Is there a reliable way to tell what type of steel based on diameter?
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Is there a reliable way to tell what type of steel based on diameter?
Road bike from the early 70's.. top tube looks to be about 25.6mm and the seat tube is 28.8mm although my calipers aren't great so could be off by a tenth.
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: The Urban Shores Of Michigami
Posts: 1,749
Bikes: ........................................ .....Holdsworth "Special"..... .......Falcon "Special".......... .........Miyata 912........... ........................................
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 702 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times
in
420 Posts
The inner diameter of the seat tube would be the place to start. Does the seatpost have the size engraved on it?
#4
Strong Walker
As has been pointed out, seat pin diameter *is* a hint, the high end stuff usually had 27ish like 27.2mm. 26.2 would be unusual but 26.4 or 25.8 was common for lower/mid range tube sets.
If you know nothing about prevenience etc. The sort of lugs used can provide clues as well.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: GWN
Posts: 2,538
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1858 Post(s)
Liked 606 Times
in
403 Posts
Short answer: no sure way of telling by the outer diameter, those were the same for many 70ies 80iies tube sets because available lugs sort of dictated them.
As has been pointed out, seat pin diameter *is* a hint, the high end stuff usually had 27ish like 27.2mm. 26.2 would be unusual but 26.4 or 25.8 was common for lower/mid range tube sets.
If you know nothing about prevenience etc. The sort of lugs used can provide clues as well.
As has been pointed out, seat pin diameter *is* a hint, the high end stuff usually had 27ish like 27.2mm. 26.2 would be unusual but 26.4 or 25.8 was common for lower/mid range tube sets.
If you know nothing about prevenience etc. The sort of lugs used can provide clues as well.
Exceptions abound.
#6
verktyg
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 4,030
Bikes: Current favorites: 1988 Peugeot Birraritz, 1984 Gitane Super Corsa, 1980s DeRosa, 1981 Bianchi Campione Del Mondo, 1992 Paramount OS, 1988 Colnago Technos, 1985 RalieghUSA SBDU Team Pro
Mentioned: 207 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1036 Post(s)
Liked 1,238 Times
in
654 Posts
Tubing diameters
The simplest, best way is to post pictures of your bike, we are not fortune tellers!
Here's a guide of what to photograph:
Good luck...
verktyg
__________________
Don't believe everything you think! History is written by those who weren't there....
Chas. ;-)
Don't believe everything you think! History is written by those who weren't there....
Chas. ;-)
#8
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You need to add a little bit to the measured diameter for paint thickness: 25.6mm works out to 25.4mm which is 1" diameter and 28.8mm is 28.6mm or 1 1/8" diameter. The tubing is "inch" or "imperial" size so it could be a lot of different types of tubing.
The simplest, best way is to post pictures of your bike, we are not fortune tellers!
verktyg
The simplest, best way is to post pictures of your bike, we are not fortune tellers!
verktyg
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: The Urban Shores Of Michigami
Posts: 1,749
Bikes: ........................................ .....Holdsworth "Special"..... .......Falcon "Special".......... .........Miyata 912........... ........................................
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 702 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times
in
420 Posts
Do the front and rear dropouts have a name stamped in them?
Does the rear dropout have an integral derailleur hanger?
Are there braze-ons?
Does it have lugs?
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,223
Mentioned: 654 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4722 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,036 Times
in
1,874 Posts
Those tube diameters are, within measuring variance of standard imperial tubing of the era, which are nominally 28.6mm for the seat tube and 25.2mm for the top tube As noted, the seat post diameter will give you an appreciation of the grade of tubing. Assuming the post is actually 26.2mm and is correctly sized for the seat tube with a 0.2mm diametrical clearance, then your seat tube has a wall thickness of 1.1mm. This is typically indicative of a lightweight hi-tensile steel, of which there were dozens of manufacturers.
