While we're talking specifics, I'll chime in. Though not measured for
angles, my first Woodrup appears to be parallel 73 degrees, and has a 24"
c-t seat tube. Toe clip clearance was never a problem. It is a comfortable
Reynolds 531 frame, and seems to me to be one of my better climbers. I
originally thought the handling was as superb as possible, now I think it
may be just a hair on the stable side (sorry, but everything gets compared
to my 78 RS Tourer). The bike still isn't quite truly re-alligned from its
accident in '74, but I don't think the fork was affected. The bike was
gorgeous with long point lugs up front, chrome chainstays and fork with a
Cinelli style crown, and candy apple red paint. I've got an old fuzzy image
of it at:
http://image50.webshots.com/
After the accident and subsequent bad repair, I sold it and in my hurry to buy another Woodrup, I ended up with a 24-1/2" crit bike, in black with Chrome long point lugs, high bottom bracket half chrome fork w/ chrome fork crown, & chrome stays. Fastback style seat cluster with really beefy Reynolds tubes, very firm. I was told it had a 75 degree head tube, very little fork rake and the wheelbase was short!, just 38-1/4". It even felt tippy, but boy did it look good with those orange, dry weather silks. Steered like thought! You had to pay attention every second. That bike is history, got rid of it after too many close calls, no more crit bikes for me.
The first has some very fond memories. It'll probably keep those first parts on it when it does get it's fix up, I still have almost all of them.
Dan Artley in Parkton, Maryland
Artley'" <hydelake@verizon.net>; "'Classic Rendezvous'" <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Sent: Saturday, December 30, 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/
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.16.0/609 - Release Date: 12/29/2006