Equilibrium - 520, 725, 853

Bozabyka

I have been looking at the differences between different grades of steel and to be honest I am quite confused.
It appears that stiff and springy bikes do not just depend upon the grade of steel but the design of the bike.
I am interested to hear from the Equilibrium riders that have ridden the different versions 520, 725 and 853.
I expect that the price and weight were different, but was the ride?

ugo.santalucia

If the design is the same, the difference in grade of steel won't make much difference to your ride. Check which forks they come with... a good quality carbon forks will give you an improved ride over a more expensive steel frame. If they come with the same forks, get the cheapest grade of steel

Bozabyka

Thanks Ugo
So they make three frames in different grades of steel.
What is the advantage of the 725 and 853 frames over 520?

tonye_n

I previously rode an Equilibrium in Reynolds 520 which I bought second hand, stripped and built up with ultegra group and Mavic Ksyrium Elites. Rode for about 1 year constant commuting.
I liked the first bike so much that I decided that I would buy a new '725' frame and transfer all equipment.
New frame is in Reynolds 725 (sold the old bike) as I was informed that this was lighter.

As it happens it does not feel much lighter to lift. But it does feel a tad more nippy on the take-off. Haven't noticed much difference in ride feel.
The ride quality on British roads is the same. Very comfortable, and when built with good parts, it is quite a nippy and agile bike. This is also due in part to the semi-aggressive geometry.

My Equilibrium shares commuting duty's with a Dolan Dual carbon bike. Same type of wheels and carbon seatpost on both bikes. Both frames have good carbon bladed forks with alloy stearer.
Both bikes are very comfortable, but the Equilibrium transmits less road noise (for want of better terminology).
The Dolan being carbon is lighter, but you do not feel this at all either in terms of acceleration, or on hills.

styxd

All will ride very similar. The difference will mainly be in the strength and weight. The 520 is no longer made. Bet you won't be able to tell the difference in ride between the 725 and the 853. The 853 will be very slightly lighter. Although the 853 has steel forks, so if you went for the 725 with carbon forks, that would be lighter and cheaper.

ugo.santalucia

styxd wrote:

All will ride very similar. The difference will mainly be in the strength and weight. The 520 is no longer made. Bet you won't be able to tell the difference in ride between the 725 and the 853. The 853 will be very slightly lighter. Although the 853 has steel forks, so if you went for the 725 with carbon forks, that would be lighter and cheaper.

Agree... the biggest difference between Fugio (853) and Croix de Fer (725) is that t he former comes with a massively stiff and superlight carbon fork, while the latter comes with a springy and heavy steel fork
Get the one with the carbon fork for performance and the one with steel fork for commuting and general bashing

tonye_n

ugo.santalucia wrote:

styxd wrote:

All will ride very similar. The difference will mainly be in the strength and weight. The 520 is no longer made. Bet you won't be able to tell the difference in ride between the 725 and the 853. The 853 will be very slightly lighter. Although the 853 has steel forks, so if you went for the 725 with carbon forks, that would be lighter and cheaper.

Agree... the biggest difference between Fugio (853) and Croix de Fer (725) is that t he former comes with a massively stiff and superlight carbon fork, while the latter comes with a springy and heavy steel fork
Get the one with the carbon fork for performance and the one with steel fork for commuting and general bashing

The CDF & fugio are different type of bikes to the Equilibrium for which the OP is seeking advise.
The standard Equilibrium 20 comes with R725 frame, carbon/alu fork. This will be a lighter total package than the Equilibrium 853 which comes with R853 frame, steel fork.

I ride the Equilibrium 725. The carbon fork is not overly stiff at all.
The fork is not the same as the ENVE carbon fork which come with the fugio 853.

styxd

tonye_n wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

styxd wrote:

All will ride very similar. The difference will mainly be in the strength and weight. The 520 is no longer made. Bet you won't be able to tell the difference in ride between the 725 and the 853. The 853 will be very slightly lighter. Although the 853 has steel forks, so if you went for the 725 with carbon forks, that would be lighter and cheaper.

