Well, I must like funk points, as i have a genuine Baines Whirlwind TT. Evidently refinished, the paint and decals are much too good to be original. Bought the frameset a few years ago, but haven't built it up. Maybe I'll move it to the head of the list.
Regards,
Jerry Moos
> From: Harvey Sachs <hmsachs@verizon.net>
\r?\n> Subject: Re: [CR] [Baines] Flying Gate
\r?\n> To: crumpy6204@aol.com, "Classic Rendezvous" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
\r?\n> Date: Monday, November 16, 2009, 8:15 PM
\r?\n> Well, John,
\r?\n> Let me assure you that I don't have one, and won't have
\r?\n> one. I'm not necessarily opposed to ornament (I do, for
\r?\n> example, have a Hetchins), but to me the Flying Gate is a
\r?\n> triumph of patient labor over common sense or sound
\r?\n> engineering. It "allows" one to make and finish seven more
\r?\n> brazed joints than a conventional design needs, and every
\r?\n> one of those takes time and costs money. If you just enlarge
\r?\n> the first picture, and lay a piece of paper parallel to the
\r?\n> stub seat tube, the flying gate design hasn't moved the seat
\r?\n> more than an inch forward of the normal position (the edge
\r?\n> of the paper as straight edge intersects the down tube just
\r?\n> barely forward of the BB). And using the same trick, there's
\r?\n> a couple of inches between where the front edge of the rear
\r?\n> tire would intersect the back of the extended seat tube if
\r?\n> it were extended.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> My guess is that this, like the "curly" stay Hetchins and
\r?\n> the "Cantiflex" with "diadrant" (?) recurved forks was an
\r?\n> effort to do almost anything to make your brand identifiable
\r?\n> in races where no brand markings were allowed. Or did the
\r?\n> makers actually believe their hype?
\r?\n>
\r?\n> BTW, one list member has an Andy Hamel with similar layout,
\r?\n> but fully lugless.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> But, it gets lots of Funk points, something I've always
\r?\n> cherished.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> harvey sachs, feeling downright curmudgeonly
\r?\n> mcLean va.
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> +++++++++++++++++++++++++
\r?\n> John Crump wrote:
\r?\n> Item#300364710017 Baines Flying gate. Looking at the photo
\r?\n> and having NEVER ridden one. What was gained by the design?
\r?\n> the fork rake on this older one would negate I would think
\r?\n> any advantage of the frame design.The point of the saddle
\r?\n> must be way behind the bottom bracket.with the long top tube
\r?\n> and sitting so far back.steering the bloody thing must have
\r?\n> been a chore. OR am I wrong as usual? lets hear from you CR
\r?\n> members who have one, Maybe Dave Moulton could comment on
\r?\n> this, I understand the reason for the design was to shorten
\r?\n> the wheelbase? would this be an advantage in climbing?
\r?\n> Cheers John Crump OldandstretchedoutenoughBrit, Parker. Co
\r?\n> USA