[CR]rarity of Stronglight 99 tandem cranks


Example: Framebuilders:Jack Taylor

From: "Jack Bissell" <jackbissell@hotmail.com>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org, trhetzel@earthlink.net
Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 12:52:30 -0700
Subject: [CR]rarity of Stronglight 99 tandem cranks

>From: classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org
>Reply-To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: Classicrendezvous digest, Vol 1 #1335 - 14 msgs
>Date: 19 May 2002 12:07:42 -0700
>
>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. South Korean bike on Ebay (LouDeeter@aol.com)
> 2. British and French Group update (brucerobbins@eurosport.com)
> 3. Re: South Korean bike on Ebay (Philcycles@aol.com)
> 4. RE: Re: Old & new (Mark Bulgier)
> 5. CR list rules on CR web site... (OROBOYZ@aol.com)
> 6. Re: Re: Old & new (Thomas R. Adams, Jr.)
> 7. Looking for Jeremy Haynes (Thomas R. Adams, Jr.)
> 8. Re: Old vs. new again (GPVB1@cs.com)
> 9. RE: rarity of Stronglight 99 tandem crankset (kim hetzel)
> 10. Re: Old vs. new again (Brandon Ives)
> 11. Re: Old vs. new again (Philcycles@aol.com)
> 12. British Frame Design (nickzz@mindspring.com)
> 13. Re: British and French Group update (Chuck Schmidt)
> 14. Re: Old vs. new again (Chuck Schmidt)
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 1
>From: LouDeeter@aol.com
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 09:48:03 EDT
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org, ABikie@aol.com
>Subject: [CR]South Korean bike on Ebay
>
>Not many South Korean Columbus tubed bikes. Small frame. At Cirque Larry
>Black bought a "mystery" frame that had the Columbus "dove" engraved on the
>fork crown. This one does too. As I recall the mystery frame also had
>Campagnolo dropouts. Lou Deeter, Orlando FL
>
>http://cgi.aol.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1829894599
>
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 2
>To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
>From: <brucerobbins@eurosport.com>
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 14:06:45 GMT
>Subject: [CR]British and French Group update
>
>We've had an encouraging response to the idea to set
>up a group for British and French bike fans.=20
>
>There are around 30 people keen to contribute to and
>benefit from a sharing of information and literature
>about British and French bikes.
>
>Bob Reid is now working on a website where as much
>stuff as possible will be made available for any
>interested parties.
>
>Although it was clear enough in my original post,
>it's maybe worth repeating for the hard of
>understanding that THIS IS NOT A BIKE LIST.=20
>
>Chuck, give that a moment to sink in and, if there's
>any part of it you still don't understand, let me
>know and I'll talk you through it ;-)
>
>I'll email everyone who expressed an interest in a
>day or two with more details on how the group might
>develop. Comments and suggestions (off list to Bob or
>me) would be most welcome.
>
>Thanks to all those who want to get involved.
>
>Cheers,
>Bruce
>
>Bruce Robbins
>Angus
>Scotland
>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>You too can have your own email address from Eurosport.
>http://www.eurosport.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 3
>From: Philcycles@aol.com
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 10:44:05 EDT
>Subject: Re: [CR]South Korean bike on Ebay
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
>
>In a message dated 5/19/02 5:56:32 AM, LouDeeter@aol.com writes:
>
><< Not many South Korean Columbus tubed bikes. Small frame. At Cirque
>Larry
>Black bought a "mystery" frame that had the Columbus "dove" engraved on the
>fork crown. This one does too. As I recall the mystery frame also had
>Campagnolo dropouts. Lou Deeter, Orlando FL >>
>
>You can buy complete forks from Columbus. Now carbon fiber, used to be
>steel.
>Phil Brown
>In drizzly NoHo. Ca
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 4
>From: Mark Bulgier <mark@bulgier.net>
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: RE: [CR]Re: Old & new
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 08:36:51 -0700
>
>
>Mark Poore
>
> > It never ceases to amaze me, particularly with bikes, what might seem
> > new and innovative had been thought of long ago.
