# What's the deal with Reynolds 753?



## aptivaboy

...Looking for some old school steel history, here. I have read at various places on the interweb that Reynolds 753 was somehow a flawed tubeset, prone to failure. Granted, it was a very thin walled tubeset, but I have trouble seeing Reynolds allowing an easy to break tubeset out the door, especially given how protective they were of who they would allow to purchase and build up 753. I do know that 753 frames are relatively rare out there on places like the Bay of Evil, suggesting that few were made compared to Columbus SLX or even TSX, for example. 

So, what's the real scoop? Was there_ something_ wrong with 753? Was Reynolds just too selective in who they allowed to build up 753 that it never got as much of a following? Was it something else? What is urban legend and what is true? 

I'm curious because I just bought a Merckx 753 and I'm curious if the care and feeding of such an animal should be different than any other steel frame. 

Thanks!

Robert


----------



## gomango

aptivaboy said:


> ...Looking for some old school steel history, here. I have read at various places on the interweb that Reynolds 753 was somehow a flawed tubeset, prone to failure. Granted, it was a very thin walled tubeset, but I have trouble seeing Reynolds allowing an easy to break tubeset out the door, especially given how protective they were of who they would allow to purchase and build up 753. I do know that 753 frames are relatively rare out there on places like the Bay of Evil, suggesting that few were made compared to Columbus SLX or even TSX, for example.
> 
> So, what's the real scoop? Was there_ something_ wrong with 753? Was Reynolds just too selective in who they allowed to build up 753 that it never got as much of a following? Was it something else? What is urban legend and what is true?
> 
> I'm curious because I just bought a Merckx 753 and I'm curious if the care and feeding of such an animal should be different than any other steel frame.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Robert


Hi!
Please show us pics!


----------



## Scooper

Robert, Reynolds 753 is heat treated 531. Period. Because of the heat treating, it is stronger than 531 (531 has an Ultimate Tensile Strength of 100-130 Ksi, while 753 has a UTS of 157-186 Ksi). Because of the higher strength, 753 could be drawn thinner than 531 and is therefore lighter, but because all steels have roughly the same Young's modulus, the thinner walled 753 is not as stiff as 531. Reynolds began making 753 OS, and the larger tube diameter improved the stiffness. 753 was not recommended for non-lugged construction because the temperatures required for fillet brazing or TIG welding compromised the heat treating and reduced the strength. Framebuilders were required to submit examples of their silver brazed lugged 753 frames to Reynolds for certification before Reynolds would sell them 753 tubes. Reynolds checked the lugged joints to ensure excessive heat during the brazing process hadn't weakend the tubes in the heat affected zone before certifying the framebuilder.

753 was a great tubeset in the hands of skilled brazers. I built up a 1994 Waterford Paramount frameset made of 753 OS, and it's a wonderful ride.

When Reynolds introduced the 853 tubeset which is air-hardening, the problem of reduced strength because of overheating during brazing or welding was greatly diminished, so most builders quickly abandoned 753 in favor of the air-hardening 853.

You needn't be concerned about any special care and feeding of your new 753 Merckx. Treat it as you would any other fine steel frame.


----------



## martinrjensen

did you just pick up that Eddy of of eBay n the 0th? I was watchin that one. the ride is fine, great actually.


aptivaboy said:


> ...Looking for some old school steel history, here. I have read at various places on the interweb that Reynolds 753 was somehow a flawed tubeset, prone to failure. Granted, it was a very thin walled tubeset, but I have trouble seeing Reynolds allowing an easy to break tubeset out the door, especially given how protective they were of who they would allow to purchase and build up 753. I do know that 753 frames are relatively rare out there on places like the Bay of Evil, suggesting that few were made compared to Columbus SLX or even TSX, for example.
> 
> So, what's the real scoop? Was there_ something_ wrong with 753? Was Reynolds just too selective in who they allowed to build up 753 that it never got as much of a following? Was it something else? What is urban legend and what is true?
> 
> I'm curious because I just bought a Merckx 753 and I'm curious if the care and feeding of such an animal should be different than any other steel frame.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Robert


----------



## aptivaboy

If you mean the light green one without the fork, about 60 cms yesterday about 6:00 PST, then yes, that was me. I still can't believe I paid under $160. Sometimes, Eddys seem to slip through the cracks, but other times they go for exorbitant prices. The 753 and the MAX are the two Eddys I must have, although I fear I'll never get the latter due to price. It should arrive in a week, or so. It'll eventually go to either Joe Bell or Cycleart for restoration next year when fundage permits. 

