Reynolds 753: Timeline?
05-01-14, 04:50 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Berwyn PA
Posts: 6,408
Bikes: I hate bikes!
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked 710 Times
in
233 Posts
Reynolds 753: Timeline?
There do not seem to be a large number of 753 frames floating around. It got me to wonderin' when the tube set was introduced and when it was phased out? Was there a particular reason why?
05-01-14, 05:33 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 20,305
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3464 Post(s)
Liked 2,828 Times
in
1,995 Posts
First on Raleigh Team Pros.
"French" outside diameters first.
It was expensive.
A builder had to be certified first.
You had to use silver to braze it.
Also expensive.
So, the pool of builders who could order it was metered out, you had to buy the test kit, submit your example and wait for approval.
Beyond that I think Reynolds 653 replaced it, but even Reynolds USA has the date wrong on that. I think 1989.
05-01-14, 06:07 PM
#3
Decrepit Member
Waterford continued building the model 1200 using 753 OS until 2002 when Reynolds discontinued 531 and 753, and put all of its promotion behind 853 (which had been introduced in 1995).
05-01-14, 06:22 PM
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Berwyn PA
Posts: 6,408
Bikes: I hate bikes!
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked 710 Times
in
233 Posts
What's the deal with Reynolds 753? - Page 2
For the folks who ride 753 frames, what do you like and what don't you like, if anything?
05-01-14, 07:13 PM
#5
Decrepit Member
Heh. That thread really got into the nitty gritty. 
05-01-14, 07:25 PM
#6
Fat Guy on a Little Bike
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 15,944
Bikes: Two wheeled ones
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1254 Post(s)
Liked 345 Times
in
174 Posts
Disclaimer...my 753 frame is kind of funky on sizing and was custom for someone else, so it's likely not the greatest sample. I don't like my 753 much at all...it's very flexy. It's probably the flexiest road bike I've ridden. I don't like that it can't be cold spaced. I have a more appropriately sized 753 frame in the build que, so perhaps that will help. If my 753 wasn't what it is, I'd have ditched it long ago as it's the last bike I'd chose for riding.
I know your preferences a bit and don't think you'll love it.
I know your preferences a bit and don't think you'll love it.
05-02-14, 07:03 AM
#8
Junior Member
I raced on 753 from 1978 thru 1983. First was a Harry Quinn track bike. (see photo's) I knew Harry personally and was a regular at the Walton Rd shop. Harry told me that Raleigh commissioned him to work with 753 as they were having difficulty keeping it together.
Mt other two frames were one track and one road built right in Ilkeston in 1982. The team issue road bike was absolutely the nicest road bike I have ever ridden on. Felt like I was driving a luxury car. One issue with 753 was it's brittleness. My road bike experienced this twice. One time it developed a hairline fracture where the seat stays braze to the seat tube. The other was right at the bottom of the seat tube entering the BB. That's when I decided to hang up the old mare. She is now only for admiring. Performance wise 753 was fantastic. It could handle the any stress and power put to the pedals. ( and yes, I do have similar experience with Columbus, but my favorite it 753)
Mt other two frames were one track and one road built right in Ilkeston in 1982. The team issue road bike was absolutely the nicest road bike I have ever ridden on. Felt like I was driving a luxury car. One issue with 753 was it's brittleness. My road bike experienced this twice. One time it developed a hairline fracture where the seat stays braze to the seat tube. The other was right at the bottom of the seat tube entering the BB. That's when I decided to hang up the old mare. She is now only for admiring. Performance wise 753 was fantastic. It could handle the any stress and power put to the pedals. ( and yes, I do have similar experience with Columbus, but my favorite it 753)
05-02-14, 07:49 AM
#9
Hoards Thumbshifters
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Signal Mountain, TN
Posts: 1,156
Bikes: '23 Black Mtn MC, '87 Bruce Gordon Chinook, '08 Jamis Aurora, '86 Trek 560, '97 Mongoose Rockadile, & '91 Trek 750
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 246 Post(s)
Liked 334 Times
in
192 Posts
Anyone else ever have one of these? It was an early 90's, I think, Raleigh SP 1000 frame. The frame stickers said Reynolds 753 Titanium. It's from the last technium days, the front triangle was bonded 753 titanium and the rear stays were 531. Checked by magnets to make sure. I had heard that they made a carbon main triangle that year as well called the SP 2000 too.
