Re: [CR]Cinelli Training Manual (David "Flash" Gordon)

> Next off-list question: There's talk in Congress of a $300.00 tax
> rebate ("Rebate?!, REBATE?!" - Dave's father in Breaking Away) ... the given
> is that you have to spend it on bike stuff.
>
> Creative question: Who would you sent it to and on what?
>
> Example: Rivendell - 10 wired Roly-Polys for 5 bikes...(why? be
> creative...)
>
> Remember: $300 (or equivalent in other currency)
> Who gets the bucks?
> What would you get?
> & why (short answer please)
>
> Send your answers to: roydrink@mac.com NOT the list...
>
> I'll get them together and post Wednesday night, if you'd like to remain
> anonymous please tell me, to protect the guilty...
>
> Roy H. Drinkwater
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>

--__--__--

Message: 2 From: RALEIGH531@aol.com Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 15:33:22 EDT Subject: Re: [CR]Regina Extra or Oro To: steve@fridayscomputer.com, Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

In a message dated 4/2/01 1:18:18 PM EST, steve@fridayscomputer.com writes:
> Do I want a Regina Extra or Oro chain for my Super Record equipped 1981
> Raleigh Team?

Didn't these come as framesets rather then whole bikes? Regardless, my 1980 catalog shows Raleigh Professional Mark V coming with Maillard freewheel (6 spd 13-24) and Sedis chain (Sedi Color-not sure what that means). Hope this helps.

Pete Geurds Douglassville, PA

--__--__--

Message: 3 Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 21:26:07 +0100 Subject: Re: [CR] Old bike mystery... From: "Hilary Stone" <Hilary.Stone@Tesco.net> To: David Perry <bikeworks@bikecult.com>, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

The rear dropout is for a Simplex Champion du Monde rear derailleur. Some Osgear rear dropouts were similar but did not have the gear hanger. Sorry I didn't make it clear. Regards Hilary Stone

----------
>From: David Perry <bikeworks@bikecult.com>
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: [CR] Old bike mystery...
>Date: Mon, Apr 2, 2001, 7:52 pm
>
> Thanks to "wornoutguy" Sam for asking about that Edge Massed Start Special
> frameset on my shop's site. And for comments from Chuck and Hilary.
>
> I estimated its origin from the 1930s (the later part of decade) because of
> the Osgear dropout introduced around 1933 I believe. Is Hilary saying it's
> not an Osgear but a Simplex? Or that it's an Osgear but looks like Simplex?
> It has a single braze-on shifter mount. It did not come with a derailleur
> and we are not sure if the wheels for it are still around.
>
> The frame came in lot of bikes from the old Hill Cycle Shop in
> Philadelphia. They had a racing team for many years and the bikes and parts
> range in date from pre-WW2 to the late 1960s. They must have had a frame
> builder around because there are a couple HCS-labeled frames that were
> never assembled. Also, a old Paramount track frame in the collection has a
> seat stay repair with a Hill Cycle Shop stamp on it.
>
> I assumed it is an American frame, because I believe American road racing
> in the late 30s was called massed start racing (the 1932 Olympic RR was a
> time trial), and because British racing frames may not have had makers
> decals. I sure wish someone like Peter Nye (or six-day Jeff?) who knows
> more about pre-war US racing could answer some questions.
>
> Thanks
> David Perry
> http://www.bikecult.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>

--__--__--

Message: 4 Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 18:05:46 -0500 From: Chris Beyer <beyerc@mailserver.volvo.com> To: classicrendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Subject: [CR]Coventry Eagle on eBay

I noticed a small Coventry Eagle (lovely headbadge!) on eBay, misidentified as a Falcon.

Item # is 1130063452; appears to be small frame, decent condition, distinctive color.......

No connedtion, etc.

Chris Beyer Bloomfield, NJ

--__--__--

Message: 5 Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 15:06:34 -0800 From: Chuck Schmidt <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net> Reply-To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net To: David Perry <bikeworks@bikecult.com> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: Re: [CR] Old bike mystery...

The 1938 California Cycle Company Inc. catalog that I reprinted shows a large amount of English frame building supplies (tubes, stays, forks, lugs, fork ends, even some tandem sets) and derailleurs. Despite the name, the company was located on Long Island in New York state.