Agree... the biggest difference between Fugio (853) and Croix de Fer (725) is that t he former comes with a massively stiff and superlight carbon fork, while the latter comes with a springy and heavy steel fork
Get the one with the carbon fork for performance and the one with steel fork for commuting and general bashing

The CDF & fugio are different type of bikes to the Equilibrium for which the OP is seeking advise.
The standard Equilibrium 20 comes with R725 frame, carbon/alu fork. This will be a lighter total package than the Equilibrium 853 which comes with R853 frame, steel fork.

I ride the Equilibrium 725. The carbon fork is not overly stif at all.
The fork is not the same as the ENVE carbon fork which come with the fugio 853.

I think he was just making the point that you shouldnt read to much into the type of steel a frame is made from.

The diameters and tube profiles tend to be what make more of a difference. They look to be the same on the across all the different equilibrium models though. So they'll all should ride very similarly. My advice would be save the money and buy the 725 frame.

speshsteve

I've got the 725 frame, the fork is pretty heavy.....makes for a fairly poor overall weight to be honest. I've got 105 and rs80's on mine but it still feels a bit like a tank to be honest. The geometry is good, just don't expect a like for like performance against a carbon bike its just a bit chunky!

ugo.santalucia

tonye_n wrote:

The fork is not the same as the ENVE carbon fork which come with the fugio 853.

It's not Enve... it's made by ADK Composites, the company that makes Felt carbon frames

tonye_n

ugo.santalucia wrote:

tonye_n wrote:

The fork is not the same as the ENVE carbon fork which come with the fugio 853.

It's not Enve... it's made by ADK Composites, the company that makes Felt carbon frames

You must be right, since I was just going by an assumption based on the shape and profile of the fork.

The point remain though that they are quite different forks, constructed differently.
The forks on the fugio are stiffer than those on the equilibrium. Also the forks on the equilibrium are not that much heavier than any carbon/alu forks on similarly priced bikes.

tim_wand

I ve seriously been considering this as my next frameset. as I want something a bit more compliant and slightly different, having looked at a lot of Titanium options.

viewtopic.php?f=40044&t=12952758

Now I know the Volare and the equilibrium are different in terms of geometry, but are the diameters of tubing used in each frameset. 853 and 725 the same?

I am interested in Ugos comments about the various framesets being more effected in terms of ride and handling by the choice of fork than the actual grade of Renyolds tubeset used.

Following this logic, could I save myself a wedge by getting a 725 frameset and the Enve 2.0 fork (or is the Enve 2.0 fork specifically designed for the 44mm Headtube in the 853 volare?)

I don't think at my level I would notice any real difference between a 725 and an 853 frameset, the ability to absorb the road noise (described in an earlier post) and good handling means more to me than total weight.

styxd

tim wand wrote:

I ve seriously been considering this as my next frameset. as I want something a bit more compliant and slightly different, having looked at a lot of Titanium options.

viewtopic.php?f=40044&t=12952758

Now I know the Volare and the equilibrium are different in terms of geometry, but are the diameters of tubing used in each frameset. 853 and 725 the same?

I am interested in Ugos comments about the various framesets being more effected in terms of ride and handling by the choice of fork than the actual grade of Renyolds tubeset used.

Following this logic, could I save myself a wedge by getting a 725 frameset and the Enve 2.0 fork (or is the Enve 2.0 fork specifically designed for the 44mm Headtube in the 853 volare?)

I don't think at my level I would notice any real difference between a 725 and an 853 frameset, the ability to absorb the road noise (described in an earlier post) and good handling means more to me than total weight.

comapred to the volare, the equilibrium has larger diameter headtube, seat tube, bottom bracket and chainstays. All will add up to make it a bit stiffer I'd imagine.

The equilibrium is fine though, fair enough it's not as stiff as a carbon race bike, but it's not so noticeably flexy as some cheap steel frames. Best bit about it is it's so cheap. I threw mine in a bike bag and flew to the alps with it. It was still intact when I got there, I never doubted it wouldnt be (unlike I would with perhaps a lightweight carbon frame). Then stick some guards on it and you can ride/fall off it all winter without any worries. Think I paid £240 for my frame a few years ago, can't think of anything that comes close for the price.

