Great information. Where else would we find out this stuff? Certainly a lot of what we in the US know (or think we know) about English bikes depends on what was imported to the US, most of which came in the late 60's & 70's. Hence the American interest in Raleighs, Jacksons, Mercians, Holdsworths, Woodrups and Taylors. At least in the midwest (and to be even more specific, SW Michigan), these were the predominant English bikes we saw. Were these the best frames in the UK, or were other marques more revered by the knowledgeable? I know, for example that Flying Scots were top drawer, while being virtually unknown where I grew up. I don't think I ever saw a Hetchins, although I'd heard of them, and as for Hobbs, I never even heard the name until I found the CR site.
What other firms dealt with hand cut lugs? Monty Young at Condor has a reputation for doing some hand cut lugs, and Mercian used to do some pretty fancy looking stuff, although they are down to just one model with ornate lugs, the Vinctiore.
Was Hobbs the inovator, or did some other, even more august maker "inspire" him to start with the fancy lugs? After all, Hobbs apparently didn't start making frames until the early '30's. Who was the first, well known lug cutter?
Tom Adams, Shrewsbury NJ
>From: brucerobbins@supanet.com
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: [CR]Hobbs and Hetchins update
>Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 09:58:18 +0000
>
>
>I'm well aware that we'll never reach a consensus on the list about Hobbs,
>Hetchins and fancy lugs but, just for the record and in pursuit of historical
>accuracy, here's a bit of information I've found.
>
>By the end of 1936, Hetchins had sold 438 bikes
>By the end of 1933-yes, three years earlier-Hobbs had sold 680 bikes
>
>Since it would seem both were producing lugs of about the same degree of
>"ornateness", that would indicate that Hobbs would have been at least as well
>known for fancy lugs as Hetchins in the formative years. In fact, Hobbs had
>probably produced around 1000 bikes before Hetchins got going.
>
>Up to the start of the war, Hetchins had sold 2135 bikes while Hobbs had sold
>2202 bikes.
>
>Again, as far the UK buying public was concerned, Hobbs bikes were more common
>that Hetchins.
>
>There is no doubt that Hetchins ever increasing ornateness-some would say over
>elaboration-in the 1940s and 1950s, coupled with the demise of Hobbs as
>in-house framebuilders, meant that Hetchins emerged, practically unopposed, as
>the champions of fancy lugwork. Since the US wouldn't have had much exposure
>to Hetchins pre-1950s and virtually no exposure to Hobbs, it's understandable
>that most Americans can't see beyond Hetchins.
>
>However, from a historical, factually-based position (at least according to
>the info I have), it would seem undeniable that Hobbs should be given at least
>as much credit as Hetchins for introducing fancy lugs and possibly even more
>so. Also, there's no evidence (yet!) that Hobbs resorted to the "mass
>production" methods of Hetchins when it came to their lugs.
>
>Bruce
>Dundee
>Scotland
>
>--
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Classicrendezvous mailing list
>Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvous
------------------------------------------ MSN 8 with ------------------------------------------ e-mail virus protection service: ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Classicrendezvous mailing list
Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
http://www.bikelist.org/