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: The Urban Shores Of Michigami
Posts: 1,749
Bikes: ........................................ .....Holdsworth "Special"..... .......Falcon "Special".......... .........Miyata 912........... ........................................
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 702 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times
in
420 Posts
#13
blahblahblah chrome moly
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,987
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1174 Post(s)
Liked 2,569 Times
in
1,073 Posts
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: The Urban Shores Of Michigami
Posts: 1,749
Bikes: ........................................ .....Holdsworth "Special"..... .......Falcon "Special".......... .........Miyata 912........... ........................................
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 702 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times
in
420 Posts
#15
blahblahblah chrome moly
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,987
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1174 Post(s)
Liked 2,569 Times
in
1,073 Posts
Well, depends on what you mean. Do you mean frames that take a 26.4 mm seatpost? Probably most of them (historically) are French frames with 28.0 mm seat tubes with a 0.7 mm wall. That's a theoretical ID of 26.6, which makes the normal amount of clearance to fit a 26.4 post. (You know a 26.4 post can't go in a 26.4 hole right? Except by being pounded in with a very big hammer, never to be removed afterward.) There are exceptions to the "rule" of 0.2 mm theoretical clearance between tube ID and post size, but that's most common.
If a 1-1/8" (28.6) seat tube has a 26.6 theoretical ID (26.4 post), that's 1.0 mm thick, which is thicker than the plain gauge 531 I remember. Maybe they made it in more than one thickness, but I remember it as 0.8 or 0.9 mm wall, which would result in seat posts of 26.8 or 26.6 respectively. My 1971 Raleigh Super Course, which is 531 PG according to the catalog, takes a 28.6 seatpost.
If a 531 1-1/8" seattube is 1.0 wall at the top (26.4 post), then I expect it's most likely a 1.0 - 0.7 double-butted tube.
Other brands of tubing (Tange for example) came in 1.0 plain gauge and 1.0 - 0.7 DB, another reason you can't ever assume 531 based on a seatpost size.
If you meant literally a seat tube with a 26.4 ID (to take a 26.2 post), that would be a theoretical wall of 1.1 mm, though in some cases (Cinelli frames for example) that's a thinwall tube with an internal sleeve at the top for the post. You can feel for presence of a sleeve with a bent poker, such as a J-bend spoke. (Usually need to sharpen up the spoke head a little to catch on a thin sleeve like a Cinelli). If the bottom edge of the sleeve is relieved with a taper, then the bent-poker method wouldn't work, but that's rare. Cinelli didn't do it, their sleeve has a bottom edge you can detect.
I know Reynolds made 531 in 1.2 mm wall, but I doubt there was a 1.1 mm wall.
Mark B in Seattle
If a 1-1/8" (28.6) seat tube has a 26.6 theoretical ID (26.4 post), that's 1.0 mm thick, which is thicker than the plain gauge 531 I remember. Maybe they made it in more than one thickness, but I remember it as 0.8 or 0.9 mm wall, which would result in seat posts of 26.8 or 26.6 respectively. My 1971 Raleigh Super Course, which is 531 PG according to the catalog, takes a 28.6 seatpost.
If a 531 1-1/8" seattube is 1.0 wall at the top (26.4 post), then I expect it's most likely a 1.0 - 0.7 double-butted tube.
Other brands of tubing (Tange for example) came in 1.0 plain gauge and 1.0 - 0.7 DB, another reason you can't ever assume 531 based on a seatpost size.
If you meant literally a seat tube with a 26.4 ID (to take a 26.2 post), that would be a theoretical wall of 1.1 mm, though in some cases (Cinelli frames for example) that's a thinwall tube with an internal sleeve at the top for the post. You can feel for presence of a sleeve with a bent poker, such as a J-bend spoke. (Usually need to sharpen up the spoke head a little to catch on a thin sleeve like a Cinelli). If the bottom edge of the sleeve is relieved with a taper, then the bent-poker method wouldn't work, but that's rare. Cinelli didn't do it, their sleeve has a bottom edge you can detect.
