Don;
Same deal with the Universals on my '68 Masi Special. My theory is that rear wheel fenders needed more clearance for wheel removal due to the horizo ntal drops. Yeah, I know you really only need the clearance in front, but fende rs that are not equidistant from the tire all the way around look goofy to most
folks, so that means there's gonna be more clearance on top and in back too.
This was apparantly a pretty common thing... I've seen several NIB sets of Universal 61's and '68's on eBay that were mixed reach. Perhaps this was t he only way they were sold at certain times? If so, it might explain why some
bikes that were seldom fitted with fenders were still built with different reaches front and back.
Bob hovey Columbus, GA
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 10:25:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Gillies <gillies@cs.ubc.ca> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: [CR]Weinmann 610 on front, 750 on rear ?? Message-ID: <200605231725.KAA18450@cascade.cs.ubc.ca> Precedence: list Message: 12
Can someone explain to me why a vintage bike maker would use short reach (610) brakes on the front, and long-reach (750) brakes on the back? I am thinking mainly of Raleigh, of course, but I also think that Peugeot and maybe Motobecane and maybe others did the same thing. This might make sense if the maker shipped larger tires on the back, but I'm pretty sure that they never did this ...
Is the bike maker trying to allow a larger fender and tire on the rear, while providing good braking leverage on the front, where it matters ?? Is there another reason? This isn't done any more, as far as I am aware.
- Don Gillies
San Diego, CA