Ibouha

Which of these pipes is better and how do the different Reynolds and Columbus varieties compare one by one?

bulgie 

753 isn't a specific tubeset, it's a combination of a material (steel alloy) and all the treatment that goes into it (cold-working and heat-treating). It came in a number of different diameters and wall thicknesses (gauges).
The steel had superior strength compared to the somewhat generic Cr-Mo used in TSX, but one result is 753 was very finicky to work with, needing very low temperature silver brazing to keep the extra strength they got from heat treatment. It was made in some very thin gauges. (Not all 753 was super thin, but most was.) So if you cook the heat-treat out of it, you're left with essentially 531, but in such a thin wall that it's not strong enough to last a long time with a heavy or strong rider.

TSX on the other hand is a decidedly unfinicky CrMo that gets some extra strength from cold-working, but not heat-treating. It's also thicker-wall (than most 753), so it will necessarily be a bit heavier and a bit stiffer than 753.

So 753 might be better for you if you prefer light and flexible, where TSX might be better if you like 'em a bit stiffer. TSX will generally be found on bikes that cost less than the average 753 frame, so there might be a cost advantage. TSX can be joined by less well-trained workers.

The thing that makes it TSX is the addition of helical ribs on the inner wall of the tube, not visible from the outside. Sometimes erroneously called rifling. The fact that it's not "really" rifling doesn't bother me, the term works for getting the idea across. Call it rifling if you want. Anyway, in my not-very-expert opinion, it is a gimmick that does nothing to improve the ride, the stiffness or the durability, but it doesn't hurt anything either. Perfectly goot butted CrMo, just maybe more expensive than it needs to be. That is, however much of the cost went into the useless rifling is wasted money, but that's not much, it wasn't especially expensive tubing. And most of the cost in a bike frame goes into labor, marketing, shipping, and distributor/retailer profits. Price differences between tubesets doesn't change the bottom line much.

Me, I'd much rather have 753, but only if it was brazed by a seriously skilled brazer, and with silver. So many 753 frames got brass-brazed, which totally cooks the magic out of them, making them just very light and fragile 531 frames. You'd still have the extra strength from heat treating anywhere outside the heat-affected zone, so maybe it'll be a little more dent-resistant. But when frames die from fatigue or from crashing, it's almost always near the lugs, so that's where you want the extra strength. The extra strength isn't useless elsewhere, just "mostly useless".

If you gave me a choice between SL, SLX and TSX, I'd choose them in that order. SL is the best tubeset of the three precisely because it doesn't have any of that goofy rifling, a useless gimmick which I don't hate, but do dislike. SLX is my second choice because of the small amount of rifling added. TSX gets rifling over the full length of the main triangle tubes, and it gets a smaller butt differential than the other two. I prefer tubes with a larger butt differential (the difference in gauge between the butt and the unbutt). SL's diff is 0.3 mm, vs. only 0.2 mm on TSX. TSX makes a perfectly rideable frame though, and my complaints about it are kind of on the level of theoretical differences, that no one will feel on the road. If you have a TSX frame, ride it with pride.

romperrr 

bulgie , thanks for your informative reply. If I could follow up, why is "rifling" a gimmick. To my uneducated understanding it will stiffen up frames.

bulgie 

Yes it will, but only slightly less than taking that same amount of metal and distributing it evenly all over the inside of the tube.
Assuming a cylindrical tube with a fixed outside dimension (to fit in lugs for example), you can prove mathematically that a smooth thinwall tube is the most efficient use of metal. You want all the metal to be as far away from the neutral axis as possible, to maximize the moment of inertia. This has been known since the 18th century if not earlier, it's not rocket science. "Bicycles and Tricycles" by Archibald Sharp (1896) has a good primer on it, and it's still true to this day. If it helps you to accept this, please note that rifled tubes are not used in aerospace, Formula 1 or other areas where weight-efficient stiffness and strength are optimized.

