veganheart

In my quest to find my perfect frame wi/n my budget (otherwise it would be Ti) I am trying to get statistics regarding what's the weight diff b/n 531 501 631 853 Reynolds frames and Columbus frames? (assuming a frame size of 58cm if this matters).
If you know or know of a website that has the specific stats it would be appreciated.

:confused:

froze

This is all subjective! SORRY. In general, as the numbers go up the lighter the frame-BUT only a little bit; also my memory may be incorrect on some of the weights, but you'll get the general idea. The 501 is the heaviest at about 6 pounds for the frame. The 531 though gets confusing because they made at least 6 different series of this tubing, from the heaviest 531st (for touring)at about 6 pounds (but stronger steel than the 501) to the 531pro or c (for racing) that weighed 3.8pounds. Then 631 came along and it actually weighed more than 531 then they came out with a pro version that weighed 4lbs-big deal, and 631 is not as strong as 531. Then came 725 which had at least 3 different kinds, but even the lightest of this stuff weighed more than even the 631!; this tubeset is no longer in production. But the biggest improvement came with 853, the steel is the strongest and is close to the breaking strength of Titanium, and the weight gets about the same as the lightest 531, but they make at least 3 series of this stuff too with the heaviest weighing almost 4lbs.

PLEASE note, this is from memory and I could be wrong on the exact weights. I do know that 631 and 753 were not big technological improvements and no weight reductions over 531 and that's why they did not stay on the market place very long; even in the weight reduction area 853 is not even that much of a reduction, but it is a much better tube than anything they had before. Unfortunately they stopped making 531except for forks which I feel would make a very good budget frame, far better than the 501 which I think they still make.

Columbus tubing has more tubesets that are lighter than Reynolds such as (rated from lightest to heaviest): Nemo OS, Neuron std and the Genius os , but True Temper makes a gold series that is also very light, almost as light as AL, but I believe there is a rider weight limit of 150lbs as is true with the lightest Columbus nemos os.

If your on a budget, go with the 853 R for strength or Columbus Neuron STD or even the Genius OS for lightweight but more than adequate strength.

Go to Strongframes.com click on frames then click on tubing for more insight on the various tubes out there.

ParamountScapin 

froze has a pretty good memory, above.

Two other well respected tubing manufacturers are Tange (Japan) and Dediacci (Italian - but check my spelling). Anything you may look at that is Reynolds, Columbus, Tange or Dediacci will be good stuff. And all will weigh about the same, within reason.

You can also check the various tubing manufacturers' websites. They post a fair bit of info, as well. Probably more technical than you want, in many cases. But the most you will save is about what you will sweat off in the first twenty miles of a good ride unless you jump for the new, ultra-light steel .

My new Scapin, with Columbus Nemo tubing weighs 3.14 pounds on the digital scale at my LBS. But I could lose 25 pounds if I were to become a racer (some other lifetime), so it really doesn't make much difference if your frame weighs 3 pounds or 5 pounds, unless you are so fit that you can't stand to lose at least the same amount.

The one item that you want to look at for lightness is wheels. Get the lightest set that will give you reliable service for your weight/riding circumstances. I ride Ksyrium Elites and will get a set of Neutrons (Campy) once I get to the point that I stay consistantly below 175. The lighter the wheel/tire combo the easier it is to pedal because that is the weight (mass) you are turning over all the time. This is especially true on climbs. Enjoy!

roadbuzz

I don't know how big a factor this is on current bikes, particularly those made of high-end alloy (i.e. 853). Some weight is eliminated by "butting" the tubing, making the metal at the ends thicker than in the middle. Cheaper bikes use tubing which is of the same thickness throughout.

RiPHRaPH

i ride a 525 steel, which for my 58cm frame is 6 ounces heavier than the 853 in the same size. i couldn't feel a difference in the ride and the price is right. see www.steelmancycles.com for details. there is a link there to the reynolds site, where you will have more spec's than you'll know what to do with.

TimB

The 753 and 853 tubes sets are lighter than the other Reynolds offerings because the tube walls a re thinner. The 853 is a tougher alloy and is also harder than 531. It also air hardens after welding and shows superior strength recovery at the weld zone than 531. Most of the other tubes sets quoted by froze and others are also manganese molybdenum steels and are NOT CROmoly. They're all excellent tube sets. Reynolds butting process however creates less pre stress in the tube walls which means the framebuilder has a greater degree of freedom in deciding how stiff he bike needs to be in certain area. For this reason it is the material of choice.

johndoug

What is Easton 7005 Aluminum? And where is it on the quality and strength scale?

TandemGeek

Dedacciai
https://www.dedacciai.com/

TandemGeek

Although not a direct answer to your question, this article by Gary Klein might be of interest with regard to the aluminum alloys used for bicycles.
https://www.kleinbikes.com/at_klein/zr9000.asp

TimB

EAston 7005 aluminium is their midrange tubeset material used on mid range bikes.
It is basically the Ultralite and Elite tubesets.
The top range tubeset is the 7005incl Scandium to reduce grain structure. The Walls of these tubes are thinner but the frames still show adequate strength and fatigue life. Light weight is the goal here.

If you want a bike that will last a while, go with the Ultralite tubeset.

Their entry level tubeset material is 6061-T6 which also falls into the Ultralite range. Actually entry level is a bad choice of words because some manufuacturers prefer the 6061-T6 for their better bikes..

froze

I searched like crazy to find a web site comparing weights of Reynolds tubesets and finally found one-BUT not sure if accurate though it seems to agree with what I remembered.

https://www.fortunecity.com/olympia/p...chnology_2.htm

ALSO please read page 42 of the VeloNews Buyers guide on frame material. They don't speak highly of Aluminum; I copied it in part below:

As anyone familiar with beer cans can tell you, AL is softer land less stiff than steel. AL is easy to draw and form into shapes, easy to machine, and relatively easy to weld. Its density is about a third of steel and half of TI, so it is not hard to build a light bike with it. It will oxidize, and should be painted powder coated or anodized to prevent corrosion, but it does not rust away rapidly.

AL has downsides, too. Its tensile (breaking) strength, yield (bending) strength and elongation (the % of its length it can stretched before it’s unable to return to its original shape) are far less than those of high strength steel and TI alloys. AL is more vulnerable in a crash. AL has no fatigue limit, a property that steel possesses, often expressed as a % of its tensile strength. Below this limit, the material can be cycled indefinitely without breaking. This means that AL can be less predictable than steel as to when it will fail after long use.

Back to our beer can: compare a can of beer to a can of olives and it’s apparent that the AL container has much less stiffness than a steel can of similar thickness and diameter. Yet many AL bikes feel stiff. Why? It’s because AL’s density is so low; tubes can be made large and thick for stiffness and light weight.

Froze: They did mention that Scandium was the most robust of the AL frames.