Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Commuting
Reload this Page >

4130 v. Reynolds 531

Search
Notices
Commuting Bicycle commuting is easier than you think, before you know it, you'll be hooked. Learn the tips, hints, equipment, safety requirements for safely riding your bike to work.

4130 v. Reynolds 531

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-23-06 | 10:11 AM
  #1  
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
From: Washington, DC

Bikes: '85 Nishiki Tri-A, early '90's Nishiki Tange Prestige, '84 Trek 610, mid-'80's Miele (unknown), '72 all chrome Raleigh International, '81 Trek 412, 84 Specialized StumpJumper

4130 v. Reynolds 531

Any insight into the qualatative differences b/w these two materials? I'm thinking of trading in my 06 Jamis Aurora (great bike, Reynolds) for a Cross Check (4130). I've read quite a bit on this forum about the perceived overpriced Surly products, mostly due to its "cheap" 4130 frame. Is the 531 superior? Equal? Inferior? If it's at least an even trade in terms of the frame, I'm doing it. Thanks in advance.
russian fighter is offline  
Reply
Old 06-23-06 | 11:18 AM
  #2  
Grunk's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO

Bikes: Gunnar Street Dog, Bianchi Pista, ****ty Road Conversion, Fit Van Homan BMX

Don't let people tell you the Surly frames are straight guage chromoly. The main triangle is double butted. The chainstays and seatstays are straight guage. FWIW I love my crosscheck and ride it more than my "nicer" bikes.
Grunk is offline  
Reply
Old 06-23-06 | 11:22 AM
  #3  
cuda2k's Avatar
Unique Vintage Steel
Titanium Club Membership
Sheldon Brown Memorial - Titanium
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 11,591
Likes: 287
From: Allen, TX

Bikes: Kirk Frameworks JKS-C, Serotta Nova, Gazelle AB-Frame, Fuji Team Issue, Surly Straggler

If the 531 frame is full 531, it'll likely be a little lighter, though a little less durable, than 4130. Though, unless you're commuting down a mountainside (sans road) either will be a good ride.
cuda2k is offline  
Reply
Old 06-23-06 | 11:22 AM
  #4  
Easily distracted...
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 0
From: Decatur, Ga

Bikes: Surley Cross Check

Good question. I'm interested to hear from some other more knowlegable folks. This thread might get a better response in the mechanics forum or from the rec.bicycles.tech newsgroup.

As I understand it, 531 is a proprietary brand from Reynolds. It's a similar alloy (1.5% Mn, 0.25% Mo, 0.35% C) to 4130, but the Reynolds company applies some extra heat treating to make the tubing stronger (??). I don't know if that equates to lighter, such as 631 or 953(!), but it is a step up from basic 4130. Please, someone with more info step in...

That being said, I've got a "cheap" 4130 Cross Check and I really enjoy it. Surlys may be a bit overpriced in terms of frame technology, but they're such a versitile and rugged design.
GTcommuter is offline  
Reply
Old 06-23-06 | 11:49 AM
  #5  
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
From: Washington, DC

Bikes: '85 Nishiki Tri-A, early '90's Nishiki Tange Prestige, '84 Trek 610, mid-'80's Miele (unknown), '72 all chrome Raleigh International, '81 Trek 412, 84 Specialized StumpJumper

Thanks for the replies--very hellpful. I suspected as much, and for what I'm doing (commuting), it seems to be a wash b/w the two. Glad to hear you all like your Cross Checks. Now that I've got your attention--thoughts on the chainstay length of the Cross Check v. the LHT? The LHT CS length (almost 18 inches) seems a bit much, the Aurora (17.32 inches) is just about right, and the CCheck comes in on the shorter end (of my comparison) at 16.7. How material is that difference in terms of ride quality? I know the longer the CS, the "smoother" the ride. Would you describe your CChecks as "smooth" or more "agile"? Again, thanks in advance.
russian fighter is offline  
Reply
Old 06-23-06 | 05:25 PM
  #6  
ollo_ollo's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,366
Likes: 629
From: Soviet of Oregon or Pensacola FL

Bikes: Still have a few left!

Main advantage to longer seatstays is that they let you carry panniers without heel strike problems.
ollo_ollo is offline  
Reply
Old 06-23-06 | 08:41 PM
  #7  
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
Been Around Awhile
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 30,668
Likes: 1,981
From: Burlington Iowa

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Originally Posted by russian fighter
Thanks for the replies--very hellpful. I suspected as much, and for what I'm doing (commuting), it seems to be a wash b/w the two. Glad to hear you all like your Cross Checks. Now that I've got your attention--thoughts on the chainstay length of the Cross Check v. the LHT? The LHT CS length (almost 18 inches) seems a bit much, the Aurora (17.32 inches) is just about right, and the CCheck comes in on the shorter end (of my comparison) at 16.7. How material is that difference in terms of ride quality? I know the longer the CS, the "smoother" the ride. Would you describe your CChecks as "smooth" or more "agile"? Again, thanks in advance.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-06 | 12:37 PM
  #8  
georgiaboy's Avatar
Retro-nerd
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 57
From: Morningside - Atlanta

Bikes: 1991 Serotta Colorado II, 1986 Vitus 979, 1971 Juene Classic, 2008 Surly Crosscheck, 1956 Riva Sport

Originally Posted by russian fighter
Thanks for the replies--very hellpful. I suspected as much, and for what I'm doing (commuting), it seems to be a wash b/w the two. Glad to hear you all like your Cross Checks. Now that I've got your attention--thoughts on the chainstay length of the Cross Check v. the LHT? The LHT CS length (almost 18 inches) seems a bit much, the Aurora (17.32 inches) is just about right, and the CCheck comes in on the shorter end (of my comparison) at 16.7. How material is that difference in terms of ride quality? I know the longer the CS, the "smoother" the ride. Would you describe your CChecks as "smooth" or more "agile"? Again, thanks in advance.
Check the link below and look at the entire page:

https://www.anvilbikes.com/?news_ID=49&catID=3
__________________
Would you like a dream with that?
georgiaboy is offline  
Reply
Old 06-27-06 | 09:50 AM
  #9  
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
From: Washington, DC

Bikes: '85 Nishiki Tri-A, early '90's Nishiki Tange Prestige, '84 Trek 610, mid-'80's Miele (unknown), '72 all chrome Raleigh International, '81 Trek 412, 84 Specialized StumpJumper

Thanks**

nm
russian fighter is offline  
Reply
Old 06-27-06 | 10:36 AM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
From: Oklahoma

Bikes: Pake fixie. Klein Reve (for sale, https://www.theveer.net/gordons_klein)

My Cross Check is the smoothest bike I've ridden - smoother even then my suspended mountain bike and hybrid. It's the bike to use when my bag is heavy, or I just feel the need for a gentle ride. I assume this is due to the longer chain stays, fork rake, and relatively relaxed geometry. It's well behaved and versatile, but I can still get down on the drops when fighting a head wind.

You're thinking too much. Performance and comfort depend as much on fabrication technique and parts selection as on frame material and geometry details. Do some research, then do some test rides.
geog_dash is offline  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.