A fascinating aspect to this whole discussion of high and low BB height is that there hasn't been a single dimension mentioned as to what would be considered a high or low BB.
Hilarious...
Chuck Schmidt South Pasadena, CA
On Dec 31, 2006, at 6:41 AM, oroboyz@aol.com wrote:
> Hey Ken:
>
> I can't help but wonder about a couple of things you wrote here:
>
> << Mine (1980, pre-TSD) also has a high BB, the drop is about 6.4
> cm. Compares
>
> to about a cm more for my Trek and others. I think this
> contributes to the
>
> Woodrup's sense of stability. >>
>
>
>
> "In Theory" the lower the BB, the more stable and of course the
> opposite for
>
> higher BBs.
>
>
>
> In fact, if I remember correctly, that is one of Richard Sach's unique
>
> characteristics in his frames... He has used quite a bit lower bb
> height
>
> and while you may not be able to pedal through the curves quite as
> much,
>
> that is a well considered trade-off that results in a more secure
> control
>
> (stability)while cornering.
>
>
>
> I think that much of the sought after stability and steering
> accuracy is part
>
> of accurate frame alignment and dishined wheels... So many frames,
> of all quality
>
> levels, are not straight.. Just a 1/2 CM in misalignment can make a
> huge
>
> difference and we tend to blame other factors (frame angles,
> dimensions)
>
> when in fact, if the frame were carefully aligned, would make the
> bikes
>
> ride ever so much better....
>
>
>
> << My theory is that both of my frames are small frames, and
> subject to
>
> compromises inherent in minimizing toe overlap and gettign adequate
> front
>
> tire to downtube clearance, without extremely long top tubes. One
> design
>
> feature to address this is to raise the BB, and another is to lay
> back the
>
> head tube to perhaps 72 degrees. >>
>
>
>
> In my (limited) experience, the reason many builders/manufacturers
> make
>
> a higher BB in smaller frame is to solve the problem/save a lot of
> work
>
> in joinery at the compacted head tube /head lugs area...
>
> By raising the BB, that allows raising the upper head lug,
> allowing quick and unmodified use of the
> stock lugs. I.e., no cutting or fitting, etc. Another solution to
> this was a one-piece head lug
> that allowed the top tube & down tube to intersect...
>
> On road bikes of any size, I don't think
> the clearance of the down tube vs tire is much concern...
>
> 'Course I could be wrong. It is fun the theorize about all this
> mysterious stuff!
>
> Happy New Year!
>
> Dale
>
>
> Dale Brown
> Greensboro, NC USA
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: freesound@comcast.net
> To: jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net; hydelake@verizon.net;
> Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Sent: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 7:43 PM
> Subject: RE: [CR] WOODRUP frames
>
> Jerry,
>
> Mine (1980, pre-TSD) also has a high BB, the drop is about 6.4 cm.
> Compares
> to about a cm more for my Trek and others. I think this
> contributes to the
> Woodrup's sense of stability. The SOH on mine is 77.6 cm, seat
> tube is 53.5
> c-t, 52 cm c-c.
>
> My '84 or so Mondonico (sure looks on-topic, but I can't be sure!)
> has a BB
> drop of 7.2, 52 cm c-c seat tube, and 78.3 cm SOH. Both bikes seem
> to have
> high BBs, so I don't think national style is necessarily being
> illustrated
> here. My theory is that both of my frames are small frames, and
> subject to
> compromises inherent in minimizing toe overlap and gettign adequate
> front
> tire to downtube clearance, without extremely long top tubes. One
> design
> feature to address this is to raise the BB, and another is to lay
> back the
> head tube to perhaps 72 degrees. My Woodrup and Mondonico
> respectively have
> head tube angles of 72.0 degrees and 72.4 degrees (I have less
> confidence in
> this latter number).
>
> Both bikes are sort of a French fit for me.