The difference between a smooth bore tube and a Columbus style rifling is too small to worry about however. You absolutely will not feel the difference, nor will the stopwatch show any difference, in say a sprint or a hill-climb time trial (assuming we're comparing tubes of the same diameter and weight).

Chombi1 

One thing I can say about the 753 that I like is it's ultra light weight. I was really surprised how light the Raleigh 753 SBDU frame was that I bought a couple of years ago. It's definitely even lighter than the Supervitus 980 framed Peugeot and Gitane bikes that I own, And it's quite stiff too considering it's very light weight and gauge. No wonder the tubeset became a benchmark for race bikes in the 80's.

romperrr 

thanks for the informative reply, bulgie !

bikingshearer 

bulgie's thoughtful replies contain in them a point that often does not get stressed enough: Any discussion of what is the "better" tubing is close to meaningless without context, i.e., who is riding and for what kind of riding.

Case in point: I am a big boy - 6'3", 255 lbs. I am strictly a weekend warrior and about as slow a climber as you are likely to find. The best riding bike I have ever owned is my current main ride, a mid-1960s Cinelli made of Columbus SP. (SP and SL are the same metal* - SP tubes were drawn to have slightly thicker walls than SL). Under my bulk, the slightly thicker tubes feel fantastic, and the extra frame weight is a trivial price to pay for the way this bike feels to me. To someone 100 lbs lighter, maybe even 50lbs lighter, the frame likely would feel dead and too stiff. For them, thinner walled tubing might make sense. Frames made with uber-thin-walled tubesets would likely feel like a noodle to me. For that reason, I have shied away from 753 and other extra-thin-walled tubes, although I have no doubt they are plenty strong enough to hold me up.

The point is that context is everything when talking about "better" tubes (and a lot else in life) and you have to define the criteria that matter to you.

*Columbus would not use the SL and SP monikers until sometime in the1970s. In the 1960s, the same steel tubing was drawn to different thicknesses, and it was all just called "Columbus." The bewildering array of alphabet soup and funny word designations for an ever-increasing number of Columbus offerings wouldn't come for some years.

jamesdak 

Totally subjective on my part from a slew of bikes I've had. My weight has varied the past 6-8 years from high 180's to low 200 lbs. Every SL bike under me will flex when I stand a pedal to the point of making the chain rub on the FD. Never had that issue with my TSX bikes. Some of my SL bikes have felt decidedly soft under me and seemed to sap my meager power when accelerating and my daily ride logs seemed to show that they were a tad slower. TSX bike were faster and the one Lemond was a marvel at how well it carried my speed and how well it would get back up to speed late in long rides when I'd get tired and lose focus a bit. To me I honestly would say I do feel a difference in the TSX bikes. Of course so many factors come into play but to me TSX isn't the "gimmick" mentioned above from my subjective experience. Can't speak to the 753 as I've never had a bike made from that. Hmmmm.....I should do something about that. LO!

Yet all that said above, I'm not convinced that any one type of steel tubing is inherently superior to the other. Application probably matters a whole lot more than anything when a quality bike is being built.

Seanaus

A couple of detail points if I may.....

In the case of the TSX tube set, only the top tube and down tube are specifically TSX, with the full length reinforcements. The seat tube and chain stays are from the SLX set, and the rest is the SL set.

753 was available as tube sets in multiple different and wall section offerings, and in both metric and imperial tube diameters. There are 4 different seatpost diameters (26.8 27.0 27.2 27.4) that are all valid for 753, depending upon which seat tube you have.

bikingshearer 

This. Above a certain level, the application and the builder matter more than the brand of tubing, although different builders have a lot of differing opinions about different tube sets, and plenty of builders like/liked to mix and match the tubes they used.

georges1

I have one raleigh made of 753, stiff , comfy and nervous tubing.I rate it higher than the columbus sl, sp and tsx, the only steels that could beat the 753 at the time were the columbus genius, el and max, and the excell tubings (relatively unknown but high quality)

PromptCritical 

Great technical information! I’m seriously thinking of taking a frame building class, so I love this detail.

