[CR]Re: ebay outing: claude butler track frame

(Example: Framebuilders:Alex Singer)

Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 18:12:18 -0800 (PST)
From: "Fred Rafael Rednor" <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
To: Classic Rendezvous Bike List <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
In-Reply-To: <852b38f0511061502n4c7860b5w19b6561d840c795c@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [CR]Re: ebay outing: claude butler track frame

Galen,
     I think there is still a bit of confusion about the term "path racer". If you search the archives I'm sure you'll find messages from Hilary Stone and/or Mick Butler and/or Bob Reid (and who knows who else) explaining that "path racer" is an obsolete British term for "track racing bicycle".
     If I recall the story correctly, there was such a thing as a "road-path" bicycle which was something you could race on either the track or road with a suitable change of rear wheels (and removal/re-installation) of the brakes.
     But the discussion of top tube lengths that are typicle of British bicycles - that's a different story... :-D
      Cheers,
      Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia (USA)


--- galen pewtherer wrote:


> http://ebay.com/<blah>
> ategoryZ22679QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>
> it's listed as a track frame, and the measurements seem to
> bear that
> out (st is 24.5" and tt is 22") but it's drilled for front
> and rear
> brakes.
>
> (i wondered initially if it was a path racer, but from other
> posts to
> the list i've gathered that path racers tend to have tt's
> that are
> longer than the st. i'd be interested in hearing any comments
> about
> the reason for that, if anyone cares to weigh in).
>
> from what little i know of british this was normal for the
> time, is
> that correct?
>
> usual disclaimers apply: no relation to seller, i was out of
> town that
> weekend, it must have been that other fellow who looks like
> me, etc.
>
> galen pewtherer
> san francisco, ca
> _______________________________________________
>

__________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com