05-02-14, 07:55 AM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,678
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 581 Times
in
409 Posts
Disclaimer...my 753 frame is kind of funky on sizing and was custom for someone else, so it's likely not the greatest sample. I don't like my 753 much at all...it's very flexy. It's probably the flexiest road bike I've ridden. I don't like that it can't be cold spaced. I have a more appropriately sized 753 frame in the build que, so perhaps that will help. If my 753 wasn't what it is, I'd have ditched it long ago as it's the last bike I'd chose for riding.
I know your preferences a bit and don't think you'll love it.
I know your preferences a bit and don't think you'll love it.
05-02-14, 08:35 AM
#11
Fat Guy on a Little Bike
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 15,944
Bikes: Two wheeled ones
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1254 Post(s)
Liked 345 Times
in
174 Posts
While I agree that it's the builder and not the material, when you're getting one that wasn't built for you, you have to be aware of some tendencies. I know fender's preferences a bit - and I don't think most 753 is going to thrill him.
As far as quality, let me assure you that mine is likely as well built as any out there given what it is and what it was for. It was also built for a very different rider and, as said out the outset, that surely biases me.
I have no question that a skilled builder can make a 753 frame to do what someone wants it to do. I also think that in fender's case, and given what most 753 frames were designed for, there should be some skepticism. You never know until you throw a leg over it.
I don't pretend to be an expert on cold setting, but I'll tell you that I've been told by frame builders that you can't cold set 753. If it worked for you, great. I won't do it.
As far as quality, let me assure you that mine is likely as well built as any out there given what it is and what it was for. It was also built for a very different rider and, as said out the outset, that surely biases me.
I have no question that a skilled builder can make a 753 frame to do what someone wants it to do. I also think that in fender's case, and given what most 753 frames were designed for, there should be some skepticism. You never know until you throw a leg over it.
I don't pretend to be an expert on cold setting, but I'll tell you that I've been told by frame builders that you can't cold set 753. If it worked for you, great. I won't do it.
Last edited by KonAaron Snake; 05-02-14 at 08:38 AM.
05-02-14, 08:37 AM
#12
Decrepit Member
It's a fact that standard diameter 753 tubes with 0.5mm wall thickness is quite flexy when used on larger frames with heavy riders (SL for example has 0.6mm walls).
thinktubes is right; the main reason for Reynolds phasing out 753 is that it can't be welded because at welding temperatures it lost the high strength that had resulted from heat treating. This is the reason Reynolds insisted in certifying framebuilders before selling them 753; they wanted to ensure the tubes weren't overheated during brazing.
The introduction of weldable air-hardening 853 doomed 753.
From 1976 until production ceased, 753 was the bomb for lighter riders.
thinktubes is right; the main reason for Reynolds phasing out 753 is that it can't be welded because at welding temperatures it lost the high strength that had resulted from heat treating. This is the reason Reynolds insisted in certifying framebuilders before selling them 753; they wanted to ensure the tubes weren't overheated during brazing.
The introduction of weldable air-hardening 853 doomed 753.
From 1976 until production ceased, 753 was the bomb for lighter riders.
05-02-14, 08:44 AM
#13
Fat Guy on a Little Bike
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 15,944
Bikes: Two wheeled ones
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1254 Post(s)
Liked 345 Times
in
174 Posts
It's a fact that standard diameter 753 tubes with 0.5mm wall thickness is quite flexy when used on larger frames with heavy riders (SL for example has 0.6mm walls).
thinktubes is right; the main reason for Reynolds phasing out 753 is that it can't be welded because at welding temperatures it lost the high strength that had resulted from heat treating. This is the reason Reynolds insisted in certifying framebuilders before selling them 753; they wanted to ensure the tubes weren't overheated during brazing.
The introduction of weldable air-hardening 853 doomed 753.
From 1976 until production ceased, 753 was the bomb for lighter riders.
thinktubes is right; the main reason for Reynolds phasing out 753 is that it can't be welded because at welding temperatures it lost the high strength that had resulted from heat treating. This is the reason Reynolds insisted in certifying framebuilders before selling them 753; they wanted to ensure the tubes weren't overheated during brazing.