>
>My favorite example of this (pardon me if I've mentioned it here before) is
>the aerodynamic disc wheels shown and described in "Bicycles and Tricycles"
>by Archibald Sharp, published in 1896. The purpose is explicitly stated as
>aerodynamics, and the front wheel is a sort of 4-spoke, or a disc with 4
>big
>holes in it, to reduce the effect on steering from cross-winds.
>
>Mark Bulgier
>Seattle, Wa
>USA
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 5
>From: OROBOYZ@aol.com
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 11:37:52 EDT
>To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: [CR]CR list rules on CR web site...
>
> I have published a link to the CR list rules right in the main page of
>the
>CR. Take a look and use them to remind yourself in a moment of doubt!!
>
>http://www.classicrendezvous.com/CR_list_rules.htm
>
>Thanks to all
>Dale
>
>Dale Brown
>Greensboro, North Carolina
><A HREF="http://www.classicrendezvous.com/main.htm">Classic Rendezvous</A>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 6
>From: "Thomas R. Adams, Jr." <KCTOMMY@msn.com>
>To: "Mark Poore" <rauler47@hotmail.com>,
> <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>,
> "Classic List" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
>Subject: Re: [CR]Re: Old & new
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 10:45:43 -0500
>
>Well, to muddy the waters a bit, a "better performing" bike part is a sli=
>ppery rascal of a concept. There are several types of riding: utility, c=
>ommuting, recreational and racing, to name a few. While the latest, inde=
>xing, superlight, disposable racing tech may give and edge in the peleton=
>, a lot of us don't race and if, by accident, we stumbled into a uphill b=
>unch sprint, we would be looking for the quickest way out. I would argue =
>that "old tech" is better in many ways for recreational riding.
>
>My two encounters with indexed shifting (a Miyata mountain bike and a Can=
>nondale) left me rather cold. I seemed to spend an inordinate amount of =
>time fussing with shifter cable set up to try to get the things to index =
>properly. Then, after a few hundred miles, it was time to do it again to=
> compensate for cable stretch. The Cannondale was a triple, and you coul=
>dn't trim the front derailer to eliminate chain rub on even moderate cros=
>sovers. More than once the shifter system would futz up in a ride, leavin=
>g me with marginal shifting performance until I could get home, break out=
> the tools and start tinkering again. (And yes, I know my troubles were p=
>robably due to my mechanical IQ being marginal, but even my marginal skil=
>ls can maintain friction shifters.) Now if I were a racer, I would be mo=
>re tolerant of the bother so I could nail that shift into the 118 inch ge=
>ar as I crank it up to 38 MPH and go for the line, because it might gain =
>me the fraction of an inch that would win. But in reality, I just want t=
>o be able to yawn my way out to the garage on Sunday morn, puff some air =
>into the tyres, make sure the mice haven't chewed through the brake cable=
>s and hit the road. I hadn't adjusted the derailer cables on the Marinno=
>ni for close to 14 years until I finally replaced the SR rear with a wide=
> range unit, and they still worked fine. To me, that's "better", more us=
>eful technology. And of course Lance doesn't mind the complexity and mai=
>ntenance, because the US Postal team mechanics will lovingly cosset and m=
>assage his machine before every important race. And even then, the new t=
>ech carries risk. Who was the US rider at the Sydney Olympics who lost b=
>ecause her replacement wheel wouldn't index?
>
>Likewise with superlight frames. As others have said, a bike used to be =
>a substantial investment, and it had to last. 30 years ago, how many rec=
>reational riders owned fleets of bikes? My experience was that most folk=
>s owned a "good" bike, and maybe a rain/commuter bike. If they saved up =
>to buy a fancy frame, they usually traded the componentry over from the "=
>good" bike and sold the frame. I would speculate that the "modern" classi=
>c rendezvous member, with half a garage full of vintage bikes, is a relat=
>ively recent phenomenon. Indeed, perhaps we live in the "golden age" of l=
>ugged steel bike collecting, with desirable fine frames going on eBay oft=
>en for under $100 dollars. It's their durability that lets them live lon=
>g enough for us to collect them.
