I have a postwar Peugeot lever action 8 speed touring bike that has Mafac cantilevers. Schwinn also used to make a clamp-on cantilever. I'm not sure what models it appeared on. It would have been '60s or earlier.
Steve Barner, Bolton, Vermont. Who made it all the way up Lincoln Gap today, but with a wimpy 36x28. It sure was nice to ride the old Paramount P15 again, though.
> Send Classicrendezvous mailing list submissions to
> classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.bikelist.org/
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Classicrendezvous digest..."
>
>
> CR
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Getting shifty with Huret (Re: [CR]Pre-'70s Lightweights?)
(ltbradley)
> 2. RE: Re:GIFs in Cyclo-Pedia Catalog (Mark Bulgier)
> 3. Re: Now:"Experts" Was:Where we get our info (ltbradley)
> 4. Re: Carsten Rehbein's new web site! (CMontgo945@aol.com)
> 5. Re: Now:Sharing Was:"Experts" Was:Where we get our info (Brian
Baylis)
> 6. Retro Raleigh catalogs (Mark Bulgier)
> 7. Not a lot of people know that........ (Bob Reid)
> 8. Re: Eddy Merckx (Matthew Grimm)
> 9. Re: Carsten Rehbein's new web site! (nickzz@mindspring.com)
> 10. Re: I: [CR]Chesini Campione Del Mondo Bicycle?
(nickzz@mindspring.com)
> 11. Re: Carsten Rehbein's new web site! (paul patzkowsky)
> 12. Re: Classicrendezvous digest, Vol 1 #1499 - 17 msgs (Stephen Barner)
> 13. Re: 27" vs 700c size (Daniel Artley)
> 14. Re: Guing on tubbies...! (Stephen Barner)
> 15. cantilever brake history? (Tom Hayes)
> 16. Re: Carsten Rehbein's new web site! (Aldo Ross)
> 17. Re: Carsten Rehbein's new web site! (Aldo Ross)
> 18. Re: Classicrendezvous digest, Vol 1 #1500 - 23 msgs (Stephen Barner)
> 19. Getting shifty with Huret (Re: [CR]Pre-'70s Lightweights?) (Daniel
Artley)
> 20. I: [CR]cantilever brake history? (The Maaslands)
> 21. Re: I: [CR]cantilever brake history? (Steven Sweedler)
> 22. Re: Not a lot of people know that........ (Philcycles@aol.com)
> 23. Re: Trek Shimmy (non-OCLV) (Tom Dalton)
> 24. Of Campagnolo Brake Levers and Seat Posts (Bingham, Wayne R.)
> 25. Re: Re: Trek Shimmy (non-OCLV) (M4Campy)
> 26. Re:cantilever brake history (Bob Reid)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> From: "ltbradley" <ltbradley@msn.com>
> To: "Jim Merz" <jimmerz@qwest.net>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Re: Getting shifty with Huret (Re: [CR]Pre-'70s Lightweights?)
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 00:19:37 -0700
>
> I have had a Duopar Eco since the early 80's. I am not much of a bicycle
> technician but I don't recall any problems installing it. I have just
> transferred it to my new/old Mercian. It is still the best shifting rear
> derailleur I have ever owned. I still have the plastic bit that tended to
> fall out.
> Lawrence Bradley, Tacoma, WA (but of the Kentish Diaspora)
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> From: Mark Bulgier <mark@bulgier.net>
> To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: RE: [CR]Re:GIFs in Cyclo-Pedia Catalog
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 00:25:46 -0700
>
> Oops, I just realized I called Skip Echert "Steve". It was Skip who
showed
> me how to fix the images that weren't displaying right. Thanks SKIP!!
>
> Mark Bulgier
> Seattle, Wa
> USA
>
> I stupidly wrote:
> > Steve Echert found the cause of the problem with the .gif
> > images in the Cyclopedia catalog
> > (http://bulgier.net/pics/bike/catalogs/cyclo-pedia-74/) -
> > Thanks Steve!
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> From: "ltbradley" <ltbradley@msn.com>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Re: [CR]Now:"Experts" Was:Where we get our info
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 00:31:16 -0700
>
> The true expert has the beginners mind.
