Steve, when I was working in a bike shop during the summers through my highschool years, we only stocked the cheaper freewheels in that range. It just so happens that this was that late 70's, early 80's era and I remember using that exact combination for racing as a junior. We had the Suntour "build your own freewheel" board that featured bodies with every tooth combination you could dream of. I grew up in the Pococno Mountains, PA where the hills were just around the next bend. I personally used 13-14-16-19-22-26. I loved that 16 and could not ride without it, and still can't. I have never seen a Regina "board" but I'm sure different cogs are available. Get a few combinations and try 'em. I liked the bigger jumps on the low end and it wasn't that big of a difference. Just my two cents. Good luck!
Don Andersen Columbia, MD
>I would like to know if, during the 6-speed freewheel era, 13-26 was a
>popular choice for a freewheel. Whether it was that or just close to that,
>I'd like to know the specific cogs usually used.
>
>All my asking about chain for my Raleigh has reminded me that I have
>mixed-breed Shimano freewheel on there now because that's how I could piece
>together the combination I wanted, which is 13-15-17-20-23-26. I recall
>hearing that using a 22 in the next to the last position was more common
>but
>that seems like too big a jump to me. I'm pretty sure the freewheel body
>I'm now using originally was configured as 13-14-16-19-22-26.
>
>If it matters, and I believe it does, I'm riding with a 42/53 in the front,
>and I think 42/52 and 42/53 were both popular then.
>
>I confess that my inspiration for both cog and chainring choices comes from
>my working out my preferences with modern 2x9 drivetrains, where I also
>ride
>42/53 and 13-26, the latter as 13-17,19,21,23,26. I'll also note that
>13-26
>is neither a racer's nor a tourist's choice, but since I'm neither a racer
>nor a tourist, I think that's OK.
>
>--
>Steve Freides in ever more sunny Ridgewood, NJ.