[CR]Forgery discussion

(Example: Racing)

From: "Jim McCoin" <j.mccoin@attbi.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <CATFOODG8mdt4iEo5kS00000501@catfood.nt.phred.org>
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 14:05:08 -0700
Subject: [CR]Forgery discussion

If Campy goes after some one who reproduces a part that has not been produced in thirty years can I sue them for injuries when my twenty seven year old crank broke and dropped me on my head . How many attorneys are in the audience? Jim "how far will it go" McCoin Fremont Ca.


----- Original Message -----
From: classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 12:04 PM
Subject: Classicrendezvous digest, Vol 1 #1222 - 23 msgs



> Send Classicrendezvous mailing list submissions to
> classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvous
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Classicrendezvous digest..."
>
>
> CR
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: eBay item/campag item (Fred Rafael Rednor)
> 2. Re: Campy Repro Hoods/ Forgeries/ Reproductions... (Fred Rafael Rednor)
> 3. Forgeries and Masis (CBKNYC@aol.com)
> 4. Legal issues for repro logos (long) (CBKNYC@aol.com)
> 5. This Forgery discussion is silly (Wornoutguy@aol.com)
> 6. Re: forgeries (WTrikerider@cs.com)
> 7. Re: eBay item/campag item (NortonMarg@aol.com)
> 8. Now:Sexual Orientation Was:eBay item/campag item (Chuck Schmidt)
> 9. Re: Now:Sexual Orientation Was:eBay item/campag item (swampmtn)
> 10. ebay item - mafac "racer" brakeset (ben kamen)
> 11. Re: eBay item/campag item (swampmtn)
> 12. TA 3-pin chainrings?? (Neill Currie)
> 13. very sorry - re: mafac (ben kamen)
> 14. Re: eBay item/campag item (Fred Rafael Rednor)
> 15. (no subject) (Harvey M. Sachs)
> 16. Re: TA 3-pin chainrings?? (Sheldon Brown)
> 17. "open G" lever pic (swampmtn)
> 18. Re: TA 3-pin chainrings?? (Wdgadd@aol.com)
> 19. Re: eBay item/campag item (David Goerndt)
> 20. Re: Protecting new paint jobs (M4Campy@aol.com)
> 21. open<G> lever auction question (Richard M Sachs)
> 22. WTB: 26.6 post with setback (Douglas R. Brooks)
> 23. Re: Now:Sexual Orientation Was:eBay item/campag item (TGMetals98@aol.com)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 20:20:53 -0800 (PST)
> From: Fred Rafael Rednor <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: fred_rednor@yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: [CR]eBay item/campag item
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> > http://ebay.com/<blah>
> > >
> >
> > ...Seems like a decent guy to deal with...
>
> Maybe so but he ought to be more careful about the dates
> he attributes to the parts he's selling. Those shifters
> are most likely from the 60's, perhaps even as late as
> 1968 or 1969.
> Regards,
> Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 20:38:10 -0800 (PST)
> From: Fred Rafael Rednor <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: fred_rednor@yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: [CR]Campy Repro Hoods/ Forgeries/ Reproductions...
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> > Campagnolo should nip this in the bud and either
> > make replacement parts themselves or license someone
> > else to.
> Why are people having such a problem with these reproductions?
> This is no different than all the people who currently supply
> reproduction parts for classic car restorations.
> In fact, if you do some research on restoring classic balloon
> tire bicycles, you'll find that this situation already exists
> in the cycling world. As long as the reproductions are
> presented
> as such, everyone is happy to have the parts available.
> The seller is not portraying these as anything other than
> reproduction/replacements for pieces that easily deteriorate
> over the years and which are not going to be reproduced by
> Campagnolo anytime soon, if ever.
> The real danger here, is that honest people with the ability
> to make reproductions will be dissuaded from doing so.
> Best regards,
> Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> From: CBKNYC@aol.com
> Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 23:52:54 EST
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]Forgeries and Masis
>
> --- In fact, many people would say that the only true Masis are the ones
> Alberto
> --- is making now, and that any made in the US (and now Taiwan) are the
> --- "reproductions" and/or "forgeries".