> I am an expert on certain matters--certainly not bicycles although I love
> them--and I learn from my students all the time!
> I am new to the list. I am not going to be intimidated. I don't feel
like
> anyone is trying to intimidate me.
> Share the love!
> Lawrence (loves bicycles, clarinets, sushi, French cooking, Steeleye Span,
> Caravan, Oysterband, Mozart, Elgar, Finzi, Vaughan-Williams, power tools,
> hand tools and wants to learn more!) Bradley
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> From: CMontgo945@aol.com
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 03:34:06 EDT
> Subject: Re: [CR]Carsten Rehbein's new web site!
> To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> Now that's a fun site to gaze upon. His diatribe on racing bikes and
> technological innovation is bunk, but what the hey, the pics are great.
>
> Craig Montgomery in Tucson (where it finally rained after 120 days)
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 00:41:46 -0700
> From: Brian Baylis <rocklube@adnc.com>
> Reply-To: rocklube@adnc.com
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: Re: [CR]Now:Sharing Was:"Experts" Was:Where we get our info
>
> Listmembers,
>
> I wanted to respond to this thread a day or two ago but I've just been
> too busy to sit down and write. My project is now finished and I've got
> a minute; I'd like to mention something about those who post and those
> who "lurk". Perhaps it may seem odd to some; but I consider both types
> to be "contributors". The active posters often just happen to be anyone
> who has some knowledge and experience on a given topic. Considering the
> interests of this group it is not hard to imagine that some people will
> be in a position to have more experiences related to certain sub-topics
> than others. I would guess that is typical of most organizations. We
> tend to look at the "contributions" to our group in terms of those who
> post. My feeling is that is backwards.
>
> Without a vessel to pour our collective knowledge into (that would be
> the lurkers) there would be no reason for our group to exist. Every
> single day I read and learn something of interest and use to me on this
> list. It matters not where it originates. Wheather the contributor is
> aware of it or not, that person has been of benifit to at least a few of
> us. To know that there are 700 persons out there listening to our
> jibberish and possibly being informed, entertained, and inspired by some
> of it makes the "vessel" more important than the source. The spreading
> of knowledge is the only reason to collect it. Some of us spend their
> day to day lives wallowing in the sorts of things that many on the list
> might envy. Let me assure you; without a group such as this to share it
> with and the feedback that comes from that, there is nothing left but
> tedious work and the eternal search for some Mojo to throw at these
> frames.
>
> So I for one appreciate that there are 660 or so "silent members" whose
> very existance gives meaning to my life. And to be perfectly honest, I
> never would have thought that I could have so much fun and find so many
> good friends at a keyboard. Upon occassion someone will comment on my
> writing style which is something I would never have expected; having
> given up all forms of writing right after high school. Without some
> responce and encouragement (you know, suggestions as to how to destroy
> my keyboard, loose the address, etc.) life would be too common and dull
> around here.
>
> Thank you all for being part of the list. Those who post infrequently or
> never are every bit as valid as anyone else. Without someone to recieve
> we cannot give. Without someone to make use of our experiences, take
> advantage of our collective knowledge, and administer feedback there is
> little point in having these things. As always, I can't thank Dale
> enough for presenting this opportunity for all of us to interact,
> wheather it be actively or passively.
>
> Brian Baylis
> La Mesa, CA
> I'm behind on some of my responces. I'll be doing some catching up.
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> From: Mark Bulgier <mark@bulgier.net>
> To: "'Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org'" <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: [CR] Retro Raleigh catalogs
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 01:04:43 -0700
>
> Steve Kurt sent me the following catalog .PDFs that he had downloaded from
> the Retro Raleighs website, back when they were still available: '62, '67,
> '68, '70, '72, '73, '78. I've put them on my site at
> http://bulgier.net/
>
> I hope it's OK for me to name the folder "Retro-Raleigh" I called it that
> as a tribute, giving credit where it's due, not as a ripoff!
>
> Mark Bulgier
> Seattle, Wa
> USA
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 10:00:02 +0100
> From: Bob Reid <bob.reid1@virgin.net>
> To: "'Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org'" <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: [CR]Not a lot of people know that........