I believe the 1932 Olympics (Los Angeles) was a road race. The course was criticised for being too easy... flat run down the coast to Santa Monica. I have read that the 1936 Olympics (Berlin) was a time trial, but have seen movies of the event, and it too was a road race. A lot of things I have read in print don't match the reality... Anyone else have info?

Chuck Schmidt South Pasadena, California http://www.velo-retro.com (list of reprints and T-shirts)

David Perry wrote:
>
> Thanks to "wornoutguy" Sam for asking about that Edge Massed Start Special
> frameset on my shop's site. And for comments from Chuck and Hilary.
>
> I estimated its origin from the 1930s (the later part of decade) because of
> the Osgear dropout introduced around 1933 I believe. Is Hilary saying it's
> not an Osgear but a Simplex? Or that it's an Osgear but looks like Simplex?
> It has a single braze-on shifter mount. It did not come with a derailleur
> and we are not sure if the wheels for it are still around.
>
> The frame came in lot of bikes from the old Hill Cycle Shop in
> Philadelphia. They had a racing team for many years and the bikes and parts
> range in date from pre-WW2 to the late 1960s. They must have had a frame
> builder around because there are a couple HCS-labeled frames that were
> never assembled. Also, a old Paramount track frame in the collection has a
> seat stay repair with a Hill Cycle Shop stamp on it.
>
> I assumed it is an American frame, because I believe American road racing
> in the late 30s was called massed start racing (the 1932 Olympic RR was a
> time trial), and because British racing frames may not have had makers
> decals. I sure wish someone like Peter Nye (or six-day Jeff?) who knows
> more about pre-war US racing could answer some questions.
>
> Thanks
> David Perry
> http://www.bikecult.com

--__--__--

Message: 6 From: OROBOYZ@aol.com Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 19:18:44 EDT Subject: Re: [CR] Hill Cycle house brands To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

In a message dated 4/2/2001 2:56:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, bikeworks@bikecult.com writes:

<< They must have had a frame builder around because there are a couple HCS-labeled frames that were never assembled. >>

Hill Cycle was around a long time, but a buddy and ex-employee of mine, Ron Gallimore, has a "Hill Cycle" road bike that was made for team members (at least, maybe sold to the public too?) and his bike and the rest from that time were made by Holdsworth. That would have been very early 1970s. It will be on display at the Cirque this year. Dale Brown Greensboro, North Carolina

--__--__--

Message: 7 From: "stephen a. solombrino" <up4479@hotmail.com> To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 00:57:24 Subject: [CR]2 questions

I'm building some new wheels for my classics. Has anybody used the Park TS-3? What do you think of it? (No, forget about the price. How does it work to build wheels compared to a TS-2, for example?) I'll take the answers off the list. Has anybody tried to use the methods in Talbot's book to build a frame? I have all the parts for a frame and fork. I was toying with the idea of building them up into a classic style frame with a 5 speed rear end. With a name like Solombrino, it seems only fitting that I should try. Steve _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

--__--__--

Message: 8 From: Mark Bulgier <mark@bulgier.net> To: "'stephen a. solombrino'" <up4479@hotmail.com>, Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: RE: [CR]2 questions Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 18:14:01 -0700

Steve Solombrino wrote:
> Has anybody tried to use the methods in Talbot's book to
> build a frame?

It's OT here, but there's a mailing list for amateur framebuilders (well, a few pros hang out there too). Subscribe/unsubscribe on the web at: http://www.phred.org/mailman/listinfo/framebuilders Archives: http://www.phred.org/pipermail/framebuilders/ Archive Search: http://search.bikelist.org/

Mark Bulgier Seattle, Wa USA

--__--__--

Message: 9 Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 21:15:07 -0400 From: Steve Freides <steve@fridayscomputer.com> Organization: Friday's Computer, Inc. To: Classic Lightweights <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Subject: [CR]The idle ramblings of a freewheeler.

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.

--__--__--

Message: 10 Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 21:47:45 -0400 To: Steve Freides <steve@fridayscomputer.com>, Classic Lightweights <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> From: Harvey M Sachs <sachs@erols.com> Subject: Re: [CR]The idle ramblings of a freewheeler.