I know Reynolds made 531 in 1.2 mm wall, but I doubt there was a 1.1 mm wall.
Mark B in Seattle
Likes For bulgie:
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Berea, KY
Posts: 1,135
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 360 Post(s)
Liked 323 Times
in
186 Posts
Well, depends on what you mean. Do you mean frames that take a 26.4 mm seatpost? Probably most of them (historically) are French frames with 28.0 mm seat tubes with a 0.7 mm wall. That's a theoretical ID of 26.6, which makes the normal amount of clearance to fit a 26.4 post. (You know a 26.4 post can't go in a 26.4 hole right? Except by being pounded in with a very big hammer, never to be removed afterward.) There are exceptions to the "rule" of 0.2 mm theoretical clearance between tube ID and post size, but that's most common.
If a 1-1/8" (28.6) seat tube has a 26.6 theoretical ID (26.4 post), that's 1.0 mm thick, which is thicker than the plain gauge 531 I remember. Maybe they made it in more than one thickness, but I remember it as 0.8 or 0.9 mm wall, which would result in seat posts of 26.8 or 26.6 respectively. My 1971 Raleigh Super Course, which is 531 PG according to the catalog, takes a 28.6 seatpost.
If a 531 1-1/8" seattube is 1.0 wall at the top (26.4 post), then I expect it's most likely a 1.0 - 0.7 double-butted tube.
Mark B in Seattle
If a 1-1/8" (28.6) seat tube has a 26.6 theoretical ID (26.4 post), that's 1.0 mm thick, which is thicker than the plain gauge 531 I remember. Maybe they made it in more than one thickness, but I remember it as 0.8 or 0.9 mm wall, which would result in seat posts of 26.8 or 26.6 respectively. My 1971 Raleigh Super Course, which is 531 PG according to the catalog, takes a 28.6 seatpost.
If a 531 1-1/8" seattube is 1.0 wall at the top (26.4 post), then I expect it's most likely a 1.0 - 0.7 double-butted tube.
Mark B in Seattle
__________________
Andy
Andy
#17
blahblahblah chrome moly
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,987
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1174 Post(s)
Liked 2,569 Times
in
1,073 Posts
Anyone else with a SC with this size post? I did measure my '71 today, I'm not just going by memory, definitely 26.8 with a high-quality Mitutoyo caliper.
Makes me wonder if they subbed in a different tube on yours. They were known for using whatever was at hand when they ran out of what the catalog said.
Mark B
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Berea, KY
Posts: 1,135
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 360 Post(s)
Liked 323 Times
in
186 Posts
Hmm, interesting.
Anyone else with a SC with this size post? I did measure my '71 today, I'm not just going by memory, definitely 26.8 with a high-quality Mitutoyo caliper.
Makes me wonder if they subbed in a different tube on yours. They were known for using whatever was at hand when they ran out of what the catalog said.
Mark B
Anyone else with a SC with this size post? I did measure my '71 today, I'm not just going by memory, definitely 26.8 with a high-quality Mitutoyo caliper.
Makes me wonder if they subbed in a different tube on yours. They were known for using whatever was at hand when they ran out of what the catalog said.
Mark B
__________________
Andy
Andy
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: The Urban Shores Of Michigami
Posts: 1,749
Bikes: ........................................ .....Holdsworth "Special"..... .......Falcon "Special".......... .........Miyata 912........... ........................................
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 702 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times
in
420 Posts
Hmm, interesting.
Anyone else with a SC with this size post? I did measure my '71 today, I'm not just going by memory, definitely 26.8 with a high-quality Mitutoyo caliper.
Makes me wonder if they subbed in a different tube on yours. They were known for using whatever was at hand when they ran out of what the catalog said.
Mark B
Anyone else with a SC with this size post? I did measure my '71 today, I'm not just going by memory, definitely 26.8 with a high-quality Mitutoyo caliper.