The introduction of weldable air-hardening 853 doomed 753.
From 1976 until production ceased, 753 was the bomb for lighter riders.
05-02-14, 08:57 AM
#14
Decrepit Member
No, Aaron, I wouldn't. The Reynolds 753 Technical Advice says not to, and that's enough for me not to risk it.
Likes For Scooper:
05-02-14, 08:59 AM
#15
Fat Guy on a Little Bike
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 15,944
Bikes: Two wheeled ones
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1254 Post(s)
Liked 345 Times
in
174 Posts
I had a feeling Stan. good enough for me and good enough for this uninformed forumite to feel comfortable saying not to.
05-02-14, 09:51 AM
#16
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,784
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3587 Post(s)
Liked 3,400 Times
in
1,934 Posts
Likes For JohnDThompson:
05-02-14, 09:54 AM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 1,643
Bikes: 1997 Rivendell Road Standard 650b conversion (tourer), 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10 (gravel/tour), 2013 Foundry Auger disc (CX/gravel), 2016 Cannondale Fat CAAD 2 (MTB/winter), 2011 Cannondale Flash 29er Lefty (trail MTB)
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
I have a Rivendell Road, made in 753 by Waterford in '97. I understand that GP spec'd slightly thicker tubes (than 753 racing bikes) for the Rivendells. Probably closer to standard 531 tubing dimensions. So, mine feels very strong and not super light. Yet, somehow, just a bit flexy in all the best ways for a smooth ride, and quite fast. It's probably the whole package of GB Lierre tires, Velocity/Phil wheels, and a great frame; that bike just rolls so well.
I have two other bikes of heat-treated steel, but each is a different design so it's hard to compare. My Schwinn KOM-10 is Tange Prestige HT, but it must be thick-walled because that frame is heavy. My Giordana is Excell Eco, and feels paper-thin in spots. I can feel that bike flex, but in a fast and springy way, not noodly.
I have two other bikes of heat-treated steel, but each is a different design so it's hard to compare. My Schwinn KOM-10 is Tange Prestige HT, but it must be thick-walled because that frame is heavy. My Giordana is Excell Eco, and feels paper-thin in spots. I can feel that bike flex, but in a fast and springy way, not noodly.
05-02-14, 10:26 AM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 7,238
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: 831 Post(s)
Liked 2,124 Times
in
554 Posts
Further to the above, I was interested in the timeline for 753r framesets and found the following on a thread at Retrobike:
Can anyone confirm if 1983 is the date when 753r was introduced, or is that date only for Raleigh Pros?
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
05-02-14, 11:33 AM
#19
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,784
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3587 Post(s)
Liked 3,400 Times
in
1,934 Posts
05-02-14, 11:34 AM
#20
Decrepit Member
Regarding cold setting 753, I would venture guessing that an experienced framebuilder like Andy Gilmore could temper the part of the frame that needs to be cold set, then cold set to the proper position and finally heat treat again. My understanding is that this does risk introducing internal stresses, but I am not a metallurgist and am just basing this on literature I've read over the years. I may be mistaken in guessing this would be feasible.
For a brief tutorial on heat treating, THIS ARTICLE is pretty good reading.
Here is the 753 Technical Data Sheet. Note the underlined caution about cold setting and the underlined warning about loss of strength if the material is heated above 700° C.
Last edited by Scooper; 05-02-14 at 11:39 AM.
05-02-14, 12:29 PM
#21
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Berwyn PA
Posts: 6,408
Bikes: I hate bikes!
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked 710 Times
in
233 Posts
Was there a weight restriction? I ride 59cm-61cm frames and weigh 185lb-190lb. Any guess if I am too fat for 753?
05-02-14, 12:53 PM
#22
Decrepit Member
I'm guessing that at your weight and frame size it would be too flexy for you.
05-02-14, 01:37 PM
#24
Decrepit Member
Hey; if you're fat so am I. I'm 6' 0" and weigh 185. I ride a 61cm frame. 
05-02-14, 02:00 PM
#25
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 662 Times
in
311 Posts
I am riding a 56cm C-T at 220 and it has not collapsed under me......yet. 