Steve - what I find most helpful is to plot these things on a gear chart, with the chainwheels as the columns and the freewheel cogs as the rows. the intersection cells get the gear, which I usually do as gear inches (=27*cw/fw). The 13-26 you have selected is a close as possible to geometrically equal steps (constant ratios). I think you will find that the 42/53 or 42/52 puts one chainwheel shift just larger than one freewheel shift.

Us half-step guys would aim for a 4-tooth difference with that freewheel, so each chainring change splits the gap between two freewheels. (with your set-up, 8 on the chainring should be about the same as the step between two freewheel cogs). I haven't checked out the numbers, leaving that as an exercize for the reader, but pretty confident that's what you'll find.

FWIW, I generally ride with a "half-step" as described above with 5- and 6-speed setups. For a 5-speed, here's the guide:

3 cw teeth splits a 14 - 24 4 cw teeth splits a 14 -28

and so on.

harvey sachs mclean va

At 21:15 4/2/2001 -0400, Steve Freides wrote:
>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.
>
>_______________________________________________

--__--__--

Message: 11 Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 22:10:14 -0400 To: Steve Freides <steve@fridayscomputer.com>, Classic Lightweights <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> From: Sheldon Brown <CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> Subject: Re: [CR]The idle ramblings of a freewheeler.

Steve Freides wrote:
>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.

I would prefer the latter combination, particularly because I consider the 17-20 jump too large for that part of the range.

My preference has always been to have small jumps in the middle and high range, with biger jumps near the bottom.

In the higher end of the range, to make the upshift without bogging down, you need to be able to get up enough speed in the lower gear to be able to turn over the higher gear. Back in the 5-speed era, 14-17 jumps used to be very common, with 52 tooth big rings. It is very hard to get going fast enough in the 52/17 to be able to spin the 14 comfortably.

Some cyclists used to conclude that the 52/14 gear was too high to be useful to them as a result, when, actually, the problem was the big jump making the 52/14 inaccessible.

In the middle, cruising gear range, close ratios are good because they let you fine tune your gearing in the range where you spend most of your time.

In the lower range, big jumps work well. The mere act of shifting while climbing, especially on older derailer systems, would cause you to loose some speed, due to having to ease up while making the shift. If the jumps were too small, the gain in gearing would be offset by the loss of momentum.

Indeed, the old "alpine" type freewheels with a big jump at the bottom made a lot of sense back then, and they still do in the form of Shimano's "Megarange" units. My O.T.B. came with a 4-speed 14-16-19-26, with a 48-30 crankset. Worked great! The same is true of Shimano's 14-16-18-21-24-34 and 14-16-18-20-22-24-34 Megarange units (though I'd prefer 14-15-17-19-22-26-34.)

(The term "alpine" gearing later became debased into meaninglessness when adopted by marketeers, but it originally referred to a system like this with a low "bail-out" gear.)

Half-step fans (of which I've never been one) would prefer the more even jumps of your 13-15-17-20-23-26.

Sheldon "Pear Shaped" Brown Newtonville, Massachusetts +--------------------------------------------------+ | Take sides! Always take sides! | | You will sometimes be wrong--but the man who | | refuses to take sides must _always_ be wrong. | | Heaven save us from poltroons who fear | | to make a choice. --Robert A. Heinlein | +--------------------------------------------------+

Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772, 617-244-1040, FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide http://captainbike.com Useful articles about bicycles and cycling http://sheldonbrown.com

--__--__--

Message: 12 Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 22:29:05 -0400 From: Steve Freides <steve@fridayscomputer.com> Organization: Friday's Computer, Inc. To: Classic Lightweights <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Subject: Re: [CR]The idle ramblings of a freewheeler.

Using Sheldon's gear calculator just now shows the chainring changes at about 26% and the cog changes averaging about 15% for my preferred combination of cogs.

But to specifically address my question, would a 13-14-16-19-22-26 be a good choice for a half-stepper? From what I using a gear chart, a 52/48 would work nicely with the cluster above, at least the five largest cogs. It sounds like this 13-26 might have started in someone's mind as a 14-26 five-speed that had a 13 stuck on to it.

And a related question - did racers half-step or only tourists?

