Re: [CR]George Longstaff Farmes at NAHBS 2006

(Example: Framebuilders)

Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 16:09:37 -0500
From: "Phil Sieg" <triodelover@comcast.net>
To: Dan Kehew <dan.kehew@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]George Longstaff Farmes at NAHBS 2006
References: <00d301c6453c$e5d56680$71bffea9@CharlesNighbor> <000e01c64540$1aed9880$0100a8c0@nicd60e2c6b784> <8c14bd140603111257w64fe8347m697fafd48d32cd6d@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8c14bd140603111257w64fe8347m697fafd48d32cd6d@mail.gmail.com>
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

This begs a question about the trike frames Longstaff offers. Is there any inherent advantage to a two-wheel drive version that would cancel out the added complexity, expense and maintenance?

Dan Kehew wrote:
>And let's not forget Longstaff's ability and willingness to produce trike
>conversion kits, both braze-on and bolt-on. Although I didn't see this on
>their website, I spoke with the Longstaff crew about this at NAHBS (it's a
>strong possibility for an on-topic frameset now in hand, just for the fun o
>f
>it). They also had an example on hand.
>
>This ties in with one of the other groups of comments in the KOF strings
>lately: What about riders who are getting older? I was talking about the
>NAHBS weekend with my 60-something boss on Monday, a fellow who rides about
>10 mostly-paved miles once or twice a week. He really enjoys it, but he's
>facing the fact that a fall will cause more problems than ever before. He
>was delighted to find that he could convert the bike he enjoys now into a
>trike and not look like a dork riding a "shopper trike."
>
>Dan Kehew
>Davis, CA
>
>
>

Phil Sieg
Knoxville, Tennessee