Makes me wonder if they subbed in a different tube on yours. They were known for using whatever was at hand when they ran out of what the catalog said.
Mark B
EDIT: I just checked my Falcons, one takes a 26.8mm seatpost, the other 26.4
Last edited by branko_76; 05-08-20 at 10:07 AM.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: The Urban Shores Of Michigami
Posts: 1,749
Bikes: ........................................ .....Holdsworth "Special"..... .......Falcon "Special".......... .........Miyata 912........... ........................................
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 702 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times
in
420 Posts
#21
blahblahblah chrome moly
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,987
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1174 Post(s)
Liked 2,569 Times
in
1,073 Posts
I gotta say though, that's sad -- there's no need to use a tube that thick and heavy, in 531. It makes sense in cheap weak carbon steel tubes, but 531 was expensive high-strength alloy (for the day) and only worth it if you used it in thinner gauges.
I'm glad my earlier Super Course used the thinner gauge (26.8 post). It's a 25-1/2" frame, and I am big and heavy (clydesdale+) and a sprinter by nature (fast-twitch muscle). I have owned it since '71 and put a lot of miles on it, included loaded touring. Never wished for anything stiffer or stronger. I can hardly imagine anyone who would benefit from a seat tube (and maybe the whole triangle?) being 25% thicker than that.
But, all my whining aside, facts are facts and I was wrong.
MB
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: The Urban Shores Of Michigami
Posts: 1,749
Bikes: ........................................ .....Holdsworth "Special"..... .......Falcon "Special".......... .........Miyata 912........... ........................................
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 702 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times
in
420 Posts
OK thanks, I'll adjust my mental database of 531 offerings.
I gotta say though, that's sad -- there's no need to use a tube that thick and heavy, in 531. It makes sense in cheap weak carbon steel tubes, but 531 was expensive high-strength alloy (for the day) and only worth it if you used it in thinner gauges.
I'm glad my earlier Super Course used the thinner gauge (26.8 post). It's a 25-1/2" frame, and I am big and heavy (clydesdale+) and a sprinter by nature (fast-twitch muscle). I have owned it since '71 and put a lot of miles on it, included loaded touring. Never wished for anything stiffer or stronger. I can hardly imagine anyone who would benefit from a seat tube (and maybe the whole triangle?) being 25% thicker than that.
But, all my whining aside, facts are facts and I was wrong.
MB
I gotta say though, that's sad -- there's no need to use a tube that thick and heavy, in 531. It makes sense in cheap weak carbon steel tubes, but 531 was expensive high-strength alloy (for the day) and only worth it if you used it in thinner gauges.
I'm glad my earlier Super Course used the thinner gauge (26.8 post). It's a 25-1/2" frame, and I am big and heavy (clydesdale+) and a sprinter by nature (fast-twitch muscle). I have owned it since '71 and put a lot of miles on it, included loaded touring. Never wished for anything stiffer or stronger. I can hardly imagine anyone who would benefit from a seat tube (and maybe the whole triangle?) being 25% thicker than that.
But, all my whining aside, facts are facts and I was wrong.
MB
Last edited by branko_76; 05-09-20 at 04:07 AM.
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,874
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1856 Post(s)
Liked 664 Times
in
506 Posts
OK thanks, I'll adjust my mental database of 531 offerings.
I gotta say though, that's sad -- there's no need to use a tube that thick and heavy, in 531. It makes sense in cheap weak carbon steel tubes, but 531 was expensive high-strength alloy (for the day) and only worth it if you used it in thinner gauges.
I'm glad my earlier Super Course used the thinner gauge (26.8 post). It's a 25-1/2" frame, and I am big and heavy (clydesdale+) and a sprinter by nature (fast-twitch muscle). I have owned it since '71 and put a lot of miles on it, included loaded touring. Never wished for anything stiffer or stronger. I can hardly imagine anyone who would benefit from a seat tube (and maybe the whole triangle?) being 25% thicker than that.