How do titanium tubes compare to the best steel tubes? Are they significantly lighter? I’m guessing since the labor is biggest cost driver, the cost benefit ratio is poor due to the skill required to weld them.

georges1

There are four main makers of titanium tubes which are columbus, dedacciai, reynolds and sandvik. They are all making nice quality of tubes, titanium can't be brazed but only tig welded. Titanium welds can crack with age. High end steels and especially new stainless steels are less prone to crack regarding welds or brazing because they have a higher resistance to fatigue.You need to have a certification in order to weld Titanium, and also have neutral gas chamber where it can be welded for avoiding contamination.

Trakhak

Hadn't come across a mention of Sandvik in quite some time, so I looked around their website. They still manufacture titanium products for use in other industries, but I didn't find anything pertaining to bicycle tubing. Might have missed something, though.

Atlas Shrugged

There are numerous manufacturers of titanium products which supply industry, none of the current larger scale producers purchase from the manufacturers listed above.

Titanium can be brazed however only in a very specialized facility.

Titanium is prone to cracking.

There are no certification requirements for welding titanium however there are specific credentials just like any other type of welding. Thus the countless number of small boutique builders mostly self taught.

Standard tig welding is all that is needed however the tubes should be filled with inert gas, no neutral gas chamber required.

Once set up which takes some experience titanium is actually fairly easy to weld. Thus almost all titanium bikes have very good looking welds (so called stack of dimes look).

Steel Charlie

Over the last 50years or so it's been my experience that geometry overwhelms the tube sticker. A crap builder can make a crap bike out of the most fantastic materials known to man.

If a tube sticker is dictating your choices .......

botty kayer

As mentioned above I'd not make a decision on tubing without knowing what type of riding the rider would be doing and what they weigh.

I've got frames in SL,SLX,TSX, MXL and Max in Columbus tubes and 753 and 853 pro team in Reynolds and a couple of ti bikes.

I weigh 90kg.and for me my 753 rides nice but is too flexy, and my SL bike is even more flexy under me than 753. I've snapped about 3 or 4 alu bottle cages on my SL frame as it obvs flexes more than the alu and eventually the alu cracks like Uri Geller's been at it.

I've never cracked an alu bottle cage on any other frame in this way so confirms my opinion SL is the flexiest, with 753 being the next flexiest and then SLX but all of these I can feel the frame flex while track standing and gently bouncing at traffic lights, and under full power sprints, but i dont get anywhere near the flex with the other tubing.

I've had the same exact frame in SLX and TSX but preferred the TSX one as it flexed less but was not harsh in any way and still had a nice ride.

These days i think the much wider variety of tyres and them generally being much wider has more of an effect on ride feel than worrying about what the frame tubing is...unless youre a big unit, then id defo start with something stiffer.

The main issue with old vintage frames is tyre clearance for fat rubber. Personally as a fan of vintage frames with more modern gears, brakes and tyres the first thing I look for when buying a frame is will it fit 28c tyres, if not I walk away, that is now the main deal breaker for me, not the tubing.

GCN often do those viintage v modern comparisons. I wish they do a modern15k superbike with 23c tyres against a classic steel frame with a modern groupset and brakes and 28c tyres, and on our real world crap roads here in the UKi think most would prefer the ride of the older frame and newer tyres. But they won't do this of course because they're shills for the modern bike industry and they're still trying to convince us to spend 15k on a bike.

himespau 

I will say that my SLX Concorde Aquila felt more responsive than my SP Colnago does (essentially the same wheels - similar hubs laced to the same model of spokes with the same model of tires), but I'm also a bigger guy (prefer 62-64 cm frames and am ~107 kg). Could also be geometry. Dunno. I have always thought one of those really lightweight frames would be cool, but also was concerned about it flexing too much/breaking under my weight. At some point, I should compare my titanium Merckx to the others, but, after getting hit by a car ~ 3 years ago, 99+% of my riding is on the Merckx on a trainer.