>
> 101 things you always wanted to know about Tullio Campagnolo........(well
> three actually)
>
> - He might not have been the first to introduce alloy cranks when the
Record
> set was introduced in 1958, but what he did patent and give us was hollow
> chainring bolts, crank bolt covers with an AK hole, and flush fitting (at
> the rear) chainrings - oh and the ability "if so desired" to fit a
chaincase
> as a result of recessing the inner chainring ! Surely the chainring bolts
> must qualify as the singlemost unaltered component made in the 1950's
still
> used today ?
>
> - Tullio seems to have spent most of the 1960's inventing & patenting car
&
> Motorcycle hydraulic & cable operated disc brake components.... everything
> from parking brakes to dual-circuit hydraulic brake cyclinders. I guess
> this is the reason for the dearth of bicycle inventiveness between 1963 &
67
> (http://www.velo-retro.com/tline.html) - unsubstantiated of course but he
> probably had a pretty clear idea what way the industry appeared to be
going
> at a time when the European cycle industry was at an all time low.
>
> - Although the Campag, Campy, Campagnolo, Cam-pan-yo-lo Corkscrew is shown
> as a "promotional" item in the 82' Catalogue, Tullio actually applied to
> patent and was granted his self-centreing bottle opener in the shape of a
> bell in 1966 ! - And he made sure he patented it in France.
>
> Was there no end to his talents, or was he just bored in the 1960's at
Corso
> Padova 160, Vicenza .......?
>
> Note ; all of this is from original sources and verifiable documents,
> available on request :-)
>
> Bob Reid
> Stonehaven
> Scotland.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 03:27:23 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Matthew Grimm <matthewgrimm@yahoo.com>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]Re: Eddy Merckx
>
>
> Good story, Jim.
>
> Keep 'em coming.
>
> And when you run out of stories, please tell us about
> your current framebuilding activities.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matthew Grimm
> Shakopee, MN
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 06:29:08 -0400
> From: <nickzz@mindspring.com>
> To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net
> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Reply-To: nickzz@mindspring.com
> Subject: Re: [CR]Carsten Rehbein's new web site!
>
> Thanks for the heads-up.Just waiting for the password to cruise it.
> As always I appreciate your candor and willingness to pass on your
bicyling
> knowledge and 'opinions'.Expert or not your comments are always fun &
> sometimes damn informative.
> Nick Zatezalo
> Atlanta,Ga
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 06:46:14 -0400
> From: <nickzz@mindspring.com>
> To: TheMaaslands@comcast.net
> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Reply-To: nickzz@mindspring.com
> Subject: Re: I: [CR]Chesini Campione Del Mondo Bicycle?
>
> Steven,
> You got to the main reason for my posting the info.The bike is nothing
special
> as a 'collectable',but it was interesting how this mostly steel component
> ordinary bicycle still looks great after only minimal care by the original
> owner.The frame has developed some unique 'patina' but the components are
> shining like new with just some minor elbow grease.I hold dear the theory
that
> steel is real for framesets.Now it takes on a whole new meaning for
lasting
> luster in components.
> Now if only the pukey pink plastic Chesini water
> bottle had been steel.
> Nick Zatezalo
> Atlanta,Ga.
>
>
> On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 23:40:55 -0500 The Maaslands
<TheMaaslands@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> Chesini is based in the province of Verona, so the source is correct. At
> present, they make some very nice bicycles. From your description, this
> could date from the period when they were one of the bigger shops in
Verona.
> During this period, Chesini, like other 'names' had a full range of bikes
> for their local market. This means that they sold city bikes, mid-range
and
> high-end bikes out of their shop. The same is also true for Pinarello,
> Bottecchia, Atala...etc
>
> It is therefore difficult to say that much about your bike. In all
> likelihood, it was an inexpensive 'racing' bike built up for those that
> couldn't afford the very best, but still insisted on a lively ride.
>
> Basically, what I wanted to say is that the model bikes offered in the
> Italian or French home market with a given name, do not necessarily
> correspond to those seen here in North America. You are probably right
that
> it is not that great a bike from the 'mojo' or collector's point of view,
> but could give you a nice ride.
>
> Steven Maasland
> Moorestown, NJ
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 11
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 04:52:13 -0600
> Subject: Re: [CR]Carsten Rehbein's new web site!
