FiveAlpha":g7og2dan said:
Always made me laugh, that Reynolds sticker - so many different tubesets.
Interesting that the top tube is 653, whilst the downtube is 531, finally putting to bed, one of the oldest internet myths/lies - that 653 was just 531 front triangle, and 753 rear triangle.
The myth is usually further 'bullsh*tted' with the story that Merckx requested 653 because 753 was too stiff! One - 753 is less stiff, because it is thinner; Two - 653 came out 12 years after Merckx retired.
The conclusions you've drawn seem a little hasty:
- Merckx (reportedly) asked for a Reynolds 653, but not when he was a professional cyclist (he used a Reynolds 753 frame and didn't complain about it), but only when he had his own factory and produced frames... Interesting but illogical story: Merckx only built R653 frames in 1988/1989, other manufacturers used 653 before him, some used longer (R753 was not stiffer, it was unrepairable - more expensive to use).
- The official version maintains that (as you rightly noticed) R653 is a "mix" of R531 and R753 (later 725 or 708 were used instead of 531). The trouble is that this is confirmed by Reynolds' employees and official company data (e.g. tube markings in the 1992 catalogue: in sets R708 and R653 the fork and rear triangle tubes are identical)
In my opinion, the case of R653 was even different: it was the tubes of the main triangle that were R753 and the remaining R531 (perhaps only in Merckx - that's why the frames 653 had chrome chainstays and 753 didn't, in any case until 1989).
Then the method of (heat?) treatment of 753 tubes was changed and "created" on their basis slightly modified version of R653 - in the same source (1992) the designations of the main triangle tubes R753 and R653 are very similar but different...
Merckx probably used these modified tubes since 1990 (in any case since that year the "impossible" chrome plating of R753 became a fact)
The "multiReynolds" sticker would rather confirm this story.
Translated with
www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)