Scooper, if I read what you're saying its that 853 essentially supplanted 753, hence the comparative rarity of 753 frames? There was an interview with Andy Hampsten where he stated that Eddy thought the 753 was too fragile or otherwise not reliable enough for everyday pro use except for special circumstances like high mountain stages; the 753-tubed bike he won at Alpe d'Huez wasn't his everyday bike, for example, but a mountain stage only bike from Eddy. Was that a general consensus, and if so, why the fears about frame failure? I've also seen some 753 frames listed as 753R. Any particular significance to the "R?" 

Nice. A 753OS Paramount. I had heard there were a few of those. I have a 1989 True Temper Paramount OS, one of the first. A great ride, but just too steep and twitchy, and a tad small for me. I've come to really love laid back angles and longish top tubes for stability and comfort.


----------



## aptivaboy

It hasn't arrived yet. Give me time, I'll share the Eddy!


----------



## Scooper

The comparitive rarity of 753 frames was partly due to the strict certification requirements of Reynolds and partly due to the introduction of 853. Larger 753 frames with standard size tubes had a reputation for being whippy, much like larger SL frames, so until the 753 OS tubeset became available larger, heavier riders avoided 753 frames. 

753R is the designation for the 753 "Race" tubeset, with 753 used on all of the tubes. The main frame tubes were butted, and wide, oval, taper gauge fork blades were used as well as plain gauge head tube, steerer tube, and stays.

Reynolds developed a special tubeset for Eddy Merckx they called 653, which consisted of 753 stays with 531 forks and main tubes. The 653 forks and main tubes were actually a slightly thinner walled version of regular 531. Eddy had complained to Reynolds that a vanilla 753 frame was too harsh for certain stages of the Tour de France and Giro d'Italia (not too fragile, but too harsh riding). I've never heard that Eddy complained that 753 was too fragile, but I suppose it could have happened.


----------



## robert_shawn

The first really good frame I ever owned was a 753 (blades, tubes and stays). I rode the bike for 20+ years, until a cat ran out in front of me and I crashed, very hard, and cracked the chain stay. I bunny hopped the cat and landed on a wet manhole cover and slid into a curb. The cat lived, my frame and my shorts did not. I loved that frame and hated cats for a few years. 

If my wife wouldn't strangle me and I could find one I liked (Look La Vie Claire for example) I would get another one in heartbeat. I have a real soft spot for 753 frames... and steel Colnagos.

Shawn


----------



## martinrjensen

I bought mine the same way, cheap. Mine was in rough shape also, maybe not as quite bad a yours but if you clean it up it will be fine. I opted to powdercoat mine Molteni Orange as what with the damage to the frame, I didn't want to add in an expensive paint job and I had to have the frame straightened also (check that!). If it was in perfect shape I might have painted mine though (mine has a dent in it too, probably chain suck .) You should have no problem with decals, I didn't (eBay again) and I can't wait to see pics of it. The ride is great, very comfortable for me, almost equal to my Serotta. The Serotta has a carbon fork though which gives it the edge in lightness and it's a little smoother. Seeing as yours came without a fork, what cha gonna do regarding one? Merckx steel, carbon? Steel ones are around, I know. Actually I think your price is consistent for Merckx's. Mine wasn't much more than that and it was in similar shape only it had the fork. I would like to see one in pristine shape on eBay, haven't seen that yet.


aptivaboy said:


> If you mean the light green one without the fork, about 60 cms yesterday about 6:00 PST, then yes, that was me. I still can't believe I paid under $160. Sometimes, Eddys seem to slip through the cracks, but other times they go for exorbitant prices. The 753 and the MAX are the two Eddys I must have, although I fear I'll never get the latter due to price. It should arrive in a week, or so. It'll eventually go to either Joe Bell or Cycleart for restoration next year when fundage permits.
> 
> Scooper, if I read what you're saying its that 853 essentially supplanted 753, hence the comparative rarity of 753 frames? There was an interview with Andy Hampsten where he stated that Eddy thought the 753 was too fragile or otherwise not reliable enough for everyday pro use except for special circumstances like high mountain stages; the 753-tubed bike he won at Alpe d'Huez wasn't his everyday bike, for example, but a mountain stage only bike from Eddy. Was that a general consensus, and if so, why the fears about frame failure? I've also seen some 753 frames listed as 753R. Any particular significance to the "R?"
> 
> Nice. A 753OS Paramount. I had heard there were a few of those. I have a 1989 True Temper Paramount OS, one of the first. A great ride, but just too steep and twitchy, and a tad small for me. I've come to really love laid back angles and longish top tubes for stability and comfort.


----------



## CurbDestroyer

In my opinion It was better than Columbus SL, or SLX. I bet I'm not the ony one with that opinion.


----------



## Mark Kelly

Scooper said:


> T
> 
> Reynolds developed a special tubeset for Eddy Merckx they called 653, which consisted of 753 stays with 531 forks and main tubes. The 653 forks and main tubes were actually a slightly thinner walled version of regular 531. Eddy had complained to Reynolds that a vanilla 753 frame was too harsh for certain stages of the Tour de France and Giro d'Italia (not too fragile, but too harsh riding).


I've heard that story many times but I've never seen evidence for it and there is evidence for it being wrong: there is a CHART on Equus which shows that the tube and stay dimensions for 653 were identical to 753 and different from any of the grades of 531. 

When I ordered a 653 frame in 1990 I was told that the alloy was the same as 753 but heat treated to a lower level (more like 531) so the tubing was less fussy and cheaper. BTW that 653 frame never arrived, the maker substituted 700 because he felt that the 653 would be too whippy for me.


----------



## Scooper

Mark Kelly said:


> I've heard that story many times but I've never seen evidence for it and there is evidence for it being wrong: there is a CHART on Equus which shows that the tube and stay dimensions for 653 were identical to 753 and different from any of the grades of 531.
> 
> When I ordered a 653 frame in 1990 I was told that the alloy was the same as 753 but heat treated to a lower level (more like 531) so the tubing was less fussy and cheaper. BTW that 653 frame never arrived, the maker substituted 700 because he felt that the 653 would be too whippy for me.


So, I guess Reynolds is lying.

Friday, March 28, 2008:

Tom's reply: Thanks Jim. Reynolds have sent me a helpful reply so don't spend any more time on this one on my account. I'll tell you what they said as it's interesting and other folk might appreciate it too. In essence, 653 was invented following feedback from Eddy Merckx that a pure 753 frame was too harsh for certain stages. So Reynolds produced a 653 tubeset which combined 753 stays with 531 main tubes and forks. Not any old 531 though, but an even thinner gauge than usual - just for use in the 653 set. Eddy and other riders were very pleased with the result, which combined an light, ultra-stiff and efficient transmission with a more forgiving and comfy ride. Nowadays when folks are after a similar ride builders use 725 stays and usually 631 for all other tubes. I heard it from the horse's mouth. 

Thanks again for your prompt attention previously.
Tom

https://jimlangley.blogspot.com/2008/03/q-merckx-tubing-motobecane-badge-pedals.html


----------



## aptivaboy

Here's the Hampsten interview: http://prollyisnotprobably.com/2010/07/merckx_mondays_45.php . Interesting that Eddydidn't think the 753 tubeset was "long lasting." I wonder what his criteria was?