> From: paul patzkowsky <atrikerider@juno.com>
>
> That 1948 Olmo, on the Carsten Rehbein site, appears to have a one piece
> stem and handlebar. It looks pretty nice. In fact, all of the bikes
> look nice.
>
> Paul Patzkowsky Longmont Colorado
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 12
> From: "Stephen Barner" <Steve@sburl.com>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:18:37 -0400
> Subject: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous digest, Vol 1 #1499 - 17 msgs
>
> Don't forget that there is a difference in length between pre-CPSC and
> CPSC-approved spindles. The latter ones have a longer extension of the
> drive side. Using the wrong one will definitely affect shifting. Other
> list members can tell you what code numbers (stamped on the inside of the
> arm) indicate CPSC-approved crank arms, I just look at the offset between
> the spider and arm.
>
> I believe that the CPSC spindles are the ones with the "Z" under the
> 68-SS-120 stamp.
>
> Steve Barner, Bolton, Vermont
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paulie Davis" <paulieflt@email.com>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 12:41:19 -0800
> Subject: [CR]Another WTB -- Triple English Spindle this time
>
> OK, gang, it's my day to need things to complete projects!
>
> This time it's the above-mentioned bottom bracket spindle -- Campy
> preferred -- which should be marked *68SS* [NOT *70SS] on its little
spindle
> body.
>
> Many thanks for any leads. (Larry Osborn, I'll get you yet for this
little
> Raleigh project!)
>
> Paulie Davis
> Still Steamy Los Angeles
> (Hey, Aldo, want some raccoons?)
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:25:12 -0400
> From: "Daniel Artley" <dartley@co.ba.md.us>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: [CR]Re: 27" vs 700c size
>
> Back then, late '60's, I was riding Dunlop road racing wired on clinchers.
=
> They were rated at 75 psi, but would always take 90. I'm not sure that =
> they were 1-1/8" or 1-1/4". Even as a teenager, I was hoarding them at =
> the time.
>
> Dan Artley
> Parkton, Maryland
>
> Steve Kurt
> Peoria, IL
> (rode my '71 Raleigh International fixed gear 40 miles
> after work today. When it was new, the best clinchers
> were 70 psi and 1 1/4", iirc)
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 14
> From: "Stephen Barner" <Steve@sburl.com>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:25:08 -0400
> Subject: [CR]Re: Guing on tubbies...!
>
> I have never used Fastack because I have always been told that it does not
> have the same reuse properties as the real thing. I would be very nervous
> about riding on a tire I replaced on the road if I were using Fastack.
>
> It works great of car trim, though.
>
> Steve Barner, Bolton, Vermont
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:04:07 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David Feldman <feldmanbike@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR]Gluing on tubbies.... !
> To: OROBOYZ@aol.com, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> Addenda: Recently a warning was published either by a
> USCF mechanic or by Continental to the effect that the
> newest formula of Fastack will unbond the rim tape
> from Continental tires. Be forewarned.
> David Feldman
> Vancouver, WA
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:33:06 -0400
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> From: Tom Hayes <hayesbikes@mail.nls.net>
> Subject: [CR]cantilever brake history?
>
> Were there bikes set up for cantilever brakes previous to the current
(late
> 70's? to present) usage? If there were bikes made with cantilever brakes,
> when were they made, which manufacturers used them, were they for a
> specific purpose type of bike (like the cyclo-cross and mountain bike type
> of current use) and why did they fall out of favor, and what brought them
> back into favor?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Cheers.
>
> tom
>
> Tom Hayes
> 18585 Munn Road
> Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023
> hayesbikes@nls.net
> hayes@jcu.edu
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 16
> From: "Aldo Ross" <swampmtn@siscom.net>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Re: [CR]Carsten Rehbein's new web site!
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:46:06 -0400
>
> The 1949 Bianchi Folgore on Carsten's site has some interesting details:
>
> Celeste-colored thin (Gaslo?) handlebar tape.
>
> Two-piece rear fender.
>
> Sharp angle, not rounded, on the lower leading edge of the dropouts.
>
> 1-piece Y-shaped fender mounting brackets.
>
> Are there slotted cutouts on the right crank arm, near the bolt circle?
