Re: [Classicrendezvous] Laing stays are an Affectation?

(Example: Framebuilders:Richard Moon)

Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:02:39 -0400
Subject: Re: [Classicrendezvous] Laing stays are an Affectation?
From: "Richard M. Sachs" <>

regarding all this hellenic, etc. stuff... my memory is foggy on some of this, but didn't most of the non-trad 'affectations' arise during those pre-war years when british racing was banned on the open roads, relegated to outlaw type time trials only at dusk and later? does anybody recall this story...riders rode only in black, no commercial marks on uniforms...OR on frames. if i'm half on here, the explanation i'm reaching for is that all the 'unusual' frames designs we associate with this thread were born out of a framebuilders yearning to have an identifiable look, whether there were transfers or not, or whether the sun was out or not. i can't seeing any engineering gains in any of this stuff. only decorative. regarding the hellenic stuff, after the stay is joined someplace on/near the seat tube, i can't figure out how it's additional length, that part that travels to the top tube, adds, or does anything at all. i'm not an engineer. and i'm not old enough to have lived through those pre-war years.
any thoughts?