Martin, I'm going to try to locate a Merckx steel fork on Ebay or the like, but if that doesn't work then yes, I'll go carbon. I won't be upset of I can only find a steel Columbus fork, either, as I read somewhere (dang, now I can't find my references) that Eddy sometimes subbed in Columbus forks with the Reynolds frames and vice versa on his pro bikes, depending upon the rider and the race. Otherwise, carbon it will be. Yeah, this frame looks pretty beaten up, but Joe Bell and Cycleart are just an hour's drive south of me, so sometime next year one of them will be getting some fresh business from me. Its all going to come down to cost. I will insist in having the dropoups and right chainstay chromed, and that will certainly add to the cost, hence the delay in getting it restored. I might, just might, go for an older team paint scheme, like ADR or Faema. I've been toying with the idea of a 7-11 paint job, but with some of the colors reversed, like the with the green and white panels reversed. I always thought the green was too dark, and made those bikes too dull looking from a distance. 

Robert


----------



## Scooper

aptivaboy said:


> Here's the Hampsten interview: http://prollyisnotprobably.com/2010/07/merckx_mondays_45.php. Interesting that Eddy didn't think the 753 tubeset was "long lasting." I wonder what his criteria was?
> Robert


Beats me. Eddy had his name on a lot of 753 frames, so it seems odd to me he'd be selling bikes he didn't believe would last.

1990 Merckx Grand Prix catalog page


----------



## aptivaboy

It just showed up. I read where Eddy's measure a tad small, and this is the case, here. The bottom bracket has a "0" stamped on it, indicating a 60cm frame, but it measures out at about 59.5 cm, consistent with what I've read on the Merckx forum about Merckx sizing. Except for the bottom bracket, the paint job is actually superb, better than many I've seen on more expensive framesets, the decals disappearing into the clearcoat. This is one sweet looking frame.


----------



## Scooper

Pictures, please.


----------



## martinrjensen

That sound great. You can always swap a fork later if you find one too. I can't wait to see what this ride ends up as. My guess is with a carbon fork it will be a bit smoother, but really mine is pretty smooth as-is. After purchasing, straightening and power coating my frame, I think I am close to $500.00. I really didn't know I would end up putting that much into just the frame but in the end it's a great riding bike (yours will be at a minimum equal and possibly a better ride) that gets ridden a lot. 
PS: I love the team 7-11 scheme, and Stuttgart (on my Corsa)


aptivaboy said:


> Here's the Hampsten interview: http://prollyisnotprobably.com/2010/07/merckx_mondays_45.php . Interesting that Eddydidn't think the 753 tubeset was "long lasting." I wonder what his criteria was?
> 
> Martin, I'm going to try to locate a Merckx steel fork on Ebay or the like, but if that doesn't work then yes, I'll go carbon. I won't be upset of I can only find a steel Columbus fork, either, as I read somewhere (dang, now I can't find my references) that Eddy sometimes subbed in Columbus forks with the Reynolds frames and vice versa on his pro bikes, depending upon the rider and the race. Otherwise, carbon it will be. Yeah, this frame looks pretty beaten up, but Joe Bell and Cycleart are just an hour's drive south of me, so sometime next year one of them will be getting some fresh business from me. Its all going to come down to cost. I will insist in having the dropoups and right chainstay chromed, and that will certainly add to the cost, hence the delay in getting it restored. I might, just might, go for an older team paint scheme, like ADR or Faema. I've been toying with the idea of a 7-11 paint job, but with some of the colors reversed, like the with the green and white panels reversed. I always thought the green was too dark, and made those bikes too dull looking from a distance.
> 
> Robert


----------



## drlodge

Scooper said:


> So, I guess Reynolds is lying.
> 
> Friday, March 28, 2008:
> 
> Tom's reply: Thanks Jim. Reynolds have sent me a helpful reply so don't spend any more time on this one on my account. I'll tell you what they said as it's interesting and other folk might appreciate it too. In essence, 653 was invented following feedback from Eddy Merckx that a pure 753 frame was too harsh for certain stages. So Reynolds produced a 653 tubeset which combined 753 stays with 531 main tubes and forks. Not any old 531 though, but an even thinner gauge than usual - just for use in the 653 set. Eddy and other riders were very pleased with the result, which combined an light, ultra-stiff and efficient transmission with a more forgiving and comfy ride. Nowadays when folks are after a similar ride builders use 725 stays and usually 631 for all other tubes. I heard it from the horse's mouth.
> 
> Thanks again for your prompt attention previously.
> Tom


