I think this entirely misses the point with respect to how the term Constructeur was understood in France. I think some of these discussions confuse Constructeur and Manufacturer. They're not the same thing.
Please re-read Dirk Feeken's message from earlierthis morning for a good explanation:
http://search.bikelist.org/
Fred Rednor
Arlington, Virginia (USA)
> I was about to suggest the same thing, although I suspect few
> would call them a constructeur. Lambert's aren't
> particularly valuable, probably because some of the unique
> parts didn't turn out very well. The aluminum forks were
> known to break, the sleeve at the center of the bars
> sometimes worked loose, the Lambert copy of the Huret Svelto
> RD didn't shift as well as the original, and the non-tapered
> BB axle often allowed the cranks to aome loose. Still worth
> owning one, IMHO, just as an example of a bold is not very
> successful venture. Kind of like owning a well preserved
> Edsel, I guess
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerry Moos
> Big Spring, Tx
>
>
>
> "Silver, Mordecai" <MSilver@iso.com> wrote:
> Would a Lambert be considered a constructeur bicycle? It
> had
> proprietary pedals, handlebar, stem, brakes, cranks,
> derailleurs, hubs,
> and bottom bracket, so it does fit Jan Heine's definition
> that "a
> constructeur actually builds the entire bike, including
> proprietary
> components and others that are modified for the purpose."
>
> Are Lambert components worth anything today on eBay? Any
> Lambert
> collectors out there?
>
> Mordecai Silver
> NYC
____________________________________________________________________________________
Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/