Reynolds 753: Timeline?
05-02-14, 03:34 PM
#26
aka: Dr. Cannondale
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 7,735
Mentioned: 234 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2155 Post(s)
Liked 3,405 Times
in
1,206 Posts
Just got back from a 35 mile (hard) ride with my 753 Merckx. I'm 198.8 as of this afternoon, but would not call this frame flexy.
YMMV
YMMV
__________________
Hard at work in the Secret Underground Laboratory...
Hard at work in the Secret Underground Laboratory...
05-02-14, 06:05 PM
#27
Decrepit Member
A question for you two if you don't mind... Is the tubing oversized?
05-02-14, 06:39 PM
#28
If I own it, I ride it
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardinal Country
Posts: 5,580
Bikes: Lejeune(14), Raleigh, Raysport, Jan De Reus, Gazelle, Masi, B. Carré(4), Springfield, Greg Lemond, Andre Bertin, Schwinn Paramount
Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 663 Times
in
312 Posts
Nope. Metric. SB1016. And as with rccadr, I do not find the frame flexy.
05-02-14, 06:57 PM
#29
Decrepit Member
Well, that's great. A 56cm frame will be stiffer than a larger one just because the tubes aren't as long.
05-02-14, 07:40 PM
#30
aka: Dr. Cannondale
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 7,735
Mentioned: 234 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2155 Post(s)
Liked 3,405 Times
in
1,206 Posts
My Merckx frame is maybe mid 80's and not oversized tubing. And it's a 57.
__________________
Hard at work in the Secret Underground Laboratory...
Hard at work in the Secret Underground Laboratory...
05-02-14, 08:08 PM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 13,447
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4236 Post(s)
Liked 2,949 Times
in
1,808 Posts
I almost bought one remotely that was a 62 (I think), but backed out for fear of it being overly flexy. Also why I turned down a what appeared to be a great deal on a Columbus Neuron frameset. Sometimes I get jealous of those of you able to ride smaller frames (I get the same feeling when forced to fly on regional jets where I can't stand up to walk the aisle). Then I remember all the shelves that I can reach and how fun it used to be to play volleyball before I destroyed my back and am less jealous. Still, I'd love to be able to ride some of these cool frames.
__________________
Bikes: 1996 Eddy Merckx Titanium EX, 1989/90 Colnago Super(issimo?) Piu(?),1990 Concorde Aquila(hit by car while riding), others in build queue "when I get the time"
Bikes: 1996 Eddy Merckx Titanium EX, 1989/90 Colnago Super(issimo?) Piu(?),
05-02-14, 09:52 PM
#32
Decrepit Member
56cm and 57cm frames are small enough so that even with a 200 or so pound rider 753 should be reasonably stiff.
I know that in the late eighties many framebuilders who used Columbus SL or SLX for smaller frames went with SP down tubes for frames bigger than 58 because SLX was just too whippy.
SL was 0.9/0.6/0.9, SLX was 0.9/0.6/0.9 with the helical reinforcements in the butts, and SP was 1.0/0.7/1.0...
In contrast, 753 was 0.7/0.5/0.7 (top tube) and 0.8/0.5/0.8 (down tube) which would make it flexier than SL or SLX.
All steel alloys from AISI 1020 plain carbon steel to the latest high strength alloys like S3 and 953 have virtually the same modulus of elasticity (~200 GPa) and virtually the same density (~8 grams per cubic centimeter). IOW, an AISI 1020 "gaspipe" tube and a 4130, 531, 753, or 953 tube with the same diameter, wall thickness, shape, butting profile and length will all be equally stiff. Where they differ is in tensile strength and yield strength, and a stronger alloy can be drawn with thinner walls and thus be lighter, but the price of the thinner walls is less stiffness. Want thinner walls and greater stiffness? Increase the diameter (to OS or double OS).
If you look at the 753 data sheet I posted earlier in the thread, it states "The exceptional physical properties of Reynolds 753 allow frame tubes to be produced in wall thicknesses down to approx. 0.3mm, their high stiffness ensuring that top quality frames can be produced with extreme lightness and a high rigidity."