Old thread I know, but there is both truth and inaccuraies in the above (not sure who "Tom" is). Based on my discussion wth Terry Bill, I updated the Wikipedia page "Reynolds Cycle Technology"
- The original "Eddy Merckx" tube set was likely the early 531 SL tubeset which comprised 531 light weight main tubes and 531 rear stays. Eddy wanted a stiffer rear end so I assume these stays were larger in diameter in order to provide stiffness. 653 didn't exist until many years later (see below).
- Then came 531 Pro which replaced 531SL. Initially it had 753T (track) rear stays, then changed to 753R (road) stays. I assume the track stays were a little too light and therefore some may have found them wippy or weak.
- 531 Pro was then replaced by 653. Again this comprised 531 light weight main tubes, but 725 rear stays. There is no such thing as a "653 tube" - its a combination tube set and a marketing term.

Re the comment "When I ordered a 653 frame in 1990 I was told that the alloy was the same as 753 but heat treated to a lower level (more like 531) " - since a 653 tubeset contains 531 main tubes, these do have the same alloy as 531 and is heat treated to a lower level as its not heat treated!

Re "BTW that 653 frame never arrived, the maker substituted 700 because he felt that the 653 would be too whippy for me. " Well if you got a mix of 531 lightweight maintubes and 725 rear rtays, that is what a 653 tubeset is. 725 is the modern tubing closest in behaviour to 753


----------



## Scooper

drlodge said:


> Old thread I know, but there is both truth and inaccuraies in the above (not sure who "Tom" is). Based on my discussion wth Terry Bill, I updated the Wikipedia page "Reynolds Cycle Technology"
> - The original "Eddy Merckx" tube set was likely the early 531 SL tubeset which comprised 531 light weight main tubes and 531 rear stays. Eddy wanted a stiffer rear end so I assume these stays were larger in diameter in order to provide stiffness. 653 didn't exist until many years later (see below).
> - Then came 531 Pro which replaced 531SL. Initially it had 753T (track) rear stays, then changed to 753R (road) stays. I assume the track stays were a little too light and therefore some may have found them wippy or weak.
> - 531 Pro was then replaced by 653. Again this comprised 531 light weight main tubes, but 725 rear stays. There is no such thing as a "653 tube" - its a combination tube set and a marketing term.
> 
> Re the comment "When I ordered a 653 frame in 1990 I was told that the alloy was the same as 753 but heat treated to a lower level (more like 531) " - since a 653 tubeset contains 531 main tubes, these do have the same alloy as 531 and is heat treated to a lower level as its not heat treated!
> 
> Re "BTW that 653 frame never arrived, the maker substituted 700 because he felt that the 653 would be too whippy for me. " Well if you got a mix of 531 lightweight maintubes and 725 rear rtays, that is what a 653 tubeset is. 725 is the modern tubing closest in behaviour to 753


The problem with 653 having 531 lightweight main tubes and 725 stays (instead of 753 stays) is that 653 decals were available in 1986, but 725 wasn't introduced until 11 years later in 1997 (753, which is heat treated 531, was introduced in 1976). As much as I respect Terry Bill, I think on this one he may be confused.


----------



## drlodge

I've got some dates that Terry provided me which I'll dig out, but I get your point. It might be, that whilst the "725 brand" was introduced only in 1997, 725 tubing being heat treated CrMo existed some years before that just without the 725 label associated with it. If I recall, Terry said the 653 tube set was introduced late 80s or early 90s, and might be better described as "531 lightweight main tubes with heat treated CrMo rear stays".


----------



## Scooper

It wouldn't surprise me if, since as you say 653 is really just a mix of tubes called 653 for marketing purposes, 753 was used for the stays when 653 was initially introduced, and as 753 was phased out of production and 725 became available, 725 was substituted for the stays. This is pure speculation, but would fit the timeline and explain Terry's insistence that the stays were 725.

