Re: [CR] Are Mixtes historically non sex specific?

(Example: Racing:Beryl Burton)

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:59:11 -0800
From: "verktyg" <verktyg@aol.com>
To: Tom Sanders <tom@orderandchaos.com>, <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <001201ca580b$69ddab60$3d990220$@com>
In-Reply-To: <001201ca580b$69ddab60$3d990220$@com>
Subject: Re: [CR] Are Mixtes historically non sex specific?


Back in the early 70s I heard that mixtes were developed for military (French army???)use because they had a strong frame design that could carry a lot of equipment plus 1 size fit most.

This may have been an early urban myth.

Chas. Colerich Oakland, CA USA

Tom Sanders wrote:
> Billy David remarked that "mixtes are unisex not female specific". I really
> perked up my ears at this. I had not heard this said before. I have
> wondered for years why more mildly physically handicapped folks are not
> riding these instead of recumbents.
>
> Is this idea of the non-sex nature of them historically true or is it just
> Billy's and my own opinion? It sure could open up new choices for folks
> who have trouble swing a leg up over the seat, etc. Are any of our American
> One Person Shops that I love so much building a high quality Mixte? Could
> there be a new market there? I even like the looks of some I have seen.
> Most seem kind of junky, but I have see a few that were really great! A
> couple of years ago a really exciting Paramount Mixte went through E-Bay for
> less than $500.in retrospect, I really wish I had made a move on it, but my
> ideas on them were just nascent at the time.
>
> I haven't owned one (and then it was my wife's) for 30 years. How do folks
> find they ride and handle relative to a conventional bike?

>

> Tom Sanders

>

> Lansing, MI USA