dyna-ti":3ftafeuy said:
Every day's a school day! Never knew that.
Backed up here: https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vint ... 653-a.html
Nice one.
Arthur Caygill
- Thread starter mk one
- Start date
Every day's a school day! Never knew that.
Backed up here: https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vint ... 653-a.html
Nice one.
Neilios":2o1mi8ce said:
Im certainly no frame builder or expert. Whats already been mentioned refers to tubing from the road bike ranges from Reynolds, and utilising tubes from other parts of the Reynolds ranges, Enabling frame builders to come close to achieving the benefits of Reynolds 753 without the cost.
Obviously Mountain bikes can take a considerable amount more punishment than a road bike, hence the development of MTB/ATB specific tubes for frame builders. Stays, Wishbones, Fork Tubes etc.
The difference between 653 road and 653 AT is the tube size dimensions, both use Manganese (Mn Mo) instead of Chromium (Cro Mo), which is used on the Lower tubes sets.
Im sure there is a lot more to it that just this, and id love to learn more myself.
That's pretty much the definition I've heard before; that it's a 'concept tubeset' using those tube/steel-types. But here's a strange contradiction; check out the Dynatech 2070 frame spec's (on the Endeavour and Odyssey): '3 main tubes Reynolds 653, rear triangle 531'. This implies that 653's a specific tubing.Neilios":3lagaho6 said:
http://www.retrobike.co.uk/gallery2/d/1 ... eigh91.pdf
Raleigh claimed this BITD when I enquired about their Dyna-Max forks, and I've heard it elsewhere as well..? :?