>
> Why, because Alberto is the son? Maybe his are forgeries too of those of
> Faliero?
>
> My understanding is the owner of the "Masi" mark authorized Alberto to
> continue using the Masi name in Italy, and someone else to use the Masi name
> in the U.S.
> That makes them both "genuine".
>
> But I agree this is an instance when proper use a trademark is confusing.
> Unlike a fungible product (Duracell batteries made in Mexico and Duracell
> batteries made in France) we assume that Alberto's and Calfornia Masis may
> both be great (or not) but they are different. What avoids confusion is only
> the California ones are properly sold here. I think the Albertos that get to
> the US are called "Milanos" not "Masis".
>
> - Charles
>
> =====================
> Charles B. Kramer
> NY, NY, ordinarily, but tonight in South Bound Brook, NJ
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> From: CBKNYC@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 00:18:05 EST
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]Legal issues for repro logos (long)
>
> -- list members imply that making repro parts is dishonest in some way, when
> I
> -- do not believe this is the case with the facts at hand. '
>
> If a part contains the word "Campagnolo" or "Raleigh" or whatever, and does
> NOT:
>
> -- come from the source that historically was identified by those words or
>
> -- come from a source authorized by the historic source; or
>
> -- contain any explanatory note ("unauthorized reproduction of")
>
> then the words are potentially deceptive as to source. Right? I'm not
> talking law yet, just how a potential customer now or 10 years from now may
> perceive the word "Raleigh".
>
> -- The legal question that needs to answered
> -- about the Campy hoods is not how they are made nor what they are made of,
> -- but solely whether the Campy old-style logo displayed on the hoods is
> -- protected by current registration with the federal trademark and patents
> -- office.
>
> Incorrect. You really ought to speak with an intellectual property lawyer.
>
> In the U.S. at least, trademark rights are created by USE in commerce. A
> trademark can be registered on a state or federal basis (or both), but
> trademark can exist before registration, without a registration, and after a
> registration lapses for non-renewal. In the U.S. a prior USER even has
> superior rights over a registrant -- and (assuming the use by both companies
> would be likely to cause confusion) a prior user can cause the registration
> by a later user to be canceled.
>
> Campagnolo, and anything confusingly similar ("Campy") is, of course, still a
> very active trademark. No one other than the real source (or someone
> licensed by the source) can use such words on bicycle parts without causing
> confusion about the real source. It doesn't matter that a particular Campy
> product is not made anymore.
>
> An interestingly different situation exists with companies that no longer
> exist. Consider making parts labeled "Pops Brennan" (a extinct line of -- I
> think -- track bikes from Newark, NJ). There is no Pops around anymore t o
> complain about such use, and few left who might believe there is a connection
> between the current user of that name and any prior user. But while there
> might not be trademark infringement in such a case, there could still
> deception -- and isn't deception the purpose? I haven't researched this, but
> my guess is some species of false advertising or unfair competition could be
> involved.
>
> -- Raleigh USA has been bought/sold/franchised by several holding companies
> -- since these decals were produced over 25 years ago, and Raleigh's
> originals
> -- decal designs were destroyed over 20 years ago. My subsequent attempts
> for
> -- 25 years to obtain these decals were met with Raleigh Customer Support in
> -- the USA and England claiming "we don't have and have never seen those"
> -- responses. Like the guy reproducing the Campy hoods, I have stepped up to
> -- the plate and now offer factory duplicate parts (decals) that the OEM
> -- manufacturer ignores and chooses not to reproduce for whatever reasons.
>
> To the extent anyone sees the decals and believes they are genuine, the
> decals do a disservice. "Genuine" doens't mean "looks good", it means from
> the source or authorized by the source. The fact the real source doesn't
> feel like authorizing them doesn't given anyone else the right to make copies
> -- part of owning a trademark or copyright (etc.) is the right NOT to use it.
>
> -- Regarding legal technicalities, I am legally protected by the federal
> -- trademark facts that Raleigh never renewed its US trademark name or logo
> for
> -- its brands in the USA that I reproduce
>
> Incorrect. See above. Registration is not the key. The "likelihood of
> confusion as to source" is the key. Dilution, unfair competition, unfair
> advertising and other things could be involved.