>
>But modern superlight frames appear to have a definite limited life span.=
> How long will a 3.5 pound frame welded out of Pennsylvania 6500 aluminu=
>m (or whatever they're using now) last? It seems like bad Karma to buy a =
>finely made frame that I would have to junk if a few years. Tig welded s=
>teel bikes of course don't have that problem, but aren't they tougher to =
>repair? I've had a tube replaced on the PX 10 and a seatstay on a Intern=
>ational, and they're good as new. Until I meet that auto out there with m=
>y name on it, these bikes will be there for me. =20
>
>Everything else can be analyzed the same way. Ergo shifting with the bra=
>ke levers? Barcons, with new no-stretch housings, are equally accessible=
> and about as fast except from the hoods and tops. (If you're on the tops=
>, how hard is it to reach down and flick a barcon?) Dual pivot brakes? =
>Center pulls seem about as strong, and leave room for fenders. For the ri=
>ding I do, I feel the retro tech is "better" by eliminating unneeded comp=
>lication. If the racers use it, more power to em, but a technology that's=
> better for racing might be a retrograde step for me.
>
>Tom Adams, just finished a 20 miler on a 30 year old bike in Kansas City.=
> =20
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Mark Poore
>Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2002 8:51 AM
>To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net; classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: Re: [CR]Re: Old & new
> =20
>Thanks Chuck for old vs. new comparison of the Duquesne and Trek. It neve=
>r =20
>ceases to amaze me, particularly with bikes, what might seem new and =20
>innovative had been thought of long ago. Of course there are usually =20
>different materials used for the manufacturing for said piece or item.
>
>Someone here said, > The contrast between old bikes and modern ones is mo=
>re =20
>than just the
> >technological one; it's a fundamental difference in style and
> >purpose. Today's bicycles and components are designed around a
> >"coolness" standard, intended to appeal to guys in their mid-20s who are
> >unperturbed by big credit-card balances. Old bikes get their value from
> >true beauty, elegant design, and their lessons about our history and
>=C3=98 place in society.,
>
>now maybe I look at things a bit differently, or so I have been told on a=
> =20
>occasion or two in a bit different language, but many of the innovations
>=20
>that we see are race inspired and once proven in that arena they find the=
>ir =20
>way down the lineup, whether it be parts or frames. True, in some cases =20
>there is the coolness factor, but generally under that veil I believe you=
> =20
>will find a product that was designed to be a lighter, faster, more =20
>responsive and a better performing product. =20
>(snip)
>Mark, it is going into the 40=E2=80=99s today, Poore
>
>W VA
>
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 7
>From: "Thomas R. Adams, Jr." <KCTOMMY@msn.com>
>To: "Classic List" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 10:48:33 -0500
>Subject: [CR]Looking for Jeremy Haynes
>
>Hey Jeremy, the email address I have for you is expired. Could you drop =
>me a message off line? I need to ask you a question about that Paramount=
>.
>
>Tom Adams Kansas City
>
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 8
>From: GPVB1@cs.com
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 11:58:58 EDT
>Subject: Re: [CR] Old vs. new again
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
>Chuck:
>
>1) Tell me with a straight face that less than 90% of the bikes of any
>material sitting in my (or your) LBS are TIG'ed....
>
>2) Then tell me with a straight face that the new $3000 TIG'ed "wonder
>bike"
>that someone buys today is going to be worth more than $600 just a few
>short
>years down the road. Now there's lasting quality and value!!
>
>3) A decent high-school metal-shop student with a modicum of training and
>access to jigs can (and often does) TIG up a frame.