>
> Red pinstriping around headlugs, but only against the beige-looking
> headtube, and no blue details on the chainstay dimples.
>
> Rear fender bracket mounted behind the acorn nut on the rear brake!
>
> Earlier-style notched headlugs, without the continuous curve of later
> models.
>
> Aldo Ross
> Monroe, Ohio
> still awaiting the 1949 Bianchi "Sport"
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 17
> From: "Aldo Ross" <swampmtn@siscom.net>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Re: [CR]Carsten Rehbein's new web site!
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:47:55 -0400
>
> 1949 Bianchi Folgore addendum:
>
> Also, note the seat binder bolt placement above and ahead of the seat
> cluster, as done on earlier Bianchis.
>
> Aldo Ross
> Monroe, Ohio
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 18
> From: "Stephen Barner" <Steve@sburl.com>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:55:36 -0400
> Subject: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous digest, Vol 1 #1500 - 23 msgs
>
> I have three Titanium Duopars on bikes, one is on a tandem. I vote it the
> best shifting widerange derailleur ever made. I agree with what has been
> said about fragility, however. You should never pedal backwards, or roll
a
> bike backwards when equipped with Duopar. We stopped selling them for
that
> reason (although the mechanics kept special ordering them for their own
> bikes). They are also a terrible derailleur for mountain bikes.
>
> There is more difference between the steel and titanium Duopars than just
> the material. The steel version is all riveted together, and the many
> joints loosen up much more quickly than the titanium version. The ti has
> pins with circlips holding the body together, and can be almost completely
> disassembled. It's just looks a lot better made.
>
> Of course, I use to disassemble my Huret Allvit to clean it and grease the
> pivots. Later I learned the correct method was to either dunk it in carb
> cleaner and spray it with oil, or throw it away and replace it with
> something else.
>
> Steve Barner, Bolton, Vermont
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> Anyway, what's the story with the Huret Duopar? I know there were
> three versions, alloy and titanium, all alloy, and alloy and steel.
> What are peoples opinions on these versions shifting, merits, and
> quality? Also what's the current market for these things these days?
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 09:17:23 -0400
> From: "Daniel Artley" <dartley@co.ba.md.us>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Getting shifty with Huret (Re: [CR]Pre-'70s Lightweights?)
>
> I've been using a ti duopar for 18, 19 years on my Richard Sachs Tourer =
> and for a while on a '84 Santana Tandem, both with old Campy friction bar
=
> end shifters. Its a delicate derailleur that can't be rushed or crunched,
=
> but shifts wide freewheels with elan. It doesn't hunt for gears, just =
> goes in, and easily shifts an entire freewheel 13-32 smoothly. Larry =
> Black once told me that he destroyed one shifting it into the spokes of a
=
> tandem. The third parallelogram allows the jockey wheels to hug the =
> freewheel and make for really positive shifts. Its reputation when I =
> first heard about them was it shifted wide range freewheels as well as =
> racing derailleurs shifted corn cobs.
>
> The only problem I've ever had with them is an unusual one. I've got a =
> Campy NR crank drilled for a 74 bolt circle with an avocet 28 chainring.
=
> The spider is open enough with that combination that I've trapped the =
> chain between chainring and spider, of course on a hill. If you're =
> cranking with impunity, this yanks the derailleur and fairly easily bends
=
> the lower titanium parallelogram. Of course the parallelogram can be bent
=
> back, but now I shift to the bottom of the freewheel before dropping the =
> chain into the granny now to avoid it.
>
> I've liked this derailleur so much I jumped at the chance to buy out a =
> closing shop of its duopars. I now have three ti and one steel. At least
=
> one of the ti's are a parts derailleur though. And to my knowledge, I =
> think there were only two versions, steel and ti.
>
> Dan Artley
> Parkton, Maryland
>
> Anyway, what's the story with the Huret Duopar? I know there were=20
> three versions, alloy and titanium, all alloy, and alloy and steel.=20
> What are peoples opinions on these versions shifting, merits, and=20
> quality? Also what's the current market for these things these days?
>
> enjoy,
> Brandon"mmonkeyman"Ives
> Trying to wrangle a parrot and type
> at the same time in Santa Barbara, CA.
