Good point! Time for a new theory, if only I had one...
Neil Foddering Weymouth, Dorset, England
>From: John Thompson <JohnThompson@new.rr.com>
>Reply-To: john@os2.dhs.org
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: Re: [CR]Rearward opening rear "Drop-out".
>Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:35:23 -0500
>
>neil foddering wrote:
>
> > OK, here goes with my theory:
> >
> > On a bike designed for ultra-close rear wheel clearance, it makes sense
> > to have a rear-facing dropout - the wheel just has to be fitted in to
> > the dropout slots, and moved forward as far as it will go. No need to
> > fiddle about, making sure that the wheel is correctly aligned, as you
> > would with a forward-facing dropout, and with the wheel spindle braced
> > against the end of the track dropout, extra insurance against it pulling
> > over. With a forward facing dropout, some allowance has to be made to
> > move the wheel forward in order to release it from the frame, so closer
> > clearance can be achieved with a track dropout.
>
>There's only one problem with this theory: On a fixed gear bike, the
>position of the axle in the slot depends greatly on the gearing chosen
>and the chain length needed to accommodate that gear. Unless the frame
>was specifically designed and carefully constructed to use a single,
>specific gear ratio and chain length that placed the axle in the
>forward-most position, chances are you'll seldom be able to achieve that
>ideal situation. Maybe a tandem-style elliptical BB shell could do it,
>but I don't see single-rider fixed gear frames being built that way.
>
>--
>
>-John Thompson (john@os2.dhs.org)
> Appleton WI USA