Re: [CR] Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 87, Issue 18

(Example: Framebuilders:Alberto Masi)

In-Reply-To: <mailman.433.1267891681.544.classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References:
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 11:46:50 -0500
From: "Leslie Tierstein" <ltierstein@gmail.com>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org, devotion_finesse@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [CR] Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 87, Issue 18


According to my local (and knowledgeable) bike shop guy, it was pretty common practice. My Raleigh from the early 70's was configured exactly the same way. I have no idea why.

Leslie Tierstein Arlington VA


> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 08:05:42 -0500
> From: Matthew Bowne <devotion_finesse@hotmail.com>
> Subject: [CR] Short Reach Front, Long Reach Rear?
> To: CR List <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP57792EBBB59F3C5687F0E5F5370@phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed;
> delsp=yes
>
> Do my eyes deceive? Or is it really possible that this early 70's
> Colnago Super is built to accept a short reach front brake
> caliper...and a standard reach in the rear? Am I missin' something
> here? Or was this a common practice for builders of the era? If so, why?
>
> Matthew Bowne
> scratchin' my head in
> Breukelen, New Amsterdam
> (BKNYC)