This kind of nonsense, mischaracterizing high yield strength as stiffness, has lead lots of people who should know better to think some steel alloys are stiffer than others. They're not; they're all the same.
Jan Heine did a passable job of explaining it HERE.
I know that in the late eighties many framebuilders who used Columbus SL or SLX for smaller frames went with SP down tubes for frames bigger than 58 because SLX was just too whippy.
SL was 0.9/0.6/0.9, SLX was 0.9/0.6/0.9 with the helical reinforcements in the butts, and SP was 1.0/0.7/1.0...
In contrast, 753 was 0.7/0.5/0.7 (top tube) and 0.8/0.5/0.8 (down tube) which would make it flexier than SL or SLX.
All steel alloys from AISI 1020 plain carbon steel to the latest high strength alloys like S3 and 953 have virtually the same modulus of elasticity (~200 GPa) and virtually the same density (~8 grams per cubic centimeter). IOW, an AISI 1020 "gaspipe" tube and a 4130, 531, 753, or 953 tube with the same diameter, wall thickness, shape, butting profile and length will all be equally stiff. Where they differ is in tensile strength and yield strength, and a stronger alloy can be drawn with thinner walls and thus be lighter, but the price of the thinner walls is less stiffness. Want thinner walls and greater stiffness? Increase the diameter (to OS or double OS).
If you look at the 753 data sheet I posted earlier in the thread, it states "The exceptional physical properties of Reynolds 753 allow frame tubes to be produced in wall thicknesses down to approx. 0.3mm, their high stiffness ensuring that top quality frames can be produced with extreme lightness and a high rigidity."
This kind of nonsense, mischaracterizing high yield strength as stiffness, has lead lots of people who should know better to think some steel alloys are stiffer than others. They're not; they're all the same.
Jan Heine did a passable job of explaining it HERE.
05-02-14, 10:24 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 7,244
Bikes: '72 Cilo Pacer, '72 Gitane Gran Tourisme, '72 Peugeot PX10, '73 Speedwell Ti, '74 Peugeot UE-8, '75 Peugeot PR-10L, '80 Colnago Super, '85 De Rosa Pro, '86 Look Equipe 753, '86 Look KG86, '89 Parkpre Team, '90 Parkpre Team MTB, '90 Merlin
Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 834 Post(s)
Liked 2,126 Times
in
555 Posts
FWIW, my main ride is a 753r frameset in 57cm, 27.2mm post. I weigh around 195-lbs. (though I was closer to 220-lbs. as recently as a year ago) and I don't find my frame to be too flexy. I've ridden 531, 501, Tange Prestige, Tange Champion, Columbus SL, bonded aluminum (Vitus), oversized aluminum (Cannondale), titanium, gaspipe, Ishiwata 022, etc. In my experience, it may be slightly more flexy than a 531 or SL frameset, but it's not that noticeable, and nowhere near as flexy as a Vitus or my Speedwell Titanium.
Last edited by gaucho777; 05-02-14 at 10:28 PM.
05-03-14, 07:02 AM
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,681
Bikes: too many sparkly Italians, some sweet Americans and a couple interesting Japanese
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 569 Post(s)
Liked 584 Times
in
410 Posts
From what I have seen (not done) in frame building cold setting is frequently required on an alignment table after removing a frame from the jig. Heat causes stresses which move steel, especially with dropouts which I have seen pull in. Perhaps this Reynolds recommendation is a matter of degree? Would a frame builder have to scrap a chain/seat stay that pulled in 4mm once removed from the jig? If that would be the case it is no wonder 753 is seldom seen.
05-03-14, 08:39 AM
#35
Decrepit Member
A good brazer controls the heat by moving the torch around, and can minimize pulling caused by uneven heating. If uneven heat causes a stay (or any tube or a dropout) to pull, heating the opposite side of the joint can pull it back.
