Re: [Classicrendezvous] nervex professional question.


Example: Production Builders:Cinelli:Laser

Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 16:17:55 -0800
Subject: Re: [Classicrendezvous] nervex professional question.
From: "Dave Feldman" <feldmanbike@home.com>
To: Philcycles@aol.com, jac33@tron.arts.cornell.edu
CC: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org


Framebuilders on the list, is this true? I've got two Nervex Legere lug sets that came with shells, one is going to be an SPX tubed touring frame for a friend of mine. Are there real reasons that I should not use the shell? It's pretty stout looking, kind of roughly cast but there's plenty of metal where metal needs to be removed. I've also seen lots of high quality frames that have lasted many years with them. Is what Phil is saying for real?

Perplexed

David Feldman ----------
>From: Philcycles@aol.com
>To: jac33@tron.arts.cornell.edu
>Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: Re: [Classicrendezvous] nervex professional question.
>Date: Mon, Nov 13, 2000, 4:03 PM
>
>
>In a message dated 11/13/0 10:34:56 PM, jac33@tron.arts.cornell.edu writes:
>
>> I've also got a custom frame of my own and it
>>doesn't use this bottom bracket shell either; instead it has what looks
>>
>>to be a modified Henry James bb shell. Why don't builders use that
>>shell?
>The Nervex shell, while pretty, has the structural strength of paper mache. I
>built a frame with one many years ago and I'll never do that again. Very
>flexible.
>Phil Brown