the review.
Different tubing models will be equally stiff if made in the same diameter and butting.
Perhaps the 853 was going to be too stiff due to some/all the tubes being larger diameter than the 631 that was selected? That could make sense.
Different tubing models will be equally stiff if made in the same diameter and butting.
Perhaps the 853 was going to be too stiff due to some/all the tubes being larger diameter than the 631 that was selected? That could make sense.
#27
Sunshine
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,538
Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10902 Post(s)
Liked 7,393 Times
in
4,148 Posts
The stays of my current gravel frame are 4130 while the main triangle is 853. The brand's designer says in the design notes that they used 4130 because its easier to manipulate since both the seat and chain stays are S bent. I dont need some expensive stays that are just as wide in diameter and have the same butting as inexpensive stays, so it makes sense to use the steel that is easier to manipulate.
But east of fabrication is different from 'stiffness' and 'bending' when it comes to riding. A 631 tube that is the same length, diameter, and butting as an 853 tube will weigh the same and be equally 'stiff'.
Likes For mstateglfr:
#28
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,664 Times
in
2,497 Posts
All else being equal, 853 is significantly more dent resistant than 631. Although I'm not going to bother looking up what thicknesses 631 is offered in. It's probably thick enough to make up for the difference in strength.
I have a Nova 8/5/8 double oversize tube set that I bought to make a gravel bike with. I'm sorely tempted to get some of the Columbus 6/4/6 tubing for dent resistance.
I have a Nova 8/5/8 double oversize tube set that I bought to make a gravel bike with. I'm sorely tempted to get some of the Columbus 6/4/6 tubing for dent resistance.
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,863
Bikes: too many of all kinds
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1147 Post(s)
Liked 415 Times
in
335 Posts
I think this is what they are referring to:
"The Tamland is made from steel, Reynolds 631, to be exact. Raleigh went to Reynolds when they were developing the Tamland with the intentions of using an 853 tube set. However; it was changed to 631 on the insistence of Reynolds when they learned it was to be a more vibration reducing design for gravel. 853 being deemed too stiff for the application."
https://ridinggravel.com/gravel-news...-two-reviewed/
"The Tamland is made from steel, Reynolds 631, to be exact. Raleigh went to Reynolds when they were developing the Tamland with the intentions of using an 853 tube set. However; it was changed to 631 on the insistence of Reynolds when they learned it was to be a more vibration reducing design for gravel. 853 being deemed too stiff for the application."
https://ridinggravel.com/gravel-news...-two-reviewed/
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,863
Bikes: too many of all kinds
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1147 Post(s)
Liked 415 Times
in
335 Posts
As I remind my son regularly when he has some wacky statistic to quote, not everything you read online is true. Seek out trusted and verifiable sources.
Cased in point: A quick google source on this rumor reveals.... Drum roll please... Someplace called bikeforums is the only identified source...
Cased in point: A quick google source on this rumor reveals.... Drum roll please... Someplace called bikeforums is the only identified source...
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,863
Bikes: too many of all kinds
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1147 Post(s)
Liked 415 Times
in
335 Posts
You won't do better on price than the Motobecane. If it were me, I would be torn between the Motobecane and a Ritchey, IF I liked the color of the Ritchey frame being offered at the time of purchase.
#32
Senior Member
I think this is what they are referring to:
"The Tamland is made from steel, Reynolds 631, to be exact. Raleigh went to Reynolds when they were developing the Tamland with the intentions of using an 853 tube set. However; it was changed to 631 on the insistence of Reynolds when they learned it was to be a more vibration reducing design for gravel. 853 being deemed too stiff for the application."
https://ridinggravel.com/gravel-news...-two-reviewed/
"The Tamland is made from steel, Reynolds 631, to be exact. Raleigh went to Reynolds when they were developing the Tamland with the intentions of using an 853 tube set. However; it was changed to 631 on the insistence of Reynolds when they learned it was to be a more vibration reducing design for gravel. 853 being deemed too stiff for the application."
https://ridinggravel.com/gravel-news...-two-reviewed/
#33
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,664 Times
in
2,497 Posts
I think the big brands are happier with 631 vs. 853 because it's a bit more forgiving to build a frame with it. And it's easier to pass tests with it.
