It is stronger, but that's not the same thing as stiffness.

All steel has the same stiffness. Some are stronger, and can be drawn into thinner tubes which will reduce stiffness. Larger diameter tubing will restore stiffness, allowing high stiffness and low weight in comparison to less fancy steel. What reynolds means when they say 853 'allows frame builders to make very strong, stiff frames with a low frame weight' is that the stronger 853 steel can be made into thin/oversize tubing that attains strength/stiffness of smaller diameter tubing that is thicker.

A straight gauge frame of 531 in 0.9mm is stiffer than double butted 0.8mm/0.5mm 853 of the same diameter because the 531 tubing is thicker throughout. But by increasing the diameter of the 853 tubing, you can create a tube that is both stiffer and lighter than the 531. The greater strength of 853 allows for this.

Well, we're talking from two different perspectives here. I agree entirely that "all steel has the same stiffness" if your measurements are identical. However, I am talking from the perspective of a built frame. The stiffness of the frames I've had - and the advertised utility of a frame - made from 853 has in general been greater than my 531 frames. The inherent strength of the frame material allows that to be accomplished.

Please note that in my initial post you quoted I said a "stiffer frame," not "stiffer steel."

-Gregory

I thought that might've been what you meant, I just wanted to be extra clear for Bad Lag :) Since they asked (as you noted) a well-trodden question and your response had some assumptions about an 853 frame that he may not be aware of, like how oversize tubing affects stiffness.

That piece of metal is often chromed(or polished stainless steel) so housing can rub and there is no paint lost on the frame or little metal piece.

Piff I gotcha'. Bob Jackson had used OS tubing for a lot of their builds up until the closer in 2020, and apparently Woodrup is carrying on that tradition with standard OS tubing and 1 1/8" steerers for the re-released models. In any tubing choice these are bound to be stiffer than classic standard sized 531 frames, and as long as they're made using higher strength steel like 725 or 853, almost certainly lighter despite the increased tube dimensions.

-Gregory

One of the problems of explaining the differences between tubing types is that all things are not equal. Reynolds 531 was made with different tubing wall thicknesses from very thin to thick (22/25 to 19/22 wire gauge). It is the thickness and diameter of the tube that effects stiffness and not the alloy being used. Also tubing is made with different butting profiles (longer and shorter lengths) and where a builder chooses to miter the tubes within the butting profile might make a little difference too. This is why it is a meaningless explanation to say one bike with 531 rides differently than one with 853. They may will ride differently but the reason has to do with wall thickness and tubing diameter and not the alloy the tubes were made with.

Doug Fattic Thank you, and of course. If I had to re-word my initial response to the question, I suppose it would be something like:

"Generally, frames made using 853 tubing are lighter and stiffer than historical 531 frames because they are constructed using thinner walled tubing with oversized dimensions."

That being the case, this is why I generally think of 853 as "lighter and stiffer," which is precisely the way that Reynolds markets the tubing.

If one intends to replicate the dimensions of an historical 531 frame, the advantage of strength that 853 alloy possesses may be minimized or even adversely affect the ride quality compared to the ideal.

-Gregory

I’m sure it applied to 753, but I don’t know if it actually applied to 853. The story has often been told, but I guess I haven’t much corroboration.

No certification for 853. Anyone can buy that stuff and build with it, and thats from when it was introduced to now.

^ per an oldtimer frame builder who was building when 753 was around and 853 was introduced, and has forgotten more than most any of us will ever know.

The 2008 World Class Cycles price list was USD $1125 for Messina/Grand Prix 631/525 frame. The 631/725 frames started at $1295. 853 at $1495. 953 @ $1740.

I apologize. I asked what I thought was a simple question, a side issue to the Bob Jackson offerings, and it has entirely derailed this thread.

Bad Lag All good, that's what we're supposed to do around here, right?

Was that directly from Bob Jackson? Because I can remember going on their website and seeing a figure of 600 - 700 pounds for the Audax / "End to End" frameset, converting that to under $1000, and thinking it was a very good deal. Now, I don't remember if that was three years ago or five years ago, but it wasn't as far back as 2008.

That was what the US distributor was charging. My 531 frame from the 90's started around $700.

I wouldn't call that derailing. We can do much worse around here. That was just a friendly round of clarification We've all shaken hands over it, by now!

Welcome to Bike Forums and C&V! I must say, I have learned a LOT here about cycling, and I hope I've been effective (and diplomatic?) in sharing what I know.

Please stay.

Nice to see one of 'my' Cyclo Sportife's hopefully still being enjoyed.
After some 52 years of pro frame building for the likes of Bob Jackson, Woodrup and Thorn I am now making 'Sayles' frames from my workshop in North Lincolnshire.
Cheers

The stainless rubs first appeared on a frame I made in 2003 whilst working for Thorn cycles, inevitably other frame builders have 'copied' my idea.

Very cool! Were you building Bob Jackson frames in ~1974? If so, I am still riding one that could be one of yours.

No matter, really, I am an original owner have enjoyed the heck out of it for almost 50 years. It has been everywhere and I have done everything with it.

I certainly was building Jackson frames in 1974. I was at Bob Jackson's from May 1971 till Christmas 1976.
There is a chance I made your frame, but at that time there were three or four other builders. At Woodrup's I always stamped the frame number on the left hand side of the BB shell, and in recent years added a KS.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...e0ada8cbda.jpg

I could not resist posting this. As you are aware, the paint is not original but the owner is. Also, it is a genuine Bob Jackson, I just never got the 531 decal after the repaint (~1980).

This set of decals were handed to me by Bob Jackson's son (?) during a visit to his visit to a Santa Monica, California bicycle shop. He wanted to see the frame before he handed them over, so I made the drive and showed him the proof.

It's a great bike. I've had several bikes during my lifetime but this Bob Jackson is the best.

Thank you!

that would be Harold Jackson.
his wife was the apartment manager when I returned from the exile of the San Fernando Valley. We might have received the nod to rent the apartment (Mom’s income was marginal) as I saw the BobJackson bike in the living room and I made comment I had a Jackson track bike and won a number of races on it. Learned Harold was Bob’s son.

Here's another from your time period. Late 1972, I think. #9249

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...98c8601d1a.jpg

That looks great!

It really is time for a repaint on mine. Perhaps I should restore it to its original paint scheme.

My Bob Jackson World Tour.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...f2ad9f2_3k.jpg20160220_133953 (2) by nemosengineer, on Flickr

: Mike

It was Howard Jackson, not Harold.
I believe he passed away several years before his father [Bob Jackson]