Jerry Moos wrote:
>Having recently acquired three early 60's/ late 50's bikes (a Hetchins, an
>Epgrave and a Rixie), I'm having to educate myself on the equipment of the
>era. The Rixie is a complete touring bike, and I'm thinking of outfitting
>the other two, which are framesets, as Audax machines. On my two newly
>built Audax bikes, a new Bates and a Caygill, I'm using Campy Rally, Galli
>long cage (the only one I have ever seen), Simplex SLJ triple FD's and
>Cyclotourist triples. But I don't think any of this stuff is correct for
>the early 60's.
>
>It's been stated that the Cyclotourist arms weren't introduced until the
>late 60's, but the rings are older. Would a Stronglight 49D with
>Cyclotourist triple rings be correct for 1960? What about an RD? The Campy
>Rally is definitely too new and I think the Huret Duopar and long cage
>Jubilee don't go back that far either. What about the Huret Luxe?
Nope, too new.
>Will the Allvit handle a triple? What RD's were
>used for triples in 1960? What
>about FD's?
Rear derailers have nothing to do with the _number_ of chainrings, though the range of sizes does relate. Talk of "triple" rear derailers is '90s marketing-speak. Long cage rear derailers were formerly, and more correctly called either "wide range" or "touring" derailers.
You might find a look at http://www.sheldonbrown.org/
>I also note a lot of early 60's/ late 50's frames have a shifter brazeon on
>the right only. Some of these were probably time trial machines, but I
>think others were doubles that used a rod type FD like the Simplex
>Competition.
That's correct, or no front derailer at all.
>What range of teeth would these rod-type FD's handle? I've
>gotten the impression they couldn't handle a very wide double, let alone a
>triple.
Generally that's correct. I usually recall this type used with half-step rigs, typically 46-49. The Rochet linked above is the only bike I've ever seen using a rod-type front mech with a triple (also the only bike I've ever seen with 3 in front/4 in back.)
That had 48-44-38 chainrings, not a huge range by modern standards, with 14-16-18-20 in back.
My 1957 OTB came with one of these on a Rosa
48/30 double, a rather unusual touring setup.
This bike also came with an "alpine" type
freewheel: 14-16-19-26. I don't recall the rear
derailer it had when I bought it in the early
'70s. That was a semi-custom bike built up from
a frame by Charlie Hamburger.
>Does one have to remove the RH brazeon or add an LH brazeon to use
>a triple?
Nope. You can use a clamp on for the left. Indeed, in the early '70s French bikes used to commonly come with a right braze-on, and a special clamp-on for the left side, with a band that widened out and opened up to fit around the right braze-on.
When I was first getting into derailer bikes, around '59, most British derailer bikes came with the Benelux Mark 7 coil spring derailer. This model had the cage pivoted a bit above the middle, as with most modern derailers. There was also a "touring" version, the Mark 8, with the same basic mechanism, but a longer cage, which pivoted around the upper pulley.
I first saw Huréts and Simplices around 1960, and they quickly drove the Beneluces off the market.
Sheldon "Had A Mark 8 On My Elswick Tour Anglais" Brown
Newtonville, Massachusetts
+------------------------------------------+
| The generation of random numbers is |
| too important to be left to chance. |
| -- Robert R. Coveyou |
| Oak Ridge National Laboratory |
+------------------------------------------+
--
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 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