Raleigh 18-23 tubing

[porteous]

I have become curious about Raleigh 18-23 tubing. We have three mixte frame ladies bikes in the family, two restored Misty's for the girls and the memsahibs Richmond. The Richmond (1990ish) is Reynolds 531 tube while the Mistys (Both circa 1983-5) are Raleigh 18-23.

I am unable to find out the similarities (or not) between these two tube types. I know 531 is a respectable light weight tube, but can find out nothing about 18-23 except rather a lot of "opinions" (Like navels, every body has one!).

I am sure there are those on here that really know! I suspect the answer lies in the fact that TI owned Raleigh, Reynolds and Accles and Pollock all at the same time and were rationalising like mad!

Which is the better tube? If so why??

PS I am going to weigh two of the bikes today to find out if there are significant weight differences.

Hmmmmmmmm Wisp 34lb (with 27" wheels) Richmond 33lb (With 26" wheels). Not a lot in it as far as weight is concerned. The larger wheels must be worth a few ounces. The rest could easily be in chainset differences and that fact that the Richmond has centre pull brakes and the Wisp side pull. Ideas please.

 

[fossyant]

18-23 is bog standard hi-ten steel, 531 is a lightweight steel with alloys added for strength, and was available in lots of options. 18-23 is what was used on Raleigh's standard bikes

 

[Ivan Ardon]

I pulled an old Raleigh Pioneer from a skip with an "18-23 High Tensile Steel" frame sticker.

I ended up stripping it and sawing the frame into pieces. It was definitely plain gauge thick tubing.

 

[swee'pea99]

531 is good
18-23 is adequate

 

[hubgearfreak]

531 is good
18-23 is adequate

531 and 18-23 are both good, but 531 is stronger and consequently can achieve the same strength with a thinner wall tube, so consequently is lighter. if you think that a few ounces makes a difference (when racing it does) for utility riding to the shops or school & etc, it matters not one jot, except for some kudos amongst bicycle geeks (us)

 

[porteous]

Thanks for the information

Thanks for the last two posts, that's pretty much what I thought. The frames are all the same size and, since we aren't about to race anyone, an 8 oz - 1lb weight penalty from one to another, on bikes that weigh less than 35lb in road trim anyway, is more than acceptable. I am currently restoring a 50s Rudge Pathfinder, which had a 531 frame but steel bars and seat post as built, which probably added 2-3lbs at least. So, since Raleigh weren't too fussed, then I am not going to get too concerned about a lb or two.

My son went through a mountain bike phase, insisted on mid range bikes which still weighed a ton (And cost a fortune) compared to the 50s/60s racers and touring bikes I get out of skips! (He now rides a quite ordinary cheap 60s Kettler racing bike and the knobbly tyred thing rusts in peace!)

I have a definite suspicion that British bikes prior to the mid 70s were better built than anything since (Unless you want to pay zillions), but that's my personal prejudice.

 

[hubgearfreak]

I have a definite suspicion that British bikes prior to the mid 70s were better built than anything since (Unless you want to pay zillions), but that's my personal prejudice.

sheldon was also a fan

 

[MacB]

I have an 18-23, a 501 and had a 531 which was too small, the differences in weight and ride feel weren't noticeable at my level. If I was having something custom made then I'd go for the best tubing I could afford. For building up a hack bike then I'd be more interested in frame condition. I'd take a good condition 18-23 over a poorer 531 any day.