linx

I just purchased a new inexpensive RB made of 520 steel. The ride was smoother than the AL bikes I test rode, including a LeMond, Specialized and Bianchi which were steel. This new bike rides as good as the old Peugeots and Motobecanes I rode in the late 1970s. What is the history of 520 steel and how is it viewed by builders? Do the French and Italian builders use 520?


Thx

x136 

As I recall, Reynolds 520 is the same as regular 4130 chromoly steel. Nothing fancy, but there's nothing wrong with it.

MMACH 5

Just about any decent, steel bike is going to ride smoother than one with an aluminum frame.

I believe 520 and CroMo are the most popular steel tubes for frame building. I'm guessing it has to do with weight vs. structural integrity, (i.e. - you can use thinner walled tubes but not end up with an unsafe bike).

well biked

Reynolds 520 is used on a lot of relatively inexpensive bikes that generally give a lot of bang for the buck. Not high end by any means, but good solid stuff. Chromoly steel is good. I'd be surprised if you were to find Reynolds 520 on anything other than bikes made in Asia these days, but that's okay; again, these are bikes that give a lot of bang for the buck. If you're looking for "bling," look elsewhere-

linx

Thanks for the replies!

What kind of steel were they using for bikes in the 1960s and '70s? Did they have 520?

MMACH 5

Before repainting my 1986 Raliegh, I think I remember a 400 and something number and maybe the words, "Hi-tensile."

I've repainted several bikes, so I might be confusing/combining the stickers from different ones.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the numbers coincide with the percentages of iron and other metals are in the mix.