>
>4) I have nothing against progress per se (as an experienced Engineer, I
>admire the technology in many newer consumer goods - cars, cameras,
>'puters,
>etc.), but I think that planned obsolescence, progress just for progress'
>sake, and "the bicycle as fashion statement" all suck. There is a huge
>difference between a high-quality, carefully thought out and masterfully
>crafted piece of functional art, and something that was zapped together and
>powder-coated in half a day. Frames today are TIG'ed primarily because it's
>a
>fast and cheap way to build a frame.
>
>5) Classic fillet-brazed does not equal TIG-welded. No comparison IMHO.
>
>Pulling on two pair of Kevlar shorts now just to be extra safe....
>
>Cheers and classic lugged steel is (still!) real,
>
>Greg "retrogrouch" Parker
>A2 MI USA
>
>Where I have not one single index-shifting or clipless-pedal-equipped road
>or
>track bike in a rather large fleet*
>
>
>
>*OK, the tandem has Suntour Accushift indexing barcons, but it came to me
>used in that configuration!! I'm now considering retrofitting it to
>friction
>just to be even more retro-grouchy!!
>
>
>e-Chuck wrote:
>
>
> > Not equal in style and purpose? TIG'd whatevers? (Not everything is
> > TIG'd Greg.)
> >
> > Just different eras. The exact same thing only different ;) I can
> > remember when lugless construction was ultra cool. Style and purpose?
> > I can see it in current bikes, can't you? There is a comparison!
> >
> > Chuck Schmidt
> > SoPas, SoCal
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 9
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 09:00:43 -0700
>From: "kim hetzel" <trhetzel@earthlink.net>
>To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: [CR]RE: rarity of Stronglight 99 tandem crankset
>
>To all CR LIST members,
>I was told by a framebuilder, William Stevenson, in Olympia, Washington
>that
>the Stronglight 99 tandem crankset is quite rare a while back.
>I own a 1977 Gottfried French tandem; second owner, that has this crankset
>on it. How rare is it ? What would be the value on it in very good to
>excellent condition ?
>Any information and/or input would be most appreciated.
>Thank-you in advance,
>Smiles to all,
>Kim Hetzel
>Yelm, WA
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 10
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 09:46:20 -0700
>To: GPVB1@cs.com, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>From: Brandon Ives <monkeylad@mac.com>
>Subject: Re: [CR] Old vs. new again
>
>At 11:58 AM -0400 5/19/02, GPVB1@cs.com wrote:
> >Chuck:
>
>I'm not Chuck but I'll reply.
>
> >1) Tell me with a straight face that less than 90% of the bikes of any
> >material sitting in my (or your) LBS are TIG'ed....
>
>Mine does if you count bare frames. and it's a strictly high end road
>shop. If you're ever in Santa Barbara, California stop by Fastrack
>Bicycles and if it's in in the off-season you may even find Lance or
>some other pro riders chillin on the couch.
>
> >2) Then tell me with a straight face that the new $3000 TIG'ed "wonder
>bike"
> >that someone buys today is going to be worth more than $600 just a few
>short
> >years down the road. Now there's lasting quality and value!!
>
>Check Ebay any day and follow a few auctions and look at any of the
>3-5 year old bikes selling right now. The modern bikes have a little
>better price retention than 15-20 year old bikes , about 60%. Look
>at how much you can buy a $1800 '82 full Campagnolo SR bike and it's
>about 50%. Look at only production bikes so you don't muddy the
>debate.
>
> >3) A decent high-school metal-shop student with a modicum of training and
> >access to jigs can (and often does) TIG up a frame.
>
>This one really got me. I'll guess you've never TIG welded anything.
>I triple-dog dare you to try to join two pieces of .049" tubing by
>TIG without blowing huge holes in it. .049" is also about twice as
>thick as modern steels. I've got a couple hundred hours in with a
>TIG torch and I can join thin-walled tubing, but it sure doesn't look
>near as nice as the stuff coming from Taiwan.
>
> >5) Classic fillet-brazed does not equal TIG-welded. No comparison IMHO.
