# Rode a Reynolds 953 frame today.



## czdavid (Jun 1, 2005)

I just got back from a ride on a Reynolds 953 frame bike. Here is some feedback on this "wonder metal". The frame was made from the larger diameter tube set, sloping top tube, short 405mm chainstay, integrated headset cups. Frame was just under 1400g. I have seen some frames claiming sub 1000g - unless the frame is a "super compact" those weights are probably not attainable. The bike was by far the smoothest riding frame I ever rode. I have ridden Ti, various Columbus steel, 853, True Temper and various carbon and alloy frames. 
The ride is like floating on a cloud. Frame was still plenty stiff in the BB area, on rough douwnhill section the bike was on rails. The best part was the lively feel of the frame. The bike rode a "lot lighter" than it actually was (mix of various components, heavy Mavic wheels). 
I must say the material will have a future. The cost and very hard welding characteristics will be the biggest challenge.


----------



## Mike Overly (Sep 28, 2005)

Thanks for the ride report. A few Qs if you don't mind:

1. Who built the frame?

2. What size?

3. Is the weight quoted for a painted frame?

(Wondering if wondersteel fabrication isn't starting to mimick the light weight and high cost of Ti)


----------



## czdavid (Jun 1, 2005)

The frame is a prototype from a high end steel builder in Taiwan.

The size is a 56cm (56.5mm virtual top tube length).

Frame weight was for unpainted - just raw tubes.

The tubing is more expensive than 3.2 ti.

I have had a Ti bike a few years ago, this tubing absorbs better and is much stiffer.


----------



## Mike Overly (Sep 28, 2005)

Many thanks. Interesting metal ... too bad about the price, but it will probably hide painlessly in the cost structure of frame makers who already get higher-than-normal $$ for 853/Foco/OX.


----------



## Zampano (Aug 7, 2005)

Sounds like 953 might be robot weldable, and therefore allow the production houses the capability to have a material that will compete with ti.


----------



## czdavid (Jun 1, 2005)

Apparantly the material is very hard to weld, welding has to be done in a similar fashion as Ti.


----------



## terzo rene (Mar 23, 2002)

I think the 953 is basically a side show freak. The ride description could just as easily apply to any bike made with steel tubing developed in the last couple decades. No matter what you do it's still steel and will ride very similarly to other steel in the same geometry. There will always be one or two people that will buy steam powered tricycles and there will be a few that want a 953 frame too, but not many.


----------



## tubafreak (Apr 24, 2006)

czdavid said:


> Apparantly the material is very hard to weld, welding has to be done in a similar fashion as Ti.


It's my understanding that 953 is a Stainless Steel. If so then czdavid is right on, it needs to eb hand-TIG'd and either backpurged or vacuum welded. One could also use a PAW system, but those are so expensive that they'd need to sell many thousands of frames just to break even. It sounds like a glourious material, but I will agree that the market is limited.


----------



## terry b (Jan 29, 2004)

terzo rene said:


> I think the 953 is basically a side show freak. The ride description could just as easily apply to any bike made with steel tubing developed in the last couple decades. No matter what you do it's still steel and will ride very similarly to other steel in the same geometry. There will always be one or two people that will buy steam powered tricycles and there will be a few that want a 953 frame too, but not many.


You're pretty much spot on, I really want a 953 frame, but I chose to pass on the steam-powered bike I was pondering last year.


----------



## czdavid (Jun 1, 2005)

The frame rode like no other material I have used before. I have had bikes made from Columbus Max, EL OS, Foco, True Temper OX Gold and Platinum, Reynolds 853, Columbus Altec 2+, several different Kinesis build Kinesium frames, 3.2 titanium and several different carbon bikes. None of these frame materials rode like the 953. I would characterise it as lively as the best steel, smooth as the best Ti and stiff as a good carbon frame at the same time. The material is twice as strong as 3.2 Ti!!!!!

Our production target weight with conventional non integrated headset cups using the same geometry as our 900g carbon road bike is 1300g for a 56cm frame.


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

czdavid said:


> The frame rode like no other material I have used before. I have had bikes made from Columbus Max, EL OS, Foco, True Temper OX Gold and Platinum, Reynolds 853, Columbus Altec 2+, several different Kinesis build Kinesium frames, 3.2 titanium and several different carbon bikes. None of these frame materials rode like the 953. I would characterise it as lively as the best steel, smooth as the best Ti and stiff as a good carbon frame at the same time. The material is twice as strong as 3.2 Ti!!!!!
> 
> Our production target weight with conventional non integrated headset cups using the same geometry as our 900g carbon road bike is 1300g for a 56cm frame.


"Our production target weight ..."??? Did this just become spam? - TF


----------



## SDizzle (May 1, 2004)

TurboTurtle said:


> "Our production target weight ..."??? Did this just become spam? - TF


Yeah, and for whom? For Jamis, methinks. No worries here - there's not a chance I'd buy a Jamis just because it was made from the new wunder-steel.


----------

