[CR]re: why no dynohubs?

(Example: Framebuilding:Norris Lockley)

Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 08:29:42 -0700
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
From: "Jan Heine" <heine94@earthlink.net>
Subject: [CR]re: why no dynohubs?

>The front dynohub on my recently-acquired mid-1950s Raleigh Sports
>(thanks Matt!) has 90mm o.l.n. spacing.
>Don't know if they're all like that, or if there are wider axles
>available for them, but I imagine (i don't own one) that French
>randonneur bikes would have 100mm fork spacing.

Most French randonneur bikes until at least the early 1960s had 90 mm front dropout spacing. Tandems used 105 mm. Later, they used 100 mm (singles) and 110 mm (tandems).

I haven't used the older dynohubs, but I think they added significant resistance. The Schmidt and latest Shimano generator hubs really have been a big step forward in that respect.

Interestingly, already in the late 1940s, you see articles in Le Cycle predicting that generator hubs will power the lighting of the future. They hope to see them used widely within 5 years.

Well, it took another 50 years roughly...

I doubt it was nationalism that was the reason why Sturmey dynohubs weren't used - many French cyclotourists preferred English Brooks over French Ideale saddles, and English Reynolds over French Vitus tubes. -- Jan Heine Editor Bicycle Quarterly 140 Lakeside Ave #C Seattle WA 98122 http://www.bikequarterly.com