>
>How aren't they equal, they both join tubing to make something and
>that's all they're meant to do. TIG welding has been proven to be
>stronger and lighter than fillet. Fillet does look much better than
>TIG to my eyes, so at best they're equal.
>
>I have no problems with people thinking things are "better" because
>aesthetic reasons, that it 100% valid. If it is so though say so
>come up with facts. Also when you compare a Masi to a Cannondale
>it's an apples to oranges argument. If you want to compare a Masi do
>it to some other modern master custom framebuilder.
>
>I think the old adage "Don't knock it 'till you try it" fits so many
>of the arguments placed on this list it's almost scarry. I've owned
>or worked on all the modern wonder bikes but I keep coming back to
>classic steel. Why. . . because I like the way they look, period.
>Oh and the history involved too. Last year I updated a guys mid-70s
>Colnago with full 2001 Campagnolo Chorus, except for the Campy
>retro-friction DT shifters, NR seatpost, and well broken in Brooks
>saddle. It was really nice and the look was dynamite. I only got to
>ride it a couple of blocks but the shifting and braking was much more
>accurate, no more over or under shifting, and much stronger.
>
>enjoy,
>Brandon"monkey(more of a retro techno weenie)man"Ives
>Sunny SB, So.Cal
>--
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 11
>From: Philcycles@aol.com
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 12:54:25 EDT
>Subject: Re: [CR] Old vs. new again
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
>
>In a message dated 5/19/02 8:01:09 AM, GPVB1@cs.com writes:
>
>Lots snipped.
>
><< "the bicycle as fashion statement" all suck. >>
>
>This just in, those classic lugged bikes that we love are fashion
>statements
>too. At least mine are. It's just a fashion that we like.
>Phil Brown
>Putting on my Nomex shorts and jersey in NoHo, Ca
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 12
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 13:14:45 -0400
>From: <nickzz@mindspring.com>
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Reply-To: nickzz@mindspring.com
>Subject: [CR]British Frame Design
>
>Any one out there who can explain the reason many
>British made frames are so ornate?I am referring to the highly cutout lug
>details seen on many top
>quality British makes.To me it seems rather out of character with the
>British mode of design & more what I expect from French makers.
>Not being critical at all.Just curious as to the reasons.Opinions of the
>list encouraged.
>Nick Zatezalo
>Atlanta,Ga
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 13
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 10:33:45 -0700
>From: Chuck Schmidt <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: Re: [CR]British and French Group update
>
>Bruce Robbins wrote:
> >
>(cut)
> > Although it was clear enough in my original post,
> > it's maybe worth repeating for the hard of
> > understanding that THIS IS NOT A BIKE LIST.
> >
> > Chuck, give that a moment to sink in and, if there's
> > any part of it you still don't understand, let me
> > know and I'll talk you through it ;-)
>
>
>Bruce, I thought the same thing was perfectly clear in
>my "original" post too. Maybe you missed the "funny part"?
>\u053f\u052c
>
>Chuck Schmidt
>SoPas, SoCal
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 14
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 10:56:42 -0700
>From: Chuck Schmidt <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: Re: [CR] Old vs. new again
>
>Greg Parker wrote:
>
> > (cut)There is a huge
> > difference between a high-quality, carefully thought out and masterfully
> > crafted piece of functional art, and something that was zapped together
>and
> > powder-coated in half a day.
>
>We are talkin' apples and oranges here Greg. I wish you could recognize
>and appreciate the art and craftsmanship of today's high end bikes. As
>an artist, I can. My local bike shop (Velo Pasadena) is actually full
>of Time, Look, Seven, Colnago, Litespeed bikes and frames. "Zapped
>together and powder-coated in half a day?" I don't think so...
>
>I have quite a few bikes, both quite old and quite new that I ride
>everyday, and all of them exhibit the art and craftsmanship of their
>respective eras.
>
>Chuck Schmidt
>South Pasadena, Southern California

>

>

>--__--__--