>
> -- Therefore my decal renderings are protected by legal "freedom of speech"
> as artistic
> -- interpretations and exact reproductions of originals where Raleigh
> -- International abandoned its trademark rights long ago.
>
> PUHleeze! what are you claiming to "express"? There is no "freedom" to
> deceive. Now possibly YOUR products don't deceive -- I haven't seen them,
> and by this post I mean to express general legal principles, not to give an
> opinion on anyone's operation or products. But IF a product is likely to
> cause confusion as to its source (now or 10 years from now) I find "freedom
> of speech" a lousy defense.
>
> The bike biz is really odd on the subject of decals. My "Masi" has "genuine"
> decals of Alberto Masi -- but they were put on by a company that did a
> restoration in the US, and I wonder if it was authorized by Alberto to use
> them. The bike is terrific and beautiful, and the *restoration company's*
> logo is also on the bike -- which is a way is a certificate of
> UNauthenticity, which maybe makes use of the logos okay.
>
> - Charles
>
> ====================
> Charles B. Kramer New York, NY
> cbknyc@aol.com
> John Marshall J.D. and Law Review 1981
> McGeorge International Program 1982
> New York University Masters (LL.M.) Intellectual Property Law 1984
> Lord, Day & Lord 1984-1987 (associate)
> Bloodtype: unknown, but thick
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> From: Wornoutguy@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 00:38:42 EST
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]This Forgery discussion is silly
>
> If there was money in those hoods Campagnolo would make them. No one could
> ever get rich making obsolete parts for our old worn out bikes. Get real
> and think about it - only a few nutcases like myself and others would pay
> anything at all for old parts it is not like making reproduction Rolex
> watches they are brake hoods.
>
> Sam DiBartolomeo Riverside CA
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> From: WTrikerider@cs.com
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 03:42:18 EDT
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]Re: forgeries
>
> Fred Rednor and Sam Bartelolmeo have it right. I've tried to make the
> comparison between classic car restoration and vintage bike restoration
> before. If one is to restore a vintage bike, it is (for all practical
> purposes) necessary at times to use reproduction parts. A restored bike does
> not have the same paint, decals or tires, for example. The original
> manufacturer no longer makes those items. Copies of or products similar to
> the original must be used to restore the bike or the car. If reproductions
> are not allowed then restoration in many cases becomes impossible. So buy
> the copy and enjoy the bike.
> Campagnolo could possibly bring suit out of simple orneriness but what
> is the point? They don't make the parts and don't intend to.
>
> Paul Patzkowsky Longmont, Colorado
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> From: NortonMarg@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 04:23:41 EDT
> Subject: Re: [CR]eBay item/campag item
> To: LouDeeter@aol.com, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> In a message dated 4/6/02 2:54:28 PM Pacific Standard Time, LouDeeter@aol.com
> writes:
>
> << And check out his other auctions. I just bought a non-vintage frame from
> this guy in Germany. He is also the guy who was offering the early 70s Masi
> with the recessed brakes and braze-ons. Seems like a decent guy to deal
> with, at least by his emails >>
> I heard from Matteo in Italy that cyclo24 is a she. In an earlier email
> exchange that I had with cyclo, it was pretty obvious that he/she didn't
> understand the difference between a tubular and a clincher. I agree she seems
> quite nice and frequently has really great stuff.
> Stevan Thomas
> Alameda, CA
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 02:07:34 -0800
> From: Chuck Schmidt <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>
> Reply-To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]Now:Sexual Orientation Was:eBay item/campag item
>
> Stevan Thomas wrote:
> >
> > I heard from Matteo in Italy that cyclo24 is a she. In an earlier email
> > exchange that I had with cyclo, it was pretty obvious that he/she didn't
> > understand the difference between a tubular and a clincher.
>
>
> Carsten Rehbein is a woman? Huh?!?!?
>
> German is his first language and English is probably his second or third.
