There seems to be one school of thought that the 753 "test" was as much a publicity stunt by Reynolds as a sincere attempt at quality control. In some sense one wonders about 753 in general. Was the idea that this tubeset was so thin-walled that it needed heat treating to achieve adequate tensile strength? If so, maybe it was just a bad idea, as it defeats two of the major benefits of steel frames, durability and repairability. Even if one could insure that the original builder didn't overheat the tubing, there is no way to control the repairs made after a crash. In my view, it's better just to make the walls a little thicker than rely on heat treating. But that was the day of the superlightweight craze.
Regards,
Jerry Moos Big Spring, TX
Curt Goodrich <goodrichbikes@netzero.net> wrote:
At 11:59 AM 7/20/2006, Bruce Gordon wrote:
>This is all news to me!!!
>I NEVER sent Reynolds a 753 test, fillet brazed or lugged or any other
>method.
>I never seemed to be amazed at the misinformation taken as truth if found on
>the internet.
>Regards,
>Bruce Gordon
>www.bgcycles.com
Come on Bruce. Won't you play along? Truth can be so boring.
Curt Goodrich
Minneapolis, MN