-S-

Harvey M Sachs wrote:
>
> Steve -
> what I find most helpful is to plot these things on a gear chart, with the
> chainwheels as the columns and the freewheel cogs as the rows. the
> intersection cells get the gear, which I usually do as gear inches
> (=27*cw/fw). The 13-26 you have selected is a close as possible to
> geometrically equal steps (constant ratios). I think you will find that
> the 42/53 or 42/52 puts one chainwheel shift just larger than one freewheel
> shift.
>
> Us half-step guys would aim for a 4-tooth difference with that freewheel,
> so each chainring change splits the gap between two freewheels. (with your
> set-up, 8 on the chainring should be about the same as the step between two
> freewheel cogs). I haven't checked out the numbers, leaving that as an
> exercize for the reader, but pretty confident that's what you'll find.
>
> FWIW, I generally ride with a "half-step" as described above with 5- and
> 6-speed setups. For a 5-speed, here's the guide:
>
> 3 cw teeth splits a 14 - 24
> 4 cw teeth splits a 14 -28
>
> and so on.
>
> harvey sachs
> mclean va
>
> At 21:15 4/2/2001 -0400, Steve Freides wrote:
> >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.
> >
> >_______________________________________________

-- Steve Freides

--__--__--

Message: 13 Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 22:44:46 -0500 From: gregparker1 <GregParker1@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [CR]The idle ramblings of a freewheeler. To: Steve Freides <steve@fridayscomputer.com> Cc: gregparker1 <110404.153@compuserve.com>, Classic Lightweights <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>

IME, racers (and lazy folks like me...) generally used a "crossover" =

pattern that resulted in about seven commonly used gears on a 2 x 6 setup= . 42/53 with 13-14-15-17-19-21 was (is) pretty common. Cross over from the = 15....

Greg "most of us have gears we never use" Parker

-------------Forwarded Message-----------------

From: Steve Freides, INTERNET:steve@fridayscomputer.com To: Classic Lightweights, INTERNET:Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org =

Date: 4/2/01 10:32 PM

RE: Re: [CR]The idle ramblings of a freewheeler. =

And a related question - did racers half-step or only tourists?

-S-

Harvey M Sachs wrote:
> =
> Steve -
> what I find most helpful is to plot these things on a gear chart, with = the
> chainwheels as the columns and the freewheel cogs as the rows. the
> intersection cells get the gear, which I usually do as gear inches
> (=3D27*cw/fw). The 13-26 you have selected is a close as possible to
> geometrically equal steps (constant ratios). I think you will find tha= t
> the 42/53 or 42/52 puts one chainwheel shift just larger than one freew= heel
> shift.
> =
> Us half-step guys would aim for a 4-tooth difference with that freewhee= l,
> so each chainring change splits the gap between two freewheels. (with y= our
> set-up, 8 on the chainring should be about the same as the step between= two
> freewheel cogs). I haven't checked out the numbers, leaving that as an=
> exercize for the reader, but pretty confident that's what you'll find.
> =
> FWIW, I generally ride with a "half-step" as described above with 5- an= d
> 6-speed setups. For a 5-speed, here's the guide:
> =
> 3 cw teeth splits a 14 - 24
> 4 cw teeth splits a 14 -28
> =
> and so on.
> =
> harvey sachs
> mclean va
> =
> At 21:15 4/2/2001 -0400, Steve Freides wrote:
> >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 reca= ll
> >hearing that using a 22 in the next to the last position was more comm= on but
> >that seems like too big a jump to me. I'm pretty sure the freewheel b= ody
> >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 f= ront,
> >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 als= o 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 r= acer
> >nor a tourist, I think that's OK.
> >
> >--
> >Steve Freides in ever more sunny Ridgewood, NJ.
> >
> >_______________________________________________

