[CR]PX-10 quality (was re: 1973: $120 for a UO-8 and $200.00 for a PX-10?)

(Example: Framebuilders:Bernard Carré)

From: "C. Andrews" <chasds@mindspring.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 21:53:01 -0700
Subject: [CR]PX-10 quality (was re: 1973: $120 for a UO-8 and $200.00 for a PX-10?)

Garth opined:
>An early 70's UO-8 was more a mistake than the wiretapping of the Watergate. Was any other bike as badly made and designed, for the same money? Garth<

I have to agree with Garth--pace those who feel otherwise--the UO-8 was a terrible piece of junk. The only bikes Peugeot made (besides some very tasty 80s team bikes I've seen), that were worth owning were the 50s and 60s PX-10s with the Nervex lugs...and even those were not exactly models of fine workmanship. They had a certain class however. By the 70s and early 80s the PX-10, while still perfectly useable, was a good example of what the bike boom did to even a top european marque. A waste of 531 in my view...but only in my view, of course.

Awhile back I bought a nearly new PX-10 from the early 80s, for the full Campagnolo NR group on it. The frame was a joke, from a craft point-of-view. I swear they must have taken those rather ugly short-point lugs right out of the pile, brazed 'em up, and painted 'em. Nary a file mark on 'em...you could still see the casting lines on the lugs of the PX-10 frame I bought.

No offense to anyone with a PX-10. They probably ride fine. But to not even run a little sand-paper or a file over the lugs first seems blatantly sloppy to me..

Charles