The 653 mixed tube set had to have been available in 1986 since the decal history shows that as the year the decal was available.


----------



## drlodge

The dates are interesting. 653 (531/725) has two sets of dates, presumably becuase it had two types of decals: 1986-1995 and 1989-1994. 725 runs from 1995 onwards.

So I might conclude that "725" was used only for rear stays on the 653 tube set initially, and then the 653 combo tube set was replaced with a pure 725 badged tubeset from 1995 onwards. 731 OS also had 725 rear stays from 1989 so this heat treated CrMo tubing must have been around in those days but just used on rear stays and hence no 725 badge until it was used in the main tubes also.


----------



## bigbill

I had a black and red Raleigh 753. It was a great bike and a completely different ride from my other bike at the time, a Mercian KOM with 531c tubing. An issue with older 753 frames is corrosion inside on the already really thin tubing. At the time they were built, rust proofing was a good wipedown with linseed oil.


----------



## cs1

Not the best photo but it's all I have. This is a 1995 Waterford 1200. The frame is 753 and if I remember the fork is 531. It's a year after Scooters Paramount so I'd assume construction is very similar.


----------



## MANDARIC

I looked on Google to find out somekind of a list or trace with names of 753 certified builders, but it looks like such thing doesn't exist.
I got mine in 1981 signed by glamorous TA Bill.
If someone knows of such a list, please post it. 
As far as I know, not a single Italian builder passed the certification, although many of them tried


----------



## Scooper

MANDARIC said:


> I looked on Google to find out somekind of a list or trace with names of 753 certified builders, but it looks like such thing doesn't exist.
> I got mine in 1981 signed by glamorous TA Bill.
> If someone knows of such a list, please post it.
> As far as I know, not a single Italian builder passed the certification, although many of them tried


I'm not sure there was ever a list of 753 qualified builders made available to the public. My understanding is that Reynolds and its distributors would only sell 753 tubes to framebuilders who had passed their certification tests, and that's how they controlled who built with 753.

*EDIT -* I just noticed there's an unused 30 year old 753 Reynolds certification kit on ebay with a BIN price of $80. 161017216973 (not mine).


----------



## MANDARIC

Reynolds as a tube name is leased by Keith Noronha (he was smart enough to buy a right on name when TI decided to sell Reynolds tube division) to FounderLand Co. in Taiwan. I'll ask Rita Chen if she ever got any papers about the names of the builders.
Here is a second set I made to myself in 1981. I passed with the first attempt, and second was "a gift". I paid some nominal price for those two sets. Much less than for set of 531. Both sets were Metric (AKA French Standard).
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/735595_10201279184635531_837131874_o.jpg


----------



## Easyup

Martin, Scooper, other 753 expert(s) 
I have a rescued mid 80s tri-color fade Colin Laing 58mm 753R that needs a lot of help. The fork is tweaked and with a fork swap I now know the frame is not straight either even though the frame/fork shows no sign to a damage other than expected paint damage. I have read that Colin was Reynolds certified but also heard he sometimes bronze brazed 753!! While I would love to restore this bike (DA 7400) I will need it straight and perfectly contollable or it will be my new boat anchor.
A local frame builder has a Marchetti-Lange frame alignment table and I will get it down there this week. Anything I should be concerned with or looking for in repairs?


----------



## Cinelli 82220

Easyup...some will tell you that 753 cannot be cold set. But it has been done, even at the Ilkston shop that built the Team Raleighs. It depends on how out of alignment your frame is.
Brazing 753 with bronze is possible. BITD some builders made a lot of frames and had a lot of experience, they knew what they could get away with.


----------



## Easyup

Thanks much, I was looking for some hope in saving the frame as it was probably built locally or at least in AZ. I figured the fork was toast as the dropouts were not parallel and one forks rake was 2mm more. So I tried cold setting it which was very difficult (hard to move) compared to the other frames with which I have had very good results. I hung it upside down by the wheels and prior to cold setting the front wheel was at about 20 degrees to the center line and straight just after cold setting. Unfortunately it sprang back as soon as I began to petal. Maybe our local frame builder who I don't know but have heard he is good can work things out.


