Chr0m0ly 

And from Ishiwata,
looks like a frame of 019 “glorious victory” would suit you.


My ‘79 Trek 514 is a full 022 frame, and I find it to be springier than the ‘84 610 that I replaced with it. This is in the 24” size and I’m a very fit 180 lbs. (trapped within a 197 lbs body)

Chr0m0ly 

And I found a thread discussion about which brands used Ishiwata tubing here...
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-v...tube-sets.html

I don’t know if Miyata published tubing dimensions, but from my experience with an ‘84 310 and 610, and ‘85 and ‘86 710’s and an ‘86 912, I think they were using heavier gauges. They all seem built more for rigidity and durability than light weight and springy. I’d love to find tubing specs though!

Road Fan

Note on this well-known chart, that 531 CS, stated to have been used on so many Trek frames, is not listed or defined. Essentially Reynolds in that chart did not define a tube set with 8/5/8 TT and 10/7/10 DT. Maybe they wrote it somewhere, but not there. So I hypothesize that In the '70s Trek defined the tubeset they wanted for their frames and determined it could be sourced in quantity from Reynolds. Now what do they tell the retain customers who will ask the shop "is the db 531 set on my new Trek 610 the same one I would get from Mercian or Woodrup (for example)?" Ultimately the answer is who knows, because bike companies make substitutions all the time, but at least the Trek dealer is enabled to say "our frames are made with 531CS!"

Chr0m0ly 

Also... (I seem to have many also’s) it’s interesting that I read a lot that the 531CS tubing, which has 531 main tubes and Chromo fork and stays is often said to have 501 fork and stays since that was Reynolds chromo steel designation at the time.

But then why does the chart not show stays and fork in 501? And why do all of Trek’s 500 series (from ‘83 to ‘86?) that have a 501 frame all use Mangalloy forks and stays?

Was there another Reynolds chromo available? The sticker sheet just says the 531 club sport had the 531 in the main frame and chromo fork and stays... so could you call a 531 frame with say, aTange, chromo fork and stays a 531cs tube set?

samkl 

Check out this spreadsheet from the i-bob forum.

Me, I have an old Austro Daimler Vent Noir, which seems to have quite light 531 tubing even in size 25". It's got room for 32mm tires and fenders, maybe more but I've never tried. Note it's a Vent Noir, not a Vent Noir II--the latter has less tire clearance.

Road Fan

I think that like any marketing material we do not get the whole story. In electronics I need to read that stuff but also talk to the factories and technical centers to find the best solution for my problem.

But, I wish Scooper was still around here ... The companies seem to define a tubeset product (distinct from a steel or material product) in ways that serve their interests to promote sales to frame houses (such as Trek) and frame shacks such as Woodrup's in Leeds or the former little Mondonico. The Columbus catalog that Scooper used to show has a page on Tretubi that indicates main tubes under that heading. To me that means that the Tretubi branding on a frame says nothing more than the three main tubes are made of the standardized steel alloy CrMo 4130 (like 501) and that the geometry of the three tubes satisfy the specification sheet which Columbus uses to define the product. It does not say anything about the smaller tubes and the other parts of the frame.

So in the 1984 Sport section of the Trek catalog, they said the frame of the 610 has "Main tubes: Reynolds 531 CS Double butted" and "Fork & stays: Reynolds 531 CS," which would seem to include fork blades, steer tube, seatstays and chainstays. Not dropouts, bridges and possibly head tube. The main tubes are defined by Trek in the 1984 catalog. I assume that the specs of other model years are not as relevant, though most large manufacturers will not make annual changes that they don't see as important to them.

501 the only Reynolds CrMo material? Who knows? Did Reynolds make steel tubing for other industries? I think I've read that, before world war 2 they provided tubing for racing aircraft and warplanes made by Supermarine (famous for the Spitfire) and that they provided tubing to motorcycle makers like the Vincent brand, if not others. But I haven't seen good confirmation of these ideas. Campagnolo made an alloy called Elektron, and parts for aircraft and spacecraft. Do we cyclists generally know about that? No. Such diversification is still happening - Selle AnAtomica several years ago researched and developed a carbon fiber saddle, and finally brought it onto the market for about $400 last I read. Lately I have read of a subsidiary at least advertised on the S-A site called Light Composites, which is developing (perhaps marketing, by now) carbon fiber anti-virus face mask. So cycling-related technology companies diversify into other product lines, perhaps without telling the cyclists.

As far as the Mangalloy, I would bet it was cheaper and perhaps better. Probably many good steel makers can make an alloy that meets equivalent mechanical properties to those of 501, and can draw tubing that meets the design specifications. If so, cheaper should win. Trek is a big manufacturer, like a car company in some ways. Parts that are chosen for a vehicle have to be "good enough", available in high volume, and reliable in high volume. A better product that is not available and reliable isn't a good choice, for Ford or for Trek.

Sorry for the rantiness, but I hope this helps.

63rickert

That is a modern Reynolds chart. Vintage Reynolds tube to your spec would be Club Special 21/24 gauge. In millimeters that works out to 0.81/0.56. Of course Reynolds never got close to making anything accurate to 0.01mm, that is just how British Wire Gauge converts. Have never had certain knowledge when (or if) Reynolds ever went to purely metric dimensions. My guess (I said guess) is that the Trek 531CS is Club Special. For most of the years that Reynolds was a main player Club Special was the most popular tubeset. By the time enthusiasts were asking for tube by the millimeter Reynolds heyday was over.

Knowing tube specs tells very little about how the bike rides. You have to try it.

Doug Fattic 

When I was learning how to build bicycle frames in England in 1975, I stayed with a family that was involved with a motosport I never really understood. Essentially competitors rode what I would describe as something like a dune buggy up a steep muddy hill until it couldn't go any further. I think engine size was restricted. How far you made it up and the time it took you to get there got some kind of score. Whatever. The chassis for these buggies were made out of steel tubing. My host said said Reynolds made the tubing used in the frame. What I vaguely remember is that the diameter of this tubing was significantly larger than bicycle frame tubing.