#34
Senior Member
https://www.jamisbikes.com/usa/dragonpro.html
#35
Full Member
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 402
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 170 Post(s)
Liked 264 Times
in
146 Posts
If sub $1000 is the goal and you can handle Lemond geometry (long tt) I'd suggest taking a look at the early mid 2000s Poprad model. 853 Reynolds with cantis and clearance for 700x35-40mm. In nice condition they go for $500 - 600 here in the Pacific Northwest.
If you prefer fatties, maybe look into 26" mtb options from the 90s? Boat loads of sub $400 inventory out there, not limited to Miyata triple butted splined goodness.
Canti is lighter and easier to maintain than disc so much better for longer treks imo
If you prefer fatties, maybe look into 26" mtb options from the 90s? Boat loads of sub $400 inventory out there, not limited to Miyata triple butted splined goodness.
Canti is lighter and easier to maintain than disc so much better for longer treks imo
Likes For ctak:
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 950
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Liked 261 Times
in
212 Posts
The greater strength means you can go thinner wall in theory and thus be actually less stiff for the same dimensions. But the 853 tubes Reynolds supply for gravel and MTB type frames are mostly quite thick wall as well. So basically they're incredibly strong which is probably good for a downhill MTB frame but more than you need for a gravel bike.
The "DZB" 853 tubes are 1.1 wall at the ends which given also the high strength of 853 makes them stronger than the roll cage in a racing car.
Likes For guy153:
#38
Full Member
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 402
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 170 Post(s)
Liked 264 Times
in
146 Posts
Good points. In any case, not sure why greater stiffness would be desirable in an off-road context, where a bit of flex can go a long way to help retain one's line
#39
Senior Member
I owned a Poprad for years. Great bike! Wish I had kept it but needed to let it go to help fund my current ride. I upgraded the crankset and the fork to carbon options. The fork upgrade in particular was worthwhile, replacing the somewhat clunky aluminum stock option.
#40
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,664 Times
in
2,497 Posts
My lbs was trying to sell a customer's Poprad. I think I decided I wanted to be able to run bigger tires, but I also like to have discs on my gravel bike. I suppose one could replace the fork and just have discs on the front
Last edited by unterhausen; 03-08-20 at 11:37 AM.
#41
Sunshine
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,538
Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10902 Post(s)
Liked 7,393 Times
in
4,148 Posts
But the 853 tubes Reynolds supply for gravel and MTB type frames are mostly quite thick wall as well. So basically they're incredibly strong which is probably good for a downhill MTB frame but more than you need for a gravel bike.
The "DZB" 853 tubes are 1.1 wall at the ends which given also the high strength of 853 makes them stronger than the roll cage in a racing car.
The "DZB" 853 tubes are 1.1 wall at the ends which given also the high strength of 853 makes them stronger than the roll cage in a racing car.
It's used to ensure the frame passes that EN fatigue test from 12 or whatever years ago. Instead of using an external gusset, the tube is basically internally gusseted.
From the headtube, something like 4cm worth of downtube is 1.0mm thick, then it drops to .8mm. The middle is then .5, and it butts back up to .8mm at the downtube.
At least this is what I've understood up to now. Are you saying it's actually 1.1mm thick at both ends?
PDF on reynolds tubing specs
Last edited by mstateglfr; 03-08-20 at 09:08 PM.
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 950
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Liked 261 Times
in
212 Posts
The frame I have uses a dzb downtube. Its 1.0/8/5/8.
It's used to ensure the frame passes that EN fatigue test from 12 or whatever years ago. Instead of using an external gusset, the tube is basically internally gusseted.
From the headtube, something like 4cm worth of downtube is 1.0mm thick, then it drops to .8mm. The middle is then .5, and it butts back up to .8mm at the downtube.
At least this is what I've understood up to now. Are you saying it's actually 1.1mm thick at both ends?
PDF on reynolds tubing specs
It's used to ensure the frame passes that EN fatigue test from 12 or whatever years ago. Instead of using an external gusset, the tube is basically internally gusseted.
From the headtube, something like 4cm worth of downtube is 1.0mm thick, then it drops to .8mm. The middle is then .5, and it butts back up to .8mm at the downtube.
At least this is what I've understood up to now. Are you saying it's actually 1.1mm thick at both ends?