>
> Ken Freeman
> Ann Arbor, MI USA
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org
> [mailto:classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org] On Behalf Of Jerome &
> Elizabeth Moos
> Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 11:56 AM
> To: Barb & Dan Artley; Classic Rendezvous
> Subject: RE: [CR] WOODRUP frames
>
> I have an early/mid 80's Woodrup. Nice bike, but does have a very
> high
> bottom bracket. Haven't measured the actual BB height, but the
> standover
> height is what I'd expect on a bike with a seat tube about 2 cm
> longer. No
> one else has mentioned this, but were high BB's typical of
> Woodrup? On the
> other hand I also have a 52 cm ctc 1988 Mercian KOM with a
> standover height
> about the same as a 55 cm French of Italian frame, so maybe the
> high BB's
> were a British thing in the 80's.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerry Moos
> Big Spring, TX
>
>
>
> Barb & Dan Artley <hydelake@verizon.net> wrote:
> I can't say how pleased I am hearing so much of Woodrup Cycles. A
> Woodrup
> was my first really nice race bike replacing what I considered more
> of a
> tourer, my PX-10 (Sorry Peter K.). It was unfortunately crashed, badly
> repaired and sold, but recently repurchased. I'm hoping that
> someday it will
> get the restoration it deserves for the fond memories of my only
> race season
> back in 1973. Thanks to all who've provided this information. Does
> anyone
> know if they are still building keepers of the flame in lugged
> steel? ...
> More?
>
> Dan Artley in Parkton, Maryland
>
> Archive-URL:
> http://search.bikelist.org/
> 10612.
> 1653.eml
> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 21:57:24 -0500
> Subject: RE: [CR] WOODRUP frames
> From: Doug Fattic
>
> The subject of Woodrup frames reminds me of my own experiences
> visiting
> their framebuilding shop when I was learning to build at Ellis Briggs.
> I
> wanted to learn how to do a fluted seat stay top like what was on
> my Masi
> and Jack Briggs rang up Woodrup to see if one of them would be
> willing to
> show me how. What I vaguely remember Jack Briggs telling me was
> that somehow
> Jack's father helped Woodrup get started. The date around 1953 or 4
> sticks
> in my mind from our conversation about it. Leeds is about 15 miles
> to the
> east from the much smaller town of Shipley where Ellis Briggs is
> located.
> The good size city of Bradford is about 3 miles to the south.
> In
> other words, these places are one big megalopolis. 15 British miles
> is not
> 15 American miles. The roads are not laid out on a square because
> of the
> shape of the land and going to Leeds seemed like a big trip. It was
> lots of
> stop and go city driving on winding roads in my old Morris Minor. This
> generosity (to help others when it wasn't to his own advantage) was
> part of
> Jack's character too and something I've been deeply grateful for
> (since he
> did the same for me).
>
> I was a little shy going in the door and was glad Jack had asked
> permission
> for me. One of the sons (I don't remember which one) spent several
> hours of
> the afternoon showing me what to do. That day he was the only one
> there. I
> had some seat stays with me and he demonstrated how to miter the
> end and
> braze another piece of tubing in that place and then file off the
> excess. I
> looked around a bit and realized they did things a bit differently
> than
> Briggs. I also remember him suggesting to me that there wasn't much
> need now
> days (as in 1975) to pin frames together before brazing since
> hearth brazing
> was replaced with oxyacetylene brazing. As he explained, a spot
> isn't likely
> to break or move. All in all a valuable and pleasant afternoon. As
> a newbie,
> I was respectful of his advice and didn't try to argue how we did
> things a
> bit differently at Briggs. My impression was that Woodrup was a bit
> more
> production oriented - meaning that they concentrated on getting a
> certain
> number of frames made in a decent way in a week.
> It
> was the primary thing that brought in money for them. The frame
> shop at
> Briggs when I was there was a bit more of an extension of the bigger
> business. There was the regular retail sales on the ground floor with
> several sales people. There were the regular Raleigh and other
> bikes and
> another area had pro stuff. In the back was the repair shop with 2
> workers.
> Upstairs in one room was Bill and Rodney the painters and in
> another, Andrew
> mostly made the frames one at a time to a particular person. The
> result of
> not having framebuilding be the center of the business was that it
> allowed a
> bit more individual attention to be paid to each frame being made.
> Jack
> never pressured Andrew to be more productive, he just wanted him to
> make
> them right. Jack himself also helped out in there but mostly he and
> his wife
> kept an eye on the entire business. When he was in the frame shop,
> it was
> primarily to teach me and share his considerable knowledge or finalize
> instructions about another frame for Andrew to build. Those
> circumstances
> really were a benefit to me which I have always deeply appreciated.
> Another
> advantage was the ability to wander into the paint room next door and
> observe all the steps in painting. Bill and Rodney always enjoyed
> company
> and Andrew and I also ate our lunch in there.
>
> There are lots more memories of that time but not more time to
> write about
> them now. About the other framebuilders in West Yorkshire and the area
> itself.
>
> Doug Fattic
> Niles, Michigan USA
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> __
> Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
> security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
> across the web, free AOL Mail and more.