Re: [Classicrendezvous] Odd Frames

(Example: Books:Ron Kitching)

Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:50:09 -0400
To: Chris Beyer <beyerc@mailserver.volvo.com>, Philcycles@aol.com
From: "Harvey M Sachs" <sachs@erols.com>
Subject: Re: [Classicrendezvous] Odd Frames
Cc: richardsachs@juno.com, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <39E36343.31A4E25E@mail.volvo.com>
References: <72.3c1201a.2714ba3d@aol.com>


Chris - If memory serves me correctly, the Dursley Pederson dates back to about 1900 -1903 (memory of what I read; I was not there....).

For those too young to know about Moulton, Alex Moulton is not the Moulton framebuilder, but the originator of the Moulton small-wheel bikes. I believe the design of the bike and its suspension system was the work of another Alex, Issigonis (?), fresh from creating the British "mini" or "2-box" cars with transverse engines and front wheel drive. Austin & Morris, including the famous "Mini-Coopers. But, let's not migrate to cars.

The Moulton bikes are still or again in production, and I certainly regard them as modern classics

harvey sachs mclean va (owner of a mongrel first generation Moulton, converted to Sachs (no relation) 3x7 gearing)

At 02:43 PM 10/10/2000 -0400, Chris Beyer wrote:
>Lest we forget: the Dursley-Pedersen, which is reputedly one of Alex
>Moulton's inspirations in frame design. Scandinavian by design, but
>initially built in the UK, if I recall correctly.
>
>Chris Beyer
>Overcast 'n Blustery Bloomfield, NJ
>
>Philcycles@aol.com wrote:
>
> > In a message dated 10/10/0 5:41:33 PM, richardsachs@juno.com writes:
> >
> > >regarding all this hellenic, etc. stuff...
> > >my memory is foggy on some of this, but
> > >didn't most of the non-trad 'affectations'
> > >arise during those pre-war years when british
> > >racing was banned on the open roads, relegated
> > >to outlaw type time trials only at dusk and later?
> > >does anybody recall this story...riders rode only
> > >in black, no commercial marks on uniforms...OR
> > >on frames. if i'm half on here, the explanation i'm
> > >reaching for is that all the 'unusual' frames designs
> > >we associate with this thread were born out of
> > >a framebuilders yearning to have an identifiable
> > >look, whether there were transfers or not, or whether
> > >the sun was out or not.
> > >i can't seeing any engineering gains in any of this
> > >stuff. only decorative. regarding the hellenic stuff,
> > >after the stay is joined someplace on/near the
> > >seat tube, i can't figure out how it's additional length,
> > >that part that travels to the top tube, adds, or does
> > >anything at all.
> > >i'm not an engineer. and i'm not old enough
> > >to have lived through those pre-war years.
> > >any thoughts?
> > >e-RICHIE
> >
> > That's the story but I don't think it's true. I think it's rooted in the
> > English love of the eccentric. Only England produced the range of unusual
> > frame design we see-Flying Gate, Hetchins, Bates, Thanet, etc. Comments,
> > Hilary?
> > Phil brown