e-RICHIE writes:
>just for the %#(&^ ] of it i'll add:
>i've done a few repairs in my time and have been pleasantly
>surprised at the construction quality i've seen in the 20s/30s,
>etecetereterera frames built by the drysdales and pop brennans
>of the world. these were true track frames built for the original
>six-day era.
>many/most of these had plug-in dropouts.
>proper-issimo.
>e-RICHIE
>chester, ct
Good point. Y'know, I don't understand why socketed dropouts raise so many hackles. Some of them have a really nice look (Nagasawa's are some of the nicest IMO). Most folks whom I've heard complain about them seem indignant that a handmade frame would incorporate what they see as a labor-saving measure. But I've yet to hear anyone address their aesthetic qualities in an unbiased way, disregarding the effort (or lack thereof) involved in their use, but instead making a reasoned case for why they do or don't work visually. Personally, I think the best of them work well... When I look at a (lugged) frame, I see smooth cylindrical tubes inserted in the larger cylindrical openings of the lugs, the edges of which have been nicely contoured in some way. Isn't this exactly the same look you have with a socketed dropout? So if anything, one could argue that the sockets are visually more complimentary to a lugged frame (while the smoother contours of traditional dropouts are probably more complimentary to a fillet-brazed frame).
Bob Hovey
Columbus, GA