I've also done a little riding for short distances on my daughter's 853 bike (Lemond), but it was 4-6 cm too small for me and I was riding with a really extended seat post, so I can't compare it - also it lacked clipless pedals. Same with my wife's Cannondale ST400. Both fine, but platform (or bmx) pedals, and 57/58 cm.

bulgie 

Do you have any references to back up your statements? Several of your claims I know are wrong, and some I merely suspect are wrong.

• There are more than 4 makers of Ti tubes
• Titanium can be brazed, has been done in aerospace but also there are lugged brazed Ti frames. Not many but it can be done.
• Cracking with age? First I've heard. Maybe you mean can crack from fatigue, from riding? Ti just sitting there aging will not crack in my experience, so age has nothing to do with it. It's 100% down to rider weight and strength, miles, and impacts.
• You do not need to have a certification to weld Ti. I have made Ti frames (did it full-time for about 4 years) and I lack any cert, and none of the other FBs I know personally who made Ti frames had any cert.
• Ti bike frames are never (to my knowledge) welded in a "chamber". They are welded in air, with an argon purge for the inside of the tubes, and a gas lens on the torch to keep the weld arc shielded.

Going back to your previous post, how on earth can you call 753 "stiff"? Maybe the off-road variant, which came in "OS" diameters, but none of the traditional-diameter stuff can be called stiff. In fact most 753 ranks among the most flexible steel tubes ever used on bicycles.

Sorry to be so confrontational but I don't like these myths to go unchallenged.

Kontact

Titanium as a material is not prone to cracking. I have yet to see a cracked ti frame that didn't fail at a weld - likely due to some pollution of that weld.

Steel does fatigue over time. Given a strong rider and enough miles, most classic steel bikes will crack at the right chainstay several inches from a joint. That's what happens when the material is half as flexible as titanium.


TSX vs 753 in a vintage bike? That's a question of prestigiously engineered tubing vs prestigious torch work to avoid cooking the 753. For me, I'd rather spend that vintage prestige coin on the TSX because the frame will last longer and be less of a question mark when it comes to construction. And if you want lightweight/flexy tubing you would better off with Tange Prestige, which seems to be less torch sensitive.


I recall reading an article on maybe retrogrouch about how a builder was asked to assess Prestige (similar thin walls to 753). So he built a Prestige frame and rode it, but concluded that the .9/.6/.9 SL tubing made a frame that he liked the ride much better. It was just opinion, but aside from anything else, the ride qualities are the only things that are different between two standard diameter tubesets - and not much else.

Is TSX stiffer than SL? I don't see why it wouldn't be. Frames are assemblies of torque tubes, and helical ribs are going to resist that twisting load more than smooth tubes - and probably out of proportion to the gain in weight. But simply oversizing the tubes would do much more, so we are just talking about from the restriction of classic tube diameters.


Ultimately, there is no performance difference between vintage steel frame materials. They are all heavy and slightly flexible compared to later tubesets or other materials.

We buy TSX or 753 because they sound sexy, and we believe that builders that use these materials bring something more special to building bicycles. But this is despite the incredibly narrow geometry range of popular frames and the large limitation of standard tube sizes. You can buy an NOS lugged Ishiwata No. 2 frameset for $160 today - is it really going to ride less well than some "super" bike made of fancier tubing? (No. 2 is identical to SL.)