09-15-20, 05:06 PM
#37
Seńor Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hardy, VA
Posts: 17,925
Bikes: Mostly English - predominantly Raleighs
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1491 Post(s)
Liked 1,094 Times
in
640 Posts
Further to the above, I was interested in the timeline for 753r framesets and found the following on a thread at Retrobike:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Mullett former Works Manager for Raleigh
:
1) 753 is Metric-diameter tubing (28.0 mm O.D. for the seat and down tubes, 26.0 mm O.D. for the top tube), and was introduced in about 1975. Seat posts for 753 frames are either 27.0 (for small frames) or 26.8 mm (for large frames).
2) 753R and 753T are Imperial (English/Inch) diameter tubing (28.6 mm O.D. for the seat and down tubes, 25.4 mm O.D. for the top tube), and began production in 1983. Seat posts for 753R and 753T are either 27.2 or 27.4 mm.
Of particular interest is the thinner Imperial tubing which takes the 27.4mm seat pin (pillar). Not a lot of people are aware of this. All these tube sets have a part number starting 80*, but Reynolds seem to have lost these specs.
A seat pin should be an easy fit and it should not be necessary to fit the saddle to act as a tommy bar to gain extra purchase.
For those who are searching for a time scale for their frames*, the following is as near as dammit a time line from Mid 1974 until close down. Hope this helps.
[*Note: It's not completely clear from the quoted text, but the following numbers are for dating Raleigh Pro framesets.]
Year Number
1974 0
1975 200
1976 700
1977 1400
1978 2100
1979 2800
1980 3500
1981 4200
1982 4900
1983 5600
1984 6300
1985 7000
1986 7700
Mike Mullett former Works Manager for Raleigh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can anyone confirm if 1983 is the date when 753r was introduced, or is that date only for Raleigh Pros?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Mullett former Works Manager for Raleigh
:
1) 753 is Metric-diameter tubing (28.0 mm O.D. for the seat and down tubes, 26.0 mm O.D. for the top tube), and was introduced in about 1975. Seat posts for 753 frames are either 27.0 (for small frames) or 26.8 mm (for large frames).
2) 753R and 753T are Imperial (English/Inch) diameter tubing (28.6 mm O.D. for the seat and down tubes, 25.4 mm O.D. for the top tube), and began production in 1983. Seat posts for 753R and 753T are either 27.2 or 27.4 mm.
Of particular interest is the thinner Imperial tubing which takes the 27.4mm seat pin (pillar). Not a lot of people are aware of this. All these tube sets have a part number starting 80*, but Reynolds seem to have lost these specs.
A seat pin should be an easy fit and it should not be necessary to fit the saddle to act as a tommy bar to gain extra purchase.
For those who are searching for a time scale for their frames*, the following is as near as dammit a time line from Mid 1974 until close down. Hope this helps.
[*Note: It's not completely clear from the quoted text, but the following numbers are for dating Raleigh Pro framesets.]
Year Number
1974 0
1975 200
1976 700
1977 1400
1978 2100
1979 2800
1980 3500
1981 4200
1982 4900
1983 5600
1984 6300
1985 7000
1986 7700
Mike Mullett former Works Manager for Raleigh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can anyone confirm if 1983 is the date when 753r was introduced, or is that date only for Raleigh Pros?
__________________
In search of what to search for.
In search of what to search for.
03-16-21, 08:21 AM
#38
Senior Member
Does anyone know what Reynolds 753 Renovated is?
Seeing a bike that is made of this tubeset and wondered if there is anything notable about the word "renovated" in there....
Seeing a bike that is made of this tubeset and wondered if there is anything notable about the word "renovated" in there....
03-16-21, 08:23 AM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 13,447
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4236 Post(s)
Liked 2,949 Times
in
1,808 Posts
Is that a sticker you put on a bike that's been repainted (letting you know paint and decals aren't original)? I can't imagine that tubing replacements are common enough that they'd make a sticker to put on a bike after having to replace a rusted/dented tube.
