i'm not sure i follow you so let me rephrase a question: who did the kind of work you are refering to as being near-extinct? i'm asking it that way because you seem to be dismissing a few things that i thought were germaine to this topic: that builders (such as hetchins...) used available techniques to create their details in the most efficient manner. when "i" read about their methods i found the history completely refreshing. if "they" were not the model you're citing, who was? e-RICHIE chester, ct
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 03:12:10 GMT brianbaylis@juno.com writes:
Richie,
I don't see how that relates to my statement, exactly. I don't really
care how Hetchins went about producing their frames and making their
lugs, in that regard. Personally though, I would make a distinction
between a lug "out of the box", wheather investment or pressed steel, a
lug that was modified by reshaping the shoreline by adding or subtracting
parts, and wheather the parts are hand made or "mass produced" in some
way or another, and a custom designed one off completely handcut lug;
when comparing that part of the lugmaking process. My statement applies
to hand filing lugs, any type of lug, wheather stamped, IC, or with lugs
with partially streamlined ornimentation. Filing the lugs once they are
made and/or shaped and either thinning them before (i don't understand
this method) or after brazing to the frame is more of what I'm talking
about. I think most people are distracted from the surface of the lug by
the fancy profile of some of them. I look more at how the lug was filed
(or not) to determine how much effort the builder spent on the lugs. How
the seat lug is treated usually shows both style and effort, or lack of
it. Fancy (or simple) lugs can be cast, stamped, or cut by hand; but if
they are not filed and contoured "properly", they are not serving the
true purpose of a lug. The lug is there as a stress distribution collar;
that particular job is best done when the lug is filed to releave the
stress at the junction. Most people want to believe that filing lugs has
to do with aesthetics. It does look better and more refined, but the
original and main reason for filing lugs is from an engineering
standpoint. To most people the difference between a real expert file job
and a job where only minor filing and liberal use of 80 grit sandpaper is
involved, or even a Dyna-file, is frequently nearly undectable. There are
many different ways and styles to filing lugs. I will go into more detail
about this later. Even the factory carosel brazed frames of the mass
producers look pretty refined to most consumers. A clean braze and a
nice paint job, and that is all it takes for people to look at a lugged
steel frame in most cases and say things like "nice lugwork" and "that
bike is a work of art", etc. The total man hours spent on a typical such
bike is about 1 to 1 1/2 hours. In that case, neither file nor sandpaper
is used! The fact is, the expert file job is very nearly extinct. There
are two basic reasons, in my opinion. One, it is generally not
economiclly practical to put in the extra time and effort if most
consumers are not sensitive to the subtle differences. Two, largely on
account of IC lugs being so hard to file, the builders who really enjoy
the feel of the metal beneith their file and who truely feel that every
one of the thousands of file strokes is neccessary in order to satisfy
THEMSELVES as an artist, as opposed to a craftsman or a framebuilder, are
quite few. I favor pressed lugs because they do a great job of stress
distribition and they are actually "fun" to file; I find the time spent
quite enjoyable and I believe it is part of how I leave my "fingerprint"
on my work that the very sensitive and knowledgable find attractive and
valuable. They also understand completely that the effort and attention
permeates the framebuilding process from start to finish. Sounds corny
perhaps, but I will explain further during my soon to arrive narriative
on framebuilding, as requested by Don Ferris, I believe. There is in fact
a ZEN mindset to building frames, if one chooses to go that route. It
isn't any better or worse neccessarily, than any other choice in
framebuilding. All are valid, all of the frames have a purpose. Each
person does it for a different reason.
So my point is still, lug filing the "old way", which was once common
even in some of the largest factorys before the advent of the IC lug, is
now nearly a lost art. We as fledgling Amarican framebuilders built our
individuality and distinction based on these all but lost refinements in
framebuilding. It is what used to distinguish us from other parts of the
world so far as style and interpetation of the bicycle frame. Many have
lost the ability to see the fine points of a superbly crafted frame, or
have never made the distinctions I make when I look at frames. I believe
part of why we are here and have this common interest is because we
appreciate these charactistics, therefore it is neccessary to point them
out and learn to recognize and appreciate them. Why spend so much time on
things that few completely appreciate; things that apparently don't
actually effect the way the bike rides and handles(or do they?). The
answer goes FAR beyond the lugs. I will attempt to define the undefinable
in my next blurb.
Brian Baylis
La Mesa, CA
"framebuilders gravitating to "out of the box" use..."
brian just a little friendly debating is all i ax for... how do you juxtapose the above sentiment with the fact that (firms such as ) hetchins, long associated with championing the "lug cutter's art", did their best to mechanize the entire process vis-a-vis* bulk cutting and the like? that is - they weren't doing each and every fleur-de-lis with a 4" file. i'm using tom rawson's posts from last year as a basis for axing this question. search the archives for the entire story. e-RICHIE chester, ct * i just wanted to use "vis-a-vis" in a sentence