-- =

Steve Freides

_______________________________________________

----------------------- Internet Header -------------------------------- Sender: classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org Received: from catfood.nt.phred.org (catfood.phred.org [216.39.149.190]) by sphmgaac.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.9) with ESMTP id WAA07741 for <gregparker1@compuserve.com>; Mon, 2 Apr 2001 22:32:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phred.org ([216.39.149.189]) by catfood.nt.phred.org with = Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2883); Mon, 2 Apr 2001 19:27:39 -0700 Delivered-To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Received: from catfood.nt.phred.org (catfood.phred.org [216.39.149.190]) by phred.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC9FE7588 for <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>; Mon, 2 Apr 2001 19:31:00 -0700 (P= DT) Received: from renown.cnchost.com ([207.155.248.7]) by catfood.nt.phred.o= rg with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2883); Mon, 2 Apr 2001 19:27:31 -0700 Received: from fridayscomputer.com ([64.221.106.48]) by renown.cnchost.com id WAA29603; Mon, 2 Apr 2001 22:31:00 -0400 (EDT) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.10] Message-ID: <3AC93571.EC2962A5@fridayscomputer.com> From: Steve Freides <steve@fridayscomputer.com> Organization: Friday's Computer, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Classic Lightweights <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Subject: Re: [CR]The idle ramblings of a freewheeler. References: <5.0.2.1.1.20010402214154.00a5ab30@pop.erols.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Apr 2001 02:27:31.0546 (UTC) FILETIME=3D[A28D7B= A0:01C0BBE5] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii Sender: classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org Errors-To: classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org X-BeenThere: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.1 Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org?subject=3Dhelp>=

List-Post: <mailto:classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> List-Subscribe: <http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvo= us>, <mailto:classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org?subject=3Dsubscribe> List-Id: A sharing of vintage lightweight bicycle information and lore <= classicrendezvous.bikelist.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendez= vous>, <mailto:classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org?subject=3Dunsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/private/classicrendezvous/=
> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 22:29:05 -0400

--__--__--

Message: 14 From: "garth libre" <rabbitman@mindspring.com> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 22:57:20 -0400 Subject: [CR]Hello from a new old bike owner

I work out on a Velodrome near my home in South Florida. My 1981 Team = Fuji was stripped by bike strippers and I was off to purchase a = replacement this year. I was supprised to find out that new road bikes = may be very functional, but they are aesthetically horrible. Oversize = lugless welded tubes, slant top tubes, ugly welded stems, futuristic = wheels, plasticy brake-gear shifters, laughable paint jobs and high = prices to boot. Was I the only one who found this stuff ugly? My = present new old bike is a 54 cm Raleigh Prestige, 531-c Reynolds tubing. = It was purchased for $550.00 as new old stock (never ridden). The stem = and bars are Cinneli. The seat is a lovely example of embossed black = leather with two Inlay Cinneli metal badges on either side of the seat. = The bike was made the first fortnight of 1986 in England according to = the serial number. The wheels are mavic ma40 rims. The hubs, bottom = bracket, deraileurs and downtube shifters are all Suntour Superbe Pro. = The chain is Sedisport and the freewheel is a Regina Titall seven speed = (13,14,15,16,17,18,19) aluminum and titanium gears. The dropouts are = Campy and the brakes are Royal Grand Comp 400 (aero routed cables). The = paint job is red with maroone chain and seat stays giving the bike a = Classic older look of restraint and beauty. The feeling I get when = riding this new cherished possesion is one of superiority and = refinement. Secretly (not anymore now) I feel a better person for having = gone with less trendy, intrinsically beautiful machinery-art. In Miami, = and in a popular shop the owners and the customers must have seen this = bike on the rack for months, and passed it up for more expensive = aluminum rockets. This bike feels every bit as stiff as the aluminum = bikes I tested without that dead, harsh, clunky feel that aluminum is = given to. When I ride this bike I feel enriched and nourished and lucky. = I know that this is a more modern and somewhat Japanese version of a = true classic race bike, but I bet the feel is very classic and very = similar to some older race bikes built in the same vein. I am in the = process of dailing the bike in and getting all the bearings rebuilt with = fresh grease. This is the nicest of all five past road bikes I have = owned. If anyone has experience with similar bikes I would love to hear = about it. Garth=20

--__--__--

Message: 15 From: "Douglas A. Stephens" <das@aasurvey.com> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>, <internet-bob@lists.davin.ottawa.on.ca>, <BOBishBikesFS@ListBot.com> Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 23:57:26 -0400 Subject: [CR]FS: 1975 Mercian, 63 cm

I posted this about month ago. Giving ya'll one last chance before I e-bay it. This is a great example of a 1970's bike built up from a bare frame. Make me an offer if $450 is too much. Don't let the size fool you too much. I usually ride a 60 cm and fit down to 58 cm, and this one fits me just right, with the tops of the bars even with the saddle.

