Re: [CR]Warning eBay outing: Bivalent freewheel

(Example: Framebuilders:Doug Fattic)

To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
From: "H.M. & S.S. Sachs" <sachs@erols.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]Warning eBay outing: Bivalent freewheel
Cc: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:45:44 -0500

I had written:> > Please be advised that this, as depicted, lacks (at minimum) the left end > arrangement, which includes the skewer. Compared to this, finding Regina > pawls and reassembly is easy. (Since I may bid on this item, please > consider me to be conflicted).

To which the esteemed Chuck Schmidt replied: I thought it was a generally accepted fact that since a spare bivalent could be used for either the front or the back (and people got spare bivalent wheels) that there is a scarcity of freewheels for the number of wheels/hubs in existence. Over the years I have seen spares of all the parts for the bivalent system except bivalent compatible freewheel bodies.

Soo, I guess I better comment... I hadn't looked at it that way, but certainly I've never found any of the spares. Chuck may well be right. BTW, I looked at my spares last night, and noticed that my extra skewers are the same length... Shouldn't the rear one be longer than the front?

Then Chuck asked, But then again Harvey, maybe I missed your emoticon for 'tongue in cheek' and the joke is on me?

Nope, I hadn't meant a joke; I'm really arguing with myself about whether to finally go for the second freewheel, since I otherwise have the stuff for two bikes worth. Do I really need that, particularly when Kauzo is bidding?

thanks
harvey sachs
mcLean va
Chuck Ò¿Ô¬ Schmidt
South Pasadena, Southern California