----------



## Scooper

I have successfully cold set a number of 4130 chromoly and 531 frame rear triangles, but have never been able to do so with 753 or other heat treated steels. Maybe some can, but I can't; when I try, it just springs back to its original set.

Reynolds, in its technical data sheet on 753, notes, "Framebuilding should be carried out in stages, each stage to be carried out to finished dimensions. _'Setting' is virtually impossible other than for minute movements, and must be avoided._

Regarding brazing temperatures, the Reynolds technical data sheet for 753 (Technical Data Sheet T205) states that filler rod material should be to specification DIN 8513-L-AG40 Od or U.S. ASTM B260-56T, AMS 4769A or Mil-S-15395 Class 7 or an equivalent rod with a melting range not exceeding 650°C. Fluxes should be fluoride based and active at 550°C. It also states that heating 753 to temperatures over 700°C will seriously affect the strength of the finished frame.

Brass and bronze brazing alloys used in framebuilding typically have melting temperatures between 1500°F (815°C) and 2000°F (1093°C). I wouldn't trust a brass or bronze brazed 753 frame unless I knew for sure what magic brazing rod with a melting point below 650°C was being used.

Just MHO.


----------



## Cinelli 82220

The guys at Ilkston cold set 753 using a four foot bar. But those guys had a huge amount of experience, and could probably undo any damage they caused.

Remember, these are guys working in a factory. They were not artisans like Richard Sachs...they brazed all day. They made hundreds, maybe thousands of frames in their careers.


----------



## Richard

Interesting thread. I had a Bob Jackson 753 frame bought in 1986 and built up with 7400 Dura Ace. Two years later I had $600 worth of custom CyclArt paint applied (the stock British paint just wasn't holding up me living 1/2 mile from the Pacific Ocean.) 6 months later on a climb in Palos Verdes the chain started rubbing (drastically) the front derailleur cage. The Cinelli "scoop" bottom bracket shell had split between the seat and down tube. Bike had never been crashed. I took it to CyclArt and Jim Cunningham informed me it would cost more than the original price of the frame and the paint job to repair it. It wound up being "wall art."

Some months later on my Columbus SL Battaglin I stopped in a little "boutique" shop in Brentwood CA. They had a Falcon frameset on the wall, Reynolds 531P (red tubing sticker). It was the right size and I bought it for $200. Previous research had led me to believe that the 531P tubeset was nothing but 531C, but with the three main tubes the same thickness as 753 and no heat treatment (.08-.05-.08 as opposed to .09-.06-.09 for 531C and Columbus SL).

Now, a lot has to do with geometry, but I've always like the ride and the handling of that Falcon over some Columbus tubed bikes I've had or have (the aforementioned Battaglin and a Bertoni TSX currently in my possession.) I also liked it more than the Jackson.

So much so that after 23 years (and finding good replacement decals) I restored it with slightly newer Campy Record Ti 8 speed. Still my favorite bike.

If I'm wrong about the geneology of 531P, let me know.


----------



## Nessism

Love these old tubing threads. Regarding 753, funny that so many people think it was a "stout" tubeset, when it was actually quite flexible because of the thin tubes. Oh well.


----------



## Scooper

Nessism said:


> Love these old tubing threads. Regarding 753, funny that so many people think it was a "stout" tubeset, when it was actually quite flexible because of the thin tubes. Oh well.


Yes. I built up a 1994 54cm 753 OS Paramount made by Waterford after the 1992 Schwinn bankruptcy. It was for a riding buddy who weighs about 170. He's an experienced rider who loves the frameset; the OS diameter tubes give it just the right amount of stiffness.


----------



## Easyup

Update:
Andy Gilmour (Gilmour Bicycles) and his Marchetti-Lange frame alignment table and massive cast iron fork alignment table seems to have done the trick of righting my 753R frame. Only a little over 100 miles on it now over the roughest roads I ride and it tracks beautifully. As soon as I get more miles to be sure it is 100% I will have him spray it and post a pic.