>
> Chuck "'merican is my only language" Schmidt
> South Pasadena, Southern California
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> From: "swampmtn" <swampmtn@siscom.net>
> To: "Chuck Schmidt" <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>,
> <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Re: [CR]Now:Sexual Orientation Was:eBay item/campag item
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 08:57:37 -0400
>
> Carsten frequently uses his wife's email account, Tanja Rehbein. That's why
> people sometimes think it's a woman writing.
>
> Alexandra Ross
> Monroe, Ohio
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Chuck Schmidt <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 6:07 AM
> Subject: [CR]Now:Sexual Orientation Was:eBay item/campag item
>
>
> > Stevan Thomas wrote:
> > >
> > > I heard from Matteo in Italy that cyclo24 is a she. In an earlier email
> > > exchange that I had with cyclo, it was pretty obvious that he/she didn't
> > > understand the difference between a tubular and a clincher.
> >
> >
> > Carsten Rehbein is a woman? Huh?!?!?
> >
> > German is his first language and English is probably his second or third.
> >
> > Chuck "'merican is my only language" Schmidt
> > South Pasadena, Southern California
> > _______________________________________________
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 09:11:52 -0400
> From: ben kamen <ko_te_jebe@mac.com>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: [CR]ebay item - mafac "racer" brakeset
>
> hello,
>
> i have listed a mafac racer brakeset on ebay. it is complete and is new in
> box. the auction ends in 5 days and has no reserve.
>
> i will also be listing other french goodies so check if anything by mafac,
> simplex, stronglight and normandy-maillard interest you keep an eye on my
> auctions. all are new in box as well.
>
> thankyou for looking
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 11
> From: "swampmtn" <swampmtn@siscom.net>
> To: <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Re: [CR]eBay item/campag item
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 09:26:01 -0400
>
> I have two all-original bikes, a 1961 Olmo and a 1962 Atala, both with
> Campagnolo shift levers. The 1961 Olmo has "open G and open C" levers,
> while the 1962 Atala has "closed G and closed C". The change must have been
> made by 1962, or a bit earlier if Olmo was using-up stock.
>
> Aldo Ross
> "close fridge and open beer"
> Monroe, Ohio
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Fred Rafael Rednor <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 12:20 AM
> Subject: Re: [CR]eBay item/campag item
>
>
> > > http://ebay.com/<blah>
> > > >
> > >
> > > ...Seems like a decent guy to deal with...
> >
> > Maybe so but he ought to be more careful about the dates
> > he attributes to the parts he's selling. Those shifters
> > are most likely from the 60's, perhaps even as late as
> > 1968 or 1969.
> > Regards,
> > Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 06:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Neill Currie <neill1234@yahoo.com>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]TA 3-pin chainrings??
>
> Hi
> I recently obtained a pair of TA Aluminum 3-pin
> cotterless arms, in new condition. A web search
> tracked down some 45 and 51 tooth NOS rings for
> them, so they are rideable now.
> Does anyone have a ring or two extra that'll fit?
> I believe the smallest ring that will fit is a
> 36, and I would also love something in the 39 to
> 42 range.
>
> =====
> The Bicyclist formerly known as Neill Currie, Portland, Me 04102, USA.
> The Mountain Goat website is at:
> http://www.geocities.com/neill1234/index.html?1011568933040
> Mountain Goat Frameset or complete bike still wanted, 20 to 21.5 inches c to t, other goatish stuff also wanted.
> Mountain Goat Mailing list is at:
> http://www.topica.com/lists/mountain.goat
> I have repro Mountain Goat decal sets for sale.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 09:40:57 -0400
> From: ben kamen <ko_te_jebe@mac.com>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: [CR]very sorry - re: mafac
>
> hi,
>
> i had mistakenly forgot to add the link to the auction.
>
>
>
> http://ebay.com/<blah>
> torial=0&ed=1018578516&indexURL=0&rd=1
>
> ben kamen - new york city
>
>
> ciao, ben
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 08:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Fred Rafael Rednor <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: fred_rednor@yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: [CR]eBay item/campag item
> To: swampmtn <swampmtn@siscom.net>, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> > I have two all-original bikes, a 1961 Olmo and a 1962
> > Atala, both with Campagnolo shift levers. The 1961 Olmo
> > has "open G and open C" levers, while the 1962 Atala has
> > "closed G and closed C". The change must have been made
> > by 1962, or a bit earlier if Olmo was using-up stock.