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 09:48:43 -0500
> From: The Maaslands <TheMaaslands@comcast.net>
> Subject: I: [CR]cantilever brake history?
> To: Classic Rendezvous <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
>
> Cantilever brakes have been used for a very long time. The main impediment
> to their use was the fact that they required the bosses being brazed on
the
> frame. This requires slightly higher quality tubing, most definitely
better
> brazing skills and additional costs. René Herse and many other French
makers
> used them back in the 50's if I am not mistaken (Jan will correct me about
> this if I am wrong) Most of the time, the additional braking power offered
> by cantilevers is not overly important, therefore there was no terrible
> 'need' for them except on loaded touring and tandems. Their use on
> cyclo-cross bikes was linked to the fact that they didn't get 'mucked' up
as
> quickly as traditional brakes. This is also one of the reasons for them
> being used on mountain bikes.
>
> I have them on 3 of my bikes: 2 tandems and a cyclo-cross bike.
Personally,
> unless you have better quality tubing, I would stay clear of them. My 80's
> Trek tandem's rear triangle spreads visibly when the rear brakes are
> applied, whihc was very disconcerting. I therefore added a mountain bike
'U'
> brace. My other 70's tandem has Mafac cantilevers that are better
> functioning and much more beautiful. The 'modern' double fulcrum brakes
are
> just as powerful as either of these.
>
> Steven Maasland
> Moorestown, NJ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tom Hayes <hayesbikes@mail.nls.net>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 7:33 AM
> Subject: [CR]cantilever brake history?
>
>
> > Were there bikes set up for cantilever brakes previous to the current
> (late
> > 70's? to present) usage? If there were bikes made with cantilever
brakes,
> > when were they made, which manufacturers used them, were they for a
> > specific purpose type of bike (like the cyclo-cross and mountain bike
type
> > of current use) and why did they fall out of favor, and what brought
them
> > back into favor?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> > tom
> >
> > Tom Hayes
> > 18585 Munn Road
> > Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023
> > hayesbikes@nls.net
> > hayes@jcu.edu
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.373 / Virus Database: 208 - Release Date: 02/07/02
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 10:16:43 -0400
> From: Steven Sweedler <sweedler@mail.plymouth.edu>
> Reply-To: sweedler@mail.plymouth.edu
> Organization: Plymouth State College
> To: The Maaslands <TheMaaslands@comcast.net>
> Cc: Classic Rendezvous <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Re: I: [CR]cantilever brake history?
>
> I remember a profile of a cyclist in a recent publication {On the Wheel
perhaps}
> that credited a British tourist with inventing cantilever brakes in the
30's.
> I'll try and find the article.
> Steven Sweedler in Plymouth, New Hampshire
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 22
> From: Philcycles@aol.com
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 11:04:24 EDT
> Subject: Re: [CR]Not a lot of people know that........
> To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> In a message dated 7/11/02 2:04:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> bob.reid1@virgin.net writes:
>
> << Tullio seems to have spent most of the 1960's inventing & patenting
car &
> Motorcycle hydraulic & cable operated disc brake components....
everything
> from parking brakes to dual-circuit hydraulic brake cyclinders. I guess
> this is the reason for the dearth of bicycle inventiveness between 1963 &
67
> (http://www.velo-retro.com/tline.html) - unsubstantiated of course but he
> probably had a pretty clear idea what way the industry appeared to be
going
> at a time when the European cycle industry was at an all time low. >>
>
> Campy motorcycle cable disc brakes were the least effective stoppers ever
to
> appear on a motorcycle.
> Phil Brown
> In foggy San Francisco, again
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:05:02 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Tom Dalton <tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]Re: Trek Shimmy (non-OCLV)
>
>
> I had a 1982-ish Trek 950 (top-end SL/SP race bike) in 60 cm c-t-t and a
1985 Trek 760 in the same size. Both were nearly impossible to ride
no-hands. The earlier bike had a long TT short chainstays, lots of rake.
The later bike had a normal TT (57.5) "normal" stays, "normal-ish" rake.
The geometries were very different, the result was the same. I was once
told that the later bike has a 531SL (531 pro) TT or blades or something
that made this happen. Who knows. I do know that I sit crooked on the
saddle, due to some sort of assymetry in my legs. I hink this was the
common denominator. I also get shimmy on my non-Trek bikes, to a lesser
degree.