----------



## Scooper

Easyup said:


> Update:
> Andy Gilmour (Gilmour Bicycles) and his Marchetti-Lange frame alignment table and massive cast iron fork alignment table seems to have done the trick of righting my 753R frame. Only a little over 100 miles on it now over the roughest roads I ride and it tracks beautifully. As soon as I get more miles to be sure it is 100% I will have him spray it and post a pic.


I'm happy it worked out for you. Andy has been building frames for nearly forty years, and clearly knows what he's doing.

Post some pictures after it's painted.


----------



## froze

This is a very old thread.

Anyway 753 and 753OS I thought was no longer in production? I thought they stopped production after finding out that 753 was brittle? 

My Mercian was built with 631 because it is a touring bike and the good folks at Mercian recommended that tubeset for that purpose over any other Reynolds tubeset at the time I got in 07 which at the time they had some 531, 725, some 753 and 753OS, and 853. But supposedly the 631 was a bit stronger than 531, just a tad lighter, but just as comfortable as 531, and the 631 was the replacement for the 531 and made to be a close match. I can't remember all the details now about the conversation but I got 631 instead of something else, and 631 was economical to get. 

I can't really compare the 631 to my 531 bikes because all my 531 bikes are racing geometry and the 631 is a touring geometry, but the 631 is nice to ride, similar to the Columbus Tenax I have on my Schwinn Le Tour Luxe but lighter.


----------



## Scooper

froze said:


> This is a very old thread.
> 
> Anyway 753 and 753OS I thought was no longer in production? I thought they stopped production after finding out that 753 was brittle?


753 has been out of production for years, but not because it was brittle. Mimimum elongation for 753 is 8%, and elongation is a measure of ductility or brittleness. The minimum elongation of 853 is also 8%. 631 is slightly more ductile (less brittle) than either 753 or 853 with minimum elongation of 10%, but it has only about 65% of the yield strength of 853 (650MPa for 631 vs. 1000MPa for 853). 

The two reasons commonly given for 753's demise are the development of air-hardening 853 which is stronger than 753 and could be TIG-welded or brass brazed at high temperatures, and the fact that 753 was heat treated and its strength was seriously compromised when subjected to temperatures above 700° C, so distribution was limited to framebuilders who passed Reynolds 753 brazing certification tests.

Elongation is E% min.


----------



## froze

unless this is old info 753 IS (once again?) available by special order thru Reynolds?; see: Reynolds Technology

I thought I had heard the tubeset was brittle, but I stand corrected.


----------



## Scooper

froze said:


> unless this is old info 753 IS (once again?) available by special order thru Reynolds?; see: Reynolds Technology
> 
> I thought I had heard the tubeset was brittle, but I stand corrected.


When I said 753 has been "out of production for years" I meant continuing production with tubes on the shelf ready to ship. To me "special order" with a high minimum quantity isn't really production. I concede that it is still available if you want to spend a ton of money to get it.



Reynolds Technology website said:


> 753 is now only available to special order and subject to a high minimum quantity due to raw material constraints.


----------



## KensBikes

Scooper said:


> I have successfully cold set a number of 4130 chromoly and 531 frame rear triangles, but have never been able to do so with 753 or other heat treated steels. Maybe some can, but I can't; when I try, it just springs back to its original set.


Not sure if OX-PLAT is a different beast, but my Terraferma (not made for me!) needed to be opened up from 126 to 130. One of our local shops has some VERY careful guys, and they were able to perform the cold-setting. The only blemishes in the chainstays are the ones present when they were originally formed to clear 43 mm Hetre tires.


----------



## KensBikes

And with the performance of the other available Reynolds metals WITH improved heat-resistance, why would you want to draw tubes from 753? You could achieve at least as much performance with 853, at a cost much lower than 953, and with a more robust production technique.


----------



## Rpoole

I am the original owner of a 1997 Waterford 1200, built with 753 steel tubing. Outfitted with DA 9 speed and it rides like a dream. I have had three carbon bikes, but the steel is so smooth, it's just hard to leave it at home.


----------

