Richard wrote,
>i would assume that the gain in stiffness by 'butressing'
> the seat stays would be negated by the shear act of
> adding these small struts. the heat involved in the brazing
> operation will certainly not help the area onto which
> these add-ons were, well, added.
How does that square with the tube manufacturers at the time who were balatantly advertising the changes in the metals micro structure when the frames were brazed up giving increased / improved strength around the heated zone ?. This was one of their more popular sales pitches.
I'm going with the notion that the additional supports to the stays were for some perceived (real or otherwise) benefit in braking - but like everyone else I'm probably guessing. I'm going to take up with one of the original employees who had been with the company since 1937. Out of around 30,000 frames made, this is probably a pure oddity, and there us a good chance that he will remember it. They had no reputation for straying off the conventional path - like the Flying Gate and such like, in fact, quite the opposite so this may well stick out.
The other view is that this was (as were many) built at the customers request with these additional stays, too replace an older machine that was so equipped. Custome building was something they did have a reputation for - hence you rarely find two machines the same. Oddly enough it's also equipped with a head-clip, when most machines turned out at that time and earlier were using Brampton conventional headsets.
Bob Reid
Stonehaven
Scotland