> Aldo,
> Thanks for that information. It seems that dating Campi
> parts is always a challenge and even I (gasp!) make mistakes
> from time to time. But back to the levers in this auction...
> You might be amused if you closely examine the photos. (I
> suggest clicking on the "Click Here For Supersize" option.)
> The front and rear lever handles do not match! The lever for
> the front is of the "closed C/G" type but the lever for the
> rear is of the older style. You can also see that there are
> differences in shape between the two levers. Actually, there
> are a couple of other differences that you will notice if you
> spend more time than is healthy examining the photo.
> So my suspicion is that this piece comprises a '60s era set
> for which the rear shifter has been replaced with an older
> lever. Now I'm not accusing the seller of deliberate fraud
> and it could be the other way around - i.e. an older set with
> the front shifter being a replacement.
> But it's clearly not as described...
> Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 10:05:20 -0100
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> From: "Harvey M. Sachs" <sachs@erols.com>
> Subject: [CR](no subject)
>
> Richard (no relation) Sachs wrote:
>
> From: Richard M Sachs <richardsachs@juno.com>
> Subject: [CR]eBay item/campag item
> i thought i knew it all...
> it's an "open g" shift lever set, rare, and from
> the early 50s.
> is this a reproduction? a forgery?
> definitely the stuff timelines are made for.
> e-RICHIE...
> who will 'try' reproducing in the a.m.!!
>
> http://ebay.com/<blah>
> -- __--__--
>
> I'd like to see the edge-on view. The early Campy lever sets I've owned
> all had very thin "necks" just above the spool that winds the cable. so
> thin that generally the used ones are bent there, like an elbow. Not
> discernable in this picture.
>
> harvey "too cynical?" sachs
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 11:06:26 -0400
> To: Neill Currie <neill1234@yahoo.com>,
> classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> From: Sheldon Brown <CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR]TA 3-pin chainrings??
>
> Neill Currie wrote:
> >Hi
> >I recently obtained a pair of TA Aluminum 3-pin
> >cotterless arms, in new condition. A web search
> >tracked down some 45 and 51 tooth NOS rings for
> >them, so they are rideable now.
> >Does anyone have a ring or two extra that'll fit?
> >I believe the smallest ring that will fit is a
> >36, and I would also love something in the 39 to
> >42 range.
>
> I believe I can still get these new. Probably $30-40 each.
>
> Sheldon "TA Professionnel" Brown
> +-------------------------------------------+
> | Ah, but I was so much older then, |
> | I'm younger than that now. |
> | -Bob Dylan |
> +-------------------------------------------+
> Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
> Phone 617-244-9772, 617-244-1040, FAX 617-244-1041
> http://harriscyclery.com
> Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
> http://captainbike.com
> Useful articles about bicycles and cycling
> http://sheldonbrown.com
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 17
> From: "swampmtn" <swampmtn@siscom.net>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>,
> "Harvey M. Sachs" <sachs@erols.com>
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 11:39:22 -0400
> Subject: [CR]"open G" lever pic
>
> OK - I have a very good picture of "open G" levers on the Olmo. Please
> email if you'd like me to send it to you.
>
> Looking from the side, the lever is indeed thinner than the closed version
> on the 1962 Atala, the cable slot is narrower, and the lettering area on
> both (1961 Olmo and 1962 Atala) is closer to the cable hole than on later
> levers
>
> Does that mean I still need "open O" and "open P" to complete my collection?
> ;>)
>
> Aldo Ross
> Monroe, Ohio
> sunny and warming nicely for a ride on the ugly silver Legnano "Roma"
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 18
> From: Wdgadd@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 11:52:54 EDT
> Subject: Re: [CR]TA 3-pin chainrings??
> To: CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com, neill1234@yahoo.com,
> classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> At some point in the not too distant future, I'd like to use T.A. rings
> (or a single T.A. ring) on a pair of Campagnolo 3 pin cranks. Could anyone
> who has done this advise on what hardware works best? Thanks!