> Tom Dalton
> Bethlehem, PA
> Scott Goldsmith <sg8357@getcoactive.com> wrote: At 10:36 AM
7/10/2002 -0400, you wrote:
> >The thread on shimmy has been enlightening. When I worked in bike shops,
> >there were several times that people came back with this complaint. It
was
> >almost always on reacing geometry frames, and in taller sizes. We had the
> >largest number of complaints on the early '80s Treks, so I think geometry
> >has a lot to do with the issue. [snip]
> >Steve Barner, Bolton, Vermont, where it is way too nice to be sitting
here
> >writng email.
>
> Early Trek touring series bikes are 73 head angle with 55mm rake,
> mine is noticeably squirrely when standing. I haven't seen any modern
> racing bikes with trail that low (47mm), the bike is thrown off line
> by bumps easily, but no shimmy.
>
> '79 Trek 412, Cro-mo & Hi-ten for more
> road hugging weight. ;-)
> --------
> Scott Goldsmith
> Zinzinnati, Ohio
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do You Yahoo!?
> New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free & unlimited access
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 11:12:27 -0400
> From: "Bingham, Wayne R." <WBINGHAM@imf.org>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: [CR]Of Campagnolo Brake Levers and Seat Posts
>
> While contemplating the whole Campagnolo brake lever thing last night,
> I've come to the conclusion that what I was remembering must have been a
> late version of the SR lever, even though it was paired to a set of
> Victory calipers on the bike I stripped it all from. I seem to recall
> several details being of "lesser" quality than the SR lever I was used
> to. Alas, all sold now, so no actual components to examine.
>
> However, as promised, I've posted comparison pics of three generations
> of Super Record single bolt seat posts, and a bunch of brake levers, for
> your amusement, education, bewilderment or annoyance -- depending on
> your persuasion. Not that there's anything wrong with that! :)
>
> Photo links:
>
> http://www.imagestation.com/
>
> http://www.imagestation.com/
>
> Wayne Bingham
> Falls Church, VA=20
>
> (Marc - hope you're not still having the problem. Don't know what's up
> with that. Sorry. I think it was only you, and I'm afraid to send you
> another email!)
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 25
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 09:19:58 -0600
> From: M4Campy <M4Campy@aol.com>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: Re: [CR]Re: Trek Shimmy (non-OCLV)
>
> tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >I do know that I sit crooked on the saddle, due to some sort of assymetry
in my legs. I hink this was the common denominator. I also get shimmy on
my non-Trek bikes, to a lesser degree.
> >
>
> Excellent point Tom... None of us are built to as close a tolerance as
> our bikes. Maybe the shimmy is a combination of rider fit,
> confidence, pilot error, and anatomy not being perfectly inline with a
> bike that is???
>
> Mike "Doin the shimmy" Wilkinson
> Parker, CO
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 26
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:33:08 +0100
> Subject: Re:[CR]cantilever brake history
> From: Bob Reid <bob.reid1@virgin.net>
> To: Classic Rendezvous <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
>
> Cantilevers go way back further than the 50's. I've only ever seen one
set
> as early as the mid 1920's, however the basic difference is that many of
> these did not use independent bosses brazed to the forks, but used pivot
> brackets clamped to 'D' section fork legs or from plates hung from the
bolt
> hole in the fork crown. Philips and BSA used them in various disguises
> through till the 1950's, and all seem to suffer from rust. Perhaps the
best
> known though and arguably the best functioning was "The Cantilever" by The
> Resilion Co. - from a design orignally by Raphael Roblin (Fr) and Vernon
> Blake (Eng.Nat) both living in France in 1926....... and improved on by
the
> Resilion Co. in the 30's......
>
> Sadly missed apparently when they disappeared in the 50's, despite such
> innovations as side-to-side adjustment/compensation. Resilion failed to
> notice post-war that the world was passing them by and 'improvements' such
> as locking levers (a desperate idea anyway) and aluminium brake levers
were
> no competition for the lightweight products of one Gerald Nutland Burgess.
>
> Bob Reid
> Stonehaven
> Scotland
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> End of Classicrendezvous Digest