Re: [CR]Re: 80 Years of Evolution

(Example: Framebuilding:Paint)

Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 08:01:57 -0800
From: "Skip Echert" <>
Subject: Re: [CR]Re: 80 Years of Evolution
Cc: "Colin McFerran" <>
In-Reply-To: <001301c183a5$18ab3340$6ef88ec6@cmcferran>

Hello Colin -

Interesting topic! I think you will find that by going back a few more years, to about 1890, the topic becomes more complex. During the late 1800s the improving the bicycle was a subject of MUCH development, by some of the best and the brightest of the day. Patent activity was extensive. Racing bicycles weighing in at 12 lbs were made (but probably not stiff by today's standards). Many of the advances in frame shape and material we think of as "modern" were actually tried during this early period.

If you start in 1920, you will see "advances" that were actually recycled (pardon the pun) from this earlier period. The improvements (decreases in weight, increases in stiffness) from 1920 will be slow and more linear for two reasons. 1. much of what would work and not work had been sorted out earlier, and 2. the hot topic, the one that got the major engineering emphasis, was cars.

I second Dave Patrick's suggestion of "Bicycling Science" and am happy to learn it is still in print. My copy (if I could find it) must be 25 years old.

Have fun with your project!


Skip Echert Renton, WA (biking indoors today - rain, rain, rain)

At 11:08 PM 12/12/01, you wrote:
>This is my first post on the list and I am new to the 'Classic' scene.
>I am interested in finding out about how the diamond frame has evolved in
>the period covered by the list. In particular, how frame geometry has
>changed and frame weight decreased. The significant milestones and the
>people involved. I realise that this is too big a topic to address on the
>but am hoping that some of you can suggest some reading material or other
>places on the net.
>Thank you
>Colin McFerran
>ooking forward to