>
> Best Regards,
> Wes Gadd
> Unionville,CT
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 19
> From: "David Goerndt" <davidg@iag.net>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Re: [CR]eBay item/campag item
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 12:21:21 -0400
>
> : Re: [CR]eBay item/campag item
>
>
> > You might be amused if you closely examine the photos. (I
> > suggest clicking on the "Click Here For Supersize" option.)
> > The front and rear lever handles do not match! The lever for
> > the front is of the "closed C/G" type but the lever for the
> > rear is of the older style. You can also see that there are
> > differences in shape between the two levers. Actually, there
> > are a couple of other differences that you will notice if you
> > spend more time than is healthy examining the photo.
>
>
>
> I just took a look at the levers in question. First, the photo is out of
> focus, so you can't really discern much detail. I took the pic into
> Photoshop and did some contrast work to see if I could bring out any more
> detail. (Not much) I tried to see what the lettering look like and I noticed
> that both "C's" and "G's" look the same, closed. I took out two sets of
> shifters I have, one from a ' 63 Cinelli and the other a newer set. The
> older set has "closed" C's and G's and the word "Patent" is nearly the same
> size as "Campagnolo" and the depression around the text comes very close to
> the cable hole. On the newer set, the word "Patent" is much smaller than
> "Campagnolo" and the recessed area around the text ends much farther away
> from the holes as does the example on ebay. What this all means, I don't
> have a clue, just an observation.
>
> David Goerndt
> Orlando, FL
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 20
> From: M4Campy@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 13:32:07 EDT
> Subject: Re: [CR]Protecting new paint jobs
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> At the risk of beating this to death... What do people usually do about the
> munging of paint at the dropouts? Live with it? Sand it down some? Touch it
> up? Can you chrome
> dropout faces after a frame has been painted? Costly.?.
>
> Mike "Short ride after yard work yesterday, ouch my back" Wilkinson
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 21
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 13:37:03 -0400
> From: Richard M Sachs <richardsachs@juno.com>
> Subject: [CR]open<G> lever auction question
>
> as noted elsewhere, it does appear that these two
> levers differ from each other and that perhaps the
> entire assembly was concocted from parts.
> i noticed another phenomenon: the amount of
> little raised 'balls' around each lever's perimeter
> differ. one has 45 and the other has 46.
> can someone check this please.
> thanks!
> e-RICHIE
> ...i'd be racing if i could ride today
>
>
> link:
> http://ebay.com/<blah>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 22
> From: "Douglas R. Brooks" <dbrk@troi.cc.rochester.edu>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org (Classic Rendevous)
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 14:29:30 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: [CR]WTB: 26.6 post with setback
>
> Classicpals,
> I'm looking for a 26.6 seatpost, preferably French and/or with a touch
> of class, and with some darn setback. The Campy NR just doesn't let
> you get the saddle back enough, though I may buy another as a spare
> for the Singer.
>
> not a bad thing this fit I have but it could stand just a nudge
> of tweaking, thanks, please drop me a line if you have a such a thing,
> money or trade for cool stuff, either/mix is fine with me,
> cold as Flanders here today,
> Douglas Brooks
> Canandaigua, NY
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 23
> From: TGMetals98@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 14:55:23 EDT
> Subject: Re: [CR]Now:Sexual Orientation Was:eBay item/campag item
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> << Stevan Thomas wrote:
> > I heard from Matteo in Italy that cyclo24 is a she. In an earlier email
> > exchange that I had with cyclo, it was pretty obvious that he/she didn't
> > understand the difference between a tubular and a clincher.
>
> <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net writes:
> < Carsten Rehbein is a woman? Huh?!?!? >>
>
> Carsten is indeed a guy -- and a very nice one at that. Sometimes, his wife
> Orchideen helps with the e-mails. Carsten is very knowledgeable, and I would
> find it difficult to believe that he doesn't understand the difference
> between a tublular and a clincher. It is perhaps, as Chuck suggested, a
> language thing.
>
> Amanda Graham
> Copake NY
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________


>

>

> End of Classicrendezvous Digest