Doug Stephens

For Sale:

1975 Mercian 63 cm ctc, 58 cm ctc top tube, 17" chain stays two tone paint: forest green with contrasting pastel green head tube and seat tube band gold pin striping around the lugs "Guaranteed built with Reynolds 531 Butted Frame tubes" Non-ornate lugs, fork has a flat crown and graceful curves all at the bottom end Beautifully colored "Mercian Cycles, The World Over, Derby England" decals on head and seat tube, excellent condition Gold leaf looking "Mercian" decals on both sides of the down tube are a bit crinkled Stamped drop outs with eyelets front and rear, no derailleur hanger, two top tube cable stops on bottom *right* side, chrome Specialized right chain stay chain guard. Paint is in good condition with the scratches and dings I'd expect on a well ridden 25 year old bike

Seat Post: SR "Custom Melt Forging" two bolt Saddle: Brooks Pro in good condition, some cracks at the rivets Stem: Nitto 9 cm extension Headset: chrome "Tange Mercian" Bottom Bracket: chrome "TDC" "Made in England" Bars: unkown, wrapped with green tressostar cloth tape, shellaced, ends at stem wrapped with hemp tape, black rubber velox end plugs Brakeset: Dia Compe Gran Compe non-aero, silky satin finish, nutted calipers, original "Gran Compe" hoods in ok shape. Cranks: Stronglight Model 93 with chrome Stronglight dust caps, original 53 tooth outer ring in good condition, replacement 40 tooth stamped inner ring. Pedals: "Kyokuto Pro Ace" quills with Ale chrome clips and Alfred leather straps. Some rust on clips and strap buckles. Derailleurs: Suntour VGT Luxe rear and Compe-V front Shifters: Suntour Power Ratchets Wheels: Old style chrome barreled Phil Wood hubs in great condition, laced to 27" concave Weinmann rims with butted Ritchie spokes (at least there is an "R" on the head of each spoke". Some of the eyelets in the rims are corroded. Tires: Specialized Tri Sport 27" x 1 1/4" in ok shape. Will include a set of 27" x 1 1/8" Avocet FasGrip slicks.

While not a top of the line Mercian this bike is gorgeous to look at and is essentially in original unrestored condition. Best of all it has a smooth responsive ride. Whoever built this one up definitely did not have Campy Envy, there's not a drop of Campy on it. Don't hang this one on the wall, ride it.

Asking $450 plus shipping

Doug Stephens Greenfield, MA

--__--__--

Message: 16 From: "garry nold" <lksbks@ix.netcom.com> To: <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 23:11:38 -0700 Subject: [CR]FS: TA chainring bolts

Hi All, I aquired these and have no use for them. They are the small chainring = bolts for the older cranks(93?). I have 5 sets of 5, NOS still in TA = bags. How does $8 a set sound shipped CUS. Let me know, Garry Nold lksbks@ix.netcom.com

It snowed here near Seattle this AM.

--__--__--

Message: 17 From: "Jill DiMauro" <jpdimauro@starpower.net> To: "Classicrendezvous@Bikelist.Org" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 07:21:35 -0400 Subject: [CR]stereooview and views: FW: URLS

Paul was very kind to post the pictures of the stereoview and the bicycle view on his website.

Jill DiMauro Maryland

-----Original Message----- From: halbike [mailto:halbike@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 8:40 PM To: Jill DiMauro Subject: URLS

http://www.geocities.com/halbike/jill/stereos1.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/halbike/jill/stereos2.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/halbike/jill/stereos3.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/halbike/jill/stereov1.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/halbike/jill/stereov2.jpg

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text

--__--__--

Message: 18 Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 06:07:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Velo Hund <velohund@yahoo.com> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: [CR]Cinelli Training Manual

In the early 70s I bought a large (about 11 x 17), light blue cover softback from a bike shop that they called the Cinelli Manual (the actual title was something else, like "Cycling"). It had a sylized drawing of a racer on the front.

It contained detailed instructions for every aspect of training -- the progression of fixed gears to use in the early season, intervals, recording milage, weight, pulse, diet, equipment, everything. It also contained pictures of certain Cinelli items -- the Bivalent (sp?) hub and the early Cinelli clipless pedals.

I loaned it to a friend in the late 70s and never saw it again.

Anyone else have this? Are there copies floating around?

-- Keith Mayton

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

--__--__--

_______________________________________________

End of Classicrendezvous Digest