Re: [CR]Rear spacing on track/ path/ fixed gear cycles.

(Example: Racing:Beryl Burton)

From: "ternst" <ternst1@cox.net>
To: <Hughethornton@aol.com>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <cc9.fe2cb8c.33720af1@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]Rear spacing on track/ path/ fixed gear cycles.
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 12:01:00 -0700
reply-type=original

I was pondering that also. I wonder if it came about at the time as Hugh says the 5sp cluster an hubs started to get more modern with FB-Campy-Airlite came into high mode. Maybe the machining on hub shells,and standardising frame width for practical build reasons. I also think that about the same time, tieing and soldering was getting old hat somehat and the wider hub certainly gave more stability on the banked tracks. One could do much more changing around for those years where 120 was the standard. Then when the road got wider it changed again, but track was settled in and left as is except for some of the newer narrow gauge aero hubs were custom made for "slippery" bikes.
Ted Ernst
Palos Verdes Estates
CA USA


----- Original Message -----
From: Hughethornton@aol.com
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: [CR]Rear spacing on track/ path/ fixed gear cycles.



>
> In a message dated 08/05/2007 01:18:44 GMT Standard Time,
> fred_rednor@yahoo.com writes:
>
> Actually, the switch to 120mm strikes me as somewhat of a
> puzzle.
>
>
> It may not be the reason for switching to 120mm, but it was really handy
> for
> those of us who way back then had only one pair of racing "sprint" wheels
> with fixed-free rear hub -- they worked on the road bike with 5-speed
> block and
> on the track bike too, without having to mess around with spacers.
>
> Hugh Thornton
> Cheshire, England