But, all my whining aside, facts are facts and I was wrong.
MB
I gotta say though, that's sad -- there's no need to use a tube that thick and heavy, in 531. It makes sense in cheap weak carbon steel tubes, but 531 was expensive high-strength alloy (for the day) and only worth it if you used it in thinner gauges.
I'm glad my earlier Super Course used the thinner gauge (26.8 post). It's a 25-1/2" frame, and I am big and heavy (clydesdale+) and a sprinter by nature (fast-twitch muscle). I have owned it since '71 and put a lot of miles on it, included loaded touring. Never wished for anything stiffer or stronger. I can hardly imagine anyone who would benefit from a seat tube (and maybe the whole triangle?) being 25% thicker than that.
But, all my whining aside, facts are facts and I was wrong.
MB
Or am I missing something?
.
BTW, the Rudge frame I mention takes a 27.2 mm post. The OD is 28.6. 28.6-27.2 = 1.4 mm for a tube wall between 0.6 and 0.7 mm. Does this make sense, to have such a thinwall tube back in the dark ages, with no butting? .6/.9 was known.
Or maybe the tubing broker got the specs wrong and sent a year's wortth of straight gauge 0.6 instread of a year's worth of .9 / .6, and Production just said "we'll just build through it!"
When I get it built, I think it will ride very nicely!
Last edited by Road Fan; 05-09-20 at 12:47 PM.
#24
blahblahblah chrome moly
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,987
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1174 Post(s)
Liked 2,569 Times
in
1,073 Posts
.
Haha, hardly a new discovery. I knew my SC was PG when I bought it in '71. Actually it has the decal with 531 on a diagonal, usually meant to indicate butted, but the words "butted tubes forks and stays" were painted out with black paint, by hand. They must have run out of the right decals. Others who bought a SC around that time have reported the same thing, so they made some number of them with the hand-painted decals.
That Rudge sounds like a pretty special frame, take good care of it. 0.6 mm plain gauge is very unlikely, so if you have a 27.2 post, they probably substituted a single-butted seattube, or it was thicker at the top and got reamed to 27.2. Either way, an upgrade from PG.
I had a Rudge "Aero" for awhile but sold it, too small. I liked the graphics though, and workmanship was very good for a factory-made frame. There was nothing 'aero' about it, but back then I guess the word was just meant to evoke aircraft technology or some such -- not streamlined as we think of it today.
Mark B
Haha, hardly a new discovery. I knew my SC was PG when I bought it in '71. Actually it has the decal with 531 on a diagonal, usually meant to indicate butted, but the words "butted tubes forks and stays" were painted out with black paint, by hand. They must have run out of the right decals. Others who bought a SC around that time have reported the same thing, so they made some number of them with the hand-painted decals.
That Rudge sounds like a pretty special frame, take good care of it. 0.6 mm plain gauge is very unlikely, so if you have a 27.2 post, they probably substituted a single-butted seattube, or it was thicker at the top and got reamed to 27.2. Either way, an upgrade from PG.
I had a Rudge "Aero" for awhile but sold it, too small. I liked the graphics though, and workmanship was very good for a factory-made frame. There was nothing 'aero' about it, but back then I guess the word was just meant to evoke aircraft technology or some such -- not streamlined as we think of it today.
Mark B
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: The Urban Shores Of Michigami
Posts: 1,749
Bikes: ........................................ .....Holdsworth "Special"..... .......Falcon "Special".......... .........Miyata 912........... ........................................
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 702 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times
in
420 Posts
I checked some of my seatposts that are marked 26.4mm, they vary between 26.25 to 26.35mm, same manufacturer (SR Sakae) but different dates. Does your seatpost fit snugly into the seat tube without forcing it?
Also, I see you have 12 posts so you can now upload some photos of the frame.
Also, I see you have 12 posts so you can now upload some photos of the frame.