Dear Mark,
I (dimly) recall that 531 SL was "not recommended" for heavier riders (over 160-165?) when I weighed much less than that, which was 20-30 years ago. :-(
I also just had a phone conversation on this very topic with long- time frame builder Jeff Lyon the other day.
I am 56 years old, 5' 7" tall, and am (or was) relatively light- boned. I am not a strong or "power" rider. I have ridden 50.5cm (c- c) / 52cm (c-t) 531 frames (1973-1987: Raleigh Pro Mark IV, PX-10LE, TREK 660) as well as a TREK 2000 aluminum bike (1987-1999). I often fantasized about owning a "custom" frame or a PY-10 in the 1970s, when I weighed 135# dripping wet and was in my best-ever aerobic shape.My current ride is an Eisentraut (52 c-t x 54 c-c TT) that was built for a woman weighing 145# who wanted to use it for Paris-Brest- Paris and other l-o-n-g rides on European cobblestones and such. (The fork and dropout eyelets that she had ordered were left off of this frame, which Eisentraut replaced with a correctly-detailed one. I got this one off the wall at the LBS for a song as a result.)
In an effort to find a slightly better fit than the 73 degree parallel Eisentraut offers me (I think I need a 72 seat tube), I asked Jeff Lyon (http://www.lyonsport.com; 541-476-7092) if I could use 531 SL at my current too-heavy 165-170# weight. He essentially said "sure."
Jeff has not seen me except during two brief conversations at the San Jose NAHMBS, and I do not want to put words in his mouth, but he seemed to think I could easily ride a 531 SL frame at my current weight, which is slightly lower than yours.
I dimly recall that 531 SL was "not recommended for heavier riders" (over 160-165?) long ago, when I weighed much less than 160#. But if Jeff and other frame builders with similar long experience recommend it for me as i am now, perhaps it might work for you, too. Of course your frame size and other needs will be different than anyone else's, as you already know.
In any case, "Your mileage may vary."
Regards,
Jon Spangler (longing for the "good old days" of the mid-1980s when he felt sluggish and overweight at "only" 145#) Alameda, CA 94501
On Sep 28, 2008, at 12:00 PM, classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org
wrote:
>
> Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 13:47:34 -0500
> From: Mark Stonich <mark@bikesmithdesign.com>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]Any Heavier Riders on 531 SL? / "Planing"
> Message-ID: <E1Kk1J2-0004iP-Qw@elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Precedence: list
> Message: 9
>
> I'd like to hear from 175-190 pounders who ride frames made with
> Reynolds 531 SL tubing. Do they, as Jan says "plane" or are they
> noodles? Does the chain rub the derailleur whenever the road gets
> steep?
>
> I'm planning to build myself a new 21" frame, which I'll equip with
> mostly on topic parts. The frame it will replace is an '81 Trek 710
> with 531 standard butted tubes, forks and stays. I don't cause any
> noticeable amount of flex on this. I weigh 185 but I'm not a strong
> rider and could weigh 165 without losing any muscle. (Anybody know
> where I can buy some will power?) I run low gears, so rarely have
> to stand when climbing. The bike will not be used for touring.
>
> I have a couple of old sets of standard 531, but I just found out a
> friend is sitting on several sets of 531 SL.
>
> BTW I've built a couple of recumbents where the frame stores some
> power at peak pedal force and returns it later in the stroke. Both
> climb quite well (at least for recumbents). So I'm convinced that
> matching frame flex to the rider can provide the "Planing" Jan
> refers to.
>
> Mark Stonich;
> BikeSmith Design & Fabrication
> 5349 Elliot Ave S. - Minneapolis. MN 55417
> Ph. (612) 824-2372 http://bikesmithdesign.com
> http://mnhpva.org