Reynolds 501/531/753

[RD1]

Does anyone prefer frames made of Reynolds 501 (chrome molybdenum?) Or 531/753 (manganese molybdenum) steel verse alluminium or carbon fibre?
Pros and cons.?
Cheers Rich

 

[S-Express]

Well, what do you prefer and why?

 

[Drago]

The cro mo has similar mechanical properties to the 531. The main difference is the cro mo has different welding or brazing options to the 531 so is cheaper to produce.

As for steel v carbon v alloy, thats such a complex equation involving rider attributes, budget, tastes, the use to which it would be put, its not worth even attempting to answer because there is no right answer.

 

[gbb]

while I haven't the weights exactly, as an example when I was building my winter commuter with a 1970s maybe 1980s 531 frame...I had my modern alloy Bianchi in pieces at the same time. Just lifting then by hand, I couldn't detect any weight difference.
My 531 is supremely smooth on the road but then fork design probably has a bit effect on that.
Fir me it's not really down to material, it's personal choice dictated by aesthetics. I like the chunky style a carbon frame gives you...normal tubing doesn't paticually do it for me.
The flip side is my 531 is already 30 years old and I have no reason to think it will give up soon. I doubt many carbon frames will last that long.

 

[RD1]

Well, what do you prefer and why?

I have always preferred Reynolds 531 for everyday use or i think there is/was a 'comp/SL' for racing...
The steel frames might be a little bit heavier than alluminium or carbon fibre but can take knocks better /repaired....?
Thanks
Rich

 

[RD1]

while I haven't the weights exactly, as an example when I was building my winter commuter with a 1970s maybe 1980s 531 frame...I had my modern alloy Bianchi in pieces at the same time. Just lifting then by hand, I couldn't detect any weight difference.
My 531 is supremely smooth on the road but then fork design probably has a bit effect on that.
Fir me it's not really down to material, it's personal choice dictated by aesthetics. I like the chunky style a carbon frame gives you...normal tubing doesn't paticually do it for me.
The flip side is my 531 is already 30 years old and I have no reason to think it will give up soon. I doubt many carbon frames will last that long.

Thanks
Yes - different frame/ fork angles for either commute / long distance or performance.
Yes- aero profile tubing does look much more attractive than the old round tubes... and steel does last a long time.....better value for money in the long term...?
Nice to have a really light/responsive/ great power transfer/comfortable frame though- especially up hills!

 

[Smokin Joe]

The flip side is my 531 is already 30 years old and I have no reason to think it will give up soon. I doubt many carbon frames will last that long.

Not many 531 frames have lasted that long and there is no reason to suppose that the same percentage of carbon fibre frames won't survive three decades either.

 

[midlife]

Way back an american cycling mag had several frames made of different tubing and exactly the same size ..............nobody could tell the difference

Geometry and wheels seem to make more difference in the real world.

Shaun

 

[RD1]

Way back an american cycling mag had several frames made of different tubing and exactly the same size ..............nobody could tell the difference

Geometry and wheels seem to make more difference in the real world.

Shaun

Geometry and wheels- yep agreed
Cheers

 

[S-Express]

I have always preferred Reynolds 531 for everyday use or i think there is/was a 'comp/SL' for racing...
The steel frames might be a little bit heavier than alluminium or carbon fibre but can take knocks better /repaired....?
Thanks
Rich

You probably mean 531C. Not really sure what it is about one steel tubeset over another that makes it more preferable for 'everyday' use. Plenty of carbon and alu frames in everyday use as well. There isn't really one material that takes knocks better than another. Steel can generally be repaired, as can carbon. Aluminium alloy, not so much.

 

[midlife]

Reynolds 531professional took over from 531 SL

Shaun

 

[simon.r]

For the type of riding I do I'll take a good quality steel frame over aluminium or carbon any day.

I know the argument is that geometry, tyre size etc make more difference than frame material, but having ridden all of them over the years I'm fairly convinced that a decent steel frame has a certain something* that no other frame material (with the possible exception of titanium) can match.

I definitely know that my preferred ride for the last few months has been a bike with a Reynolds 853 main frame.

* What that is I don't know. A bit of 'give' without being flexible is the best I can come up with.

 

[S-Express]

* What that is I don't know. A bit of 'give' without being flexible is the best I can come up with.

You can engineer those qualities into any frame material though.

 

[midlife]

Strangely enough if I close my eyes riding my Carbon / aluminium Basso it feels like i could be riding my 70's Falcon San Remo

Shaun

 

[simon.r]

You can engineer those qualities into any frame material though.

Yes, I'm sure you can. But, of the dozen or so aluminium and 3 or 4 carbon frames I've ridden none of them have had those qualities engineered in - or at least they don't feel as if they had to me. I appreciate that's a very small number compared to the amount of frames available but given that all the frames were reckoned to be fairly typical of their type it's enough to convince me.

If money was no object I'd try more frames and I suppose I'd eventually find a carbon or aluminium frame I really liked, but it ain't happened yet!

P.S. In between posting here I've just finished re-building a Tange Prestige framed bike and even a few hundred yards up and down the road to check the set up have convinced me that it's got that steel thing going on