Reynolds 753 use often led to problems, but it also made for wonderfully performing bikes for certain riders. I have a friend who still often uses his 753 Raleigh to climb the hills around Boulder and he loves it - and there has been no sign of failure or issues. It most certainly has many miles on it.
Some of the very light french-only Reynolds tubes of 531 were probably not much different in weight than the 753 tubes - and some of those super light bikes ride great!
So to say that light tubes, or 753, is not good for general consumption is simply not a valid observation. But I must say that light materials need to be mated wisely to the rider and the intended use of the bike. And of course, light tubes are more likely to dent and to lead to potential failure issues.
But - I'd much rather have a bike that rides like a dream and has a finite lifespan than one that is overbuilt and rides like a slug - and therefore lasts forever since it doesn't even get ridden.
Mike Kone in Boulder CO
> Of couse the same was true between WWI and WWII, when gear changers were banned
\r?\n> from the TdF, then derailleur-type gears were shunned by the pros even after
\r?\n> made legal. Meantime, French tourists had much more sophisticated equipment and
\r?\n> are said to have sometimes climbed the mountains faster than the pros. I guess
\r?\n> "everything old is new again".
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Regards,
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Jerry Moos
\r?\n> Big Spring, TX
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> John Thompson wrote:
\r?\n> Jerome & Elizabeth Moos wrote:
\r?\n>
\r?\n> > Maybe 753 is yet another great example of why competition equipment
\r?\n> > should often not be marketed to the general public. Professional
\r?\n> > athletes usually do not care about durability, so long as the
\r?\n> > equipment lasts to the end of the day's event, and don't care at all
\r?\n> > if the equipment can be repaired so long as the sponsor is able to
\r?\n> > just supply another new one. I think someone recently cited the
\r?\n> > comment attributed to Colin Chapman that a race car that didn't fall
\r?\n> > apart 50 yards after passing the finish line had been overdesigned.
\r?\n> > Production machines, be they bicycles or sports cars, should have a
\r?\n> > different set of design criteria which includes durability and ease
\r?\n> > of repair.
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> > Unfortunately a significant segment of the public has a mentality of
\r?\n> > having to have what the pros use, even when that is totally
\r?\n> > unsuitable for the consumer's actual use. And quite obviously many
\r?\n> > Marketing departments not only exploit that mentality but actively
\r?\n> > attempt to instill that mentality in the public.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Good points, but it's curious because now the tables seem to have been
\r?\n> turned: bikes that consumers can buy off the shelf can be considerably
\r?\n> more exotic than those used in professional racing, due to the rules and
\r?\n> regulations in professional events:
\r?\n>
\r?\n> http://blog.wired.com/
\r?\n>
\r?\n> --
\r?\n>
\r?\n> -John Thompson (john@os2.dhs.org)
\r?\n> Appleton WI USA