georges1

I always do have references to back up my statements
Besides the 4 makers I cited there are these makers https://www.northsteel.com/titanium-tube-bicycles/, https://www.ticycles.com/ticycletubes-store, https://www.gaofatech.com/titanium/, https://ora-engineering.com/collecti...tanium-tubings, https://www.lastingti.com/titanium-bicycle-tube/ They are not as well known as the 4 that I listed which are used by several bike brands.In the past brands like Merlin, Moots, Litespeed, Seven, Kona, Peugeot, Bianchi, De Rosa , Colnago and several other worldwide known brands used mostly tubes from Reynolds ,Sandvik, Ancotech and Columbus but certainly not tubes from the other manufacturers for quality reasons. The most expensive titanium frames I have seen back then were the peugeot team line 9000 and the cyfac titanium frame using the Columbus Hyperion tubing.
It’s important to note that there are different grades of titanium, and not all titanium bikes are made of the same stuff, though they do all share excellent corrosion resistance. At room temperature, titanium alloy reacts with oxygen to form a protective titanium oxide layer, which means that titanium doesn’t rust, and thus performs well in harsh conditions with little upkeep. It also doesn’t require paint to maintain its integrity. Titanium bicycles are typically made out of two different types of tubing: drawn and welded. Drawn tubes are manufactured by extruding raw materials into seamless tubes, whereas welded tubes are made out of sheets of titanium that are then bent and welded together, which is a less expensive manufacturing technique.

There are already threads on bike forums regarding Titanium bike frames cracking:
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-v...d-failure.html
https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-m...ep-return.html
https://www.bikeforums.net/framebuil...me-repair.html
To say that Titanium frames don't crack isn't true

There are two different methods to weld a titanium frame: the first one, provides to weld the tubes putting gas Argon externally; the second one, provides the use of a welding chamber.
The second method is a welding chamber in which is created the vacuum and then it’s filled with gas Argon. This method is both expensive and hard to manage but it’s better because inside the isolated chamber the welding is done in a protective gas Argon atmosphere and frames are rectified in a warm atmosphere. Only with this method the welding can be made in a large section to obtain a monocoque titanium frame. Moreover, the welds influence the performance of the bicycle: the welding chamber method allows to obtain a frame with better mechanical features and the flexion of the tubes, welded with this technique, is reduced by 35% compared with other types of weld. High quality titanium bike frames are made in welding chamber.

In terms of welds, Bingham Built and Desalvo are probably the two best Ti bike welders on the planet. Bingham is the only builder I heard of that will weld .7mm or thinner straight gauge so his straight gauge bikes are lighter than everyone else's butted frames. Long wait times / difficulty getting on the waitlist are features of both. For factory built frames Moots and Baum are probably top of the heap. Mosaic has aesthetics nailed and is probably second to none there. If you want inventive stuff No22, Prova, Firefly, Sturdy, TRED are probably the way to go. Really interesting designs and inventive use of 3d printing make those all really unique in their own way. Ora is still probably the best mass production Ti factory. Hang Lun (AKA Hi-light) is the source of all those cast / aero designs and cast Ti forks. For direct from China Xian Changda Metal Works (AKA XATW, or for custom bikes XACD) is probably tops in terms of welding aesthetics and machining capability, though support seems to be hit or miss depending on who you get as your customer relationship manager. Waltly is another solid option, but you have a lot less freedom as a designer as they cant do quite as much. Depending on options, one could be more or less expensive than the other.

I am not speaking of the 753 OS nor even about the 753 MTB variant. When I ride my Raleigh road bike I don't find it flexy but comfy and still rigid even more so when I ride my Peugeot with its Reynolds 708 tubing classic frame. 531 might be more flexy than 753.

Kontact

All welded Ti frames have the tubes filled with argon internally as well as from the welder.

Which builder welds frames in a chamber? Name one.


This frankly reads like an AI wrote it.

georges1

Passoni and Cyfac welds frames in a chamber that is why they are so expensive. An AI didn't wrote it , I wrote it

easyupbug 

My exact experience with my Colin Laing custom 753 and a Colnago SL. But I admit at my age and artritis I appreciate the vertical compliance.

Kontact

Did you write this page as well, or just copy it word for word?
https://titaniumbicycles.wordpress.c...ng-techniques/

It has pictures of someone welding in the open, and a picture of a vacuum changer with no way for a welder to access it.


Passoni's website does mention a chamber large enough to work in.