As for the forks, you need some with mudguard mounts for long drop brakes. 375mm a2c length I think (probably 10mm or so more than the Enves)

tim_wand

mmmm!!! Thought the idea of the 853 tubing was that it had higher tensile strength and therefore lower diameter tubing could be used to achieve the same strength as say 725 and 531 hence a reduction in weight.

I know the stainless 953 tubing can achieve diameters as low as 0.4mm in the chainstays and still have a higher tensile strength than other grades.

I suppose the other issue is whether plain gauge or butted tubing is used, I think the higher grade tubing tends to be butted at the ends to achieve greater weld areas and plain gauge in the middle to reduce diameters and hence weight.

I was interested in UGO's point that fork choice would influence ride to a greater degree than the grade of steel used in the tubeset. I know with regards to the 853 and 953 Volare Genesis specifically spec the ENVE 2 Because of its compatability to the 44mm headtube.

The 853 volare frameset is £1099 and the 953 £2099. So if I could pick up a 753 for sub £300 and fit a decent fork to achieve 7/10s of the ride feel of the two others than I would be happy at that.

Going to make a concerted effort before March to ride both the 853 Volare, Equilibrium Ti and a 725 frameset.

Love the colour scheme on the 853 . but would have more than enough left in the budget to get a 725 custom painted and the extra braze ons (gaurds and racks) are also appealing.

styxd

You're getting confused. The diameter and shape of the tubes can affect the ride. The 0.4mm you refer to is probably the wall thickness. Yes, the more expesnive steels are stronger so the walls can be thinner so they are lighter. To make them stiff, either make the diameter of the tubes larger or make the walls thicker (i'd guess).

I'm not quite sure why you'd want the equilibrium to ride like the volare. That's not the point of it. If you want a race frame, buy the volare. You want a cheap, comfy winter bike, buy the equilibrium.

Don't bother with the Ti, I can't see how it'd be worth it. The standard equilibrium is great, no point buying something that's just the same (but about 1lb lighter) for 4 times the money.

Get the equilibrium, you can't go wrong. If you're looking to spend over a grand, then there are loads more options available.

styxd

Here's mine (it's built up different now) but it's a pretty reasonable spec (as good as I could want) for less than the cost of the Ti frame.

tim_wand

Yer sorry. Meant wall thickness not diameter,

And your correct obviously the Volare and equilibrium are different beasts, I m tempted by Ti because this should be a bike that I want to last and last, but at a fifth of the price of Ti I could buy five 725 frames and that would see me to the grave.

Like the look of your bike, looks very purposeful . Searching on line for Genesis framesets , I come across PSL a lot anyone got any experience of them?

styxd

If you want it to last......then get it in steel. Just look how many steel bikes there are still running from decades ago.

Ti on the other hand, you tend to see plenty of broken ones. Tricky to repair if it does all go tits up aswell.

ugo.santalucia

tim wand wrote:

I was interested in UGO's point that fork choice would influence ride to a greater degree than the grade of steel used in the tubeset. I know with regards to the 853 and 953 Volare Genesis specifically spec the ENVE 2 Because of its compatability to the 44mm headtube.
.

Don't take my word for it, try for yourself.
I have had Columbus SL, Nemo... Reynolds 531, 725 and 853 they are all the same... fork material and frame design is what make the difference

RMeanwell

I have ridden an early Reynolds 753 - amazing , Have also ridden 531 Professional and a Reynolds 520 Trek . Now have an Equilibrium frame , which I have to say is lively and fast , but the 2015 forks were so vague and flexible , I have ordered Condor Pioggia carbon forks - based upon my experience with Condor Fratello ITM Visia forks which offer excellent handling . So the Reynolds 725 tubing is very good , but I'd say the forks are lacking . It was possible , with the front brake on to move them forward / backwards some 5cm , which may make for comfort but feels really vague and unresponsive when manouvering . Incidentally , a friend of mine has an Equilibrium some 5 years or so old , and the flex , as with the Visia forks , is minimal .

foggymike

That's a shame. My winter bike is built on the Equilibrium 725 2014 frameset and the carbon/alu steerer fork is very good. It rides very quietly and smoothly and the bit of extra heft (it's 20.5 lbs in a 54 with 5600 105, hope/open pro wheels and guards on) vs my summer rides is perfect for training.

I think the 520 bikes used to come with all steel forks.