PDF on reynolds tubing specs
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 950
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Liked 261 Times
in
212 Posts
that's a lot of tube for a bicycle. I am thinking that the 8/5/8 Nova tubes I have are too chunky and intend to go with columbus heat treated .65/.45/.65
My lbs was trying to sell a customer's Poprad. I think I decided I wanted to be able to run bigger tires, but I also like to have discs on my gravel bike. I suppose one could replace the fork and just have discs on the front
My lbs was trying to sell a customer's Poprad. I think I decided I wanted to be able to run bigger tires, but I also like to have discs on my gravel bike. I suppose one could replace the fork and just have discs on the front
On the subject of whether 853 DZB MTB tubes are overbuilding, the Columbus MTB tubes are only Zona, a weaker alloy than 853, and they're also thinner-wall. They do make a triple-butted (i.e. "DZB") DT (which is 1.2 at the top end) but you can also get a regular double-butted one, which is 0.8 at both ends. I think mstateglfr is right that these triple butted tubes are because of EN fatigue testing.
#44
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,664 Times
in
2,497 Posts
I couldn't find a yield strength for 853 before I got bored. Life is 850MPa. Ultimate overlaps, they both have quite a range of possible ultimate strengths. But I am not too concerned about that.
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,863
Bikes: too many of all kinds
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1147 Post(s)
Liked 415 Times
in
335 Posts
They're not stiffer just stronger and less ductile. The reduced ductility I think is what leads to the myth that 753 and 853 (heat treated versions of 531 and 631 respectively) are stiff. They're a lot harder to deform if you try to bend a fork blade or a stay but it doesn't follow that below the elastic limit they are any stiffer (and in fact they aren't).
So, you are saying they have the same stiffness below the elastic limit... and maybe the limit is at a different point (i.e. less ductile)? Being less ductile doesn't sound like a good thing, esp for gravel.
#46
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,664 Times
in
2,497 Posts
from what I see online, 631 and 853 have the same percent elongation, and this is a pretty good measure of ductility. So really, there is no reason for Reynolds to recommend 631 over 853.
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 950
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Liked 261 Times
in
212 Posts
Or it comes from "... the insistence of Reynolds when they learned it was to be a more vibration reducing design for gravel. 853 being deemed too stiff for the application."
So, you are saying they have the same stiffness below the elastic limit... and maybe the limit is at a different point (i.e. less ductile)? Being less ductile doesn't sound like a good thing, esp for gravel.
So, you are saying they have the same stiffness below the elastic limit... and maybe the limit is at a different point (i.e. less ductile)? Being less ductile doesn't sound like a good thing, esp for gravel.
The only time lack of ductility might be an issue is if the frame fails more suddenly (in the way that carbon fibre frames and forks sometimes can) and causes you an injury as opposed to a more ductile failure which gives you a bit more warning. I don't know how much of an issue this is in practice but unless I was going to take advantage of really thin walls I would use oversize-diameter 631 in .8/.5/.8 or so for a gravel bike. A frame like that is not going to bend or break unless you have a crash. If you do, maybe it's not a bad thing if the frame bends a bit and absorbs some of the energy. I don't see a huge amount of point in using .7/.5/.7 853 to save about 50g on the three main tubes, and even less point using 0.9/0.6/0.9 853 from the MTB range.
#49
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,664 Times
in
2,497 Posts
Since 631 is air hardening, and they hope you will harden it as a result of joining, the ductility where it really matters is going to be very similar to 853, even if the unwelded elongation is different. I'm much more interested in yield strength, since I hope to never worry about ductility. Which is an answer to how robust it is after it suffers some sort of failure. Yield strength is very important in fatigue failure.
Last edited by unterhausen; 03-11-20 at 01:47 PM.
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 950
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Liked 261 Times
in
212 Posts
853 is about 1.7x the price of 631. 725 a little bit cheaper than 631. 631 is about 1.5x the price of 525 which is 725 minus the heat treatment (and is standard cromoly, either 4130 or 25crmo4).
But since you're probably only going 853 on the three main tubes it's only adding around £40 or £50 to the cost of the materials in absolute terms compared to 631.
But since you're probably only going 853 on the three main tubes it's only adding around £40 or £50 to the cost of the materials in absolute terms compared to 631.
Likes For guy153: