[CR]was: NR Der. Part; now: gimme a break!

Example: Racing:Jean Robic

Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 10:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Dalton <tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <F156nfvcySa4k3z6QEy0000f6a8@hotmail.com>
Subject: [CR]was: NR Der. Part; now: gimme a break!

carl derrick <mamamia111@hotmail.com> wrote:

Later SR ders are not classic content. I was referring to NR der mod's over the years.


Oh Carl, gimme a break, phuleeeze! You threw out an incredibly nebulous question (Gee, I bet there were a lot of changes over the years, I wonder what they were?) presumably as a means of stimulating a discussion that you might find interesting. You did not contribute any information of value yourself, other than flippantly suggesting a fix that will not actually work. I responded to your query with useful information that relates to the exact derailleur part that triggered this discussion, and by way of thanks you tell me that I'm O.T.???? We're talking about THE SAME PIECE and if you'd indulge us with a tiny bit of abstract thought, you might recognize that we're essentially talking about the same derailleur. This list frequently includes discussion of SR gear right up to the bitter end, as well as the earliest C-record stuff. The threads about what is or isn't classic go on and on, but the mid-to-late 80's stuff continues to get plenty of attention. I guess it's all some of us can afford.

Next time someone responds to one of your questions you might consider thanking them first, apologizing for not being the least bit specific, and then refining you inquiry... or say nothing. Meanwhile try to recognize that other listmembers might benefit from the information brought out by your question, even if you believe that you don't. Tom Dalton, Bethlehem, PA carl derrick <mamamia111@hotmail.com> wrote: Later SR ders are not classic content. I was referring to NR der mod's over the years.

>From: Tom Dalton
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: Re: [CR]Looking for NR Rear Der. Part
>Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 08:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
> There were certainly quite a few variations over the years, and I can
>think of one in particular that is especially relavant. The last SR rear
>ders., the units with the body spring mounted on the bottom of the
>parallelogram, had bronze bushings instead of plastic. What is interesting
>about the bronze bushings is that the outer shoulder was significantly
>thicker than on the plastic bushings. The pulley cage bolt was made a
>little longer to accomodate, or it may have been that lower body was made a
>little shorter, but either way, not all body/bolt/bushing combos are
>useable. Some slop, some bind, only the correct assemblage of parts will
>work as intended. So much for that legandary Campy interchangability.
>carl derrick wrote:
>Well, you could pretend it's an earlier NR derailleur and leave it out
>altogether. This is one of those subtle design mod's to the NR derailleur
>between 69-74. How many other are there?
>Carl Derrick
>Queens NY
> >From: "Daniel Artley"
> >To:
> >Subject: [CR]Looking for NR Rear Der. Part
> >Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 08:30:21 -0400
> >
> >While cleaning up a Campy NR rear derailleur, the nylon washer/bushing
> >the bottom pivot fell to the floor and disappeared into the netherworld
> >my bike work shop. Profuse cleaning (of the shop) didn't turn it up.
> >Would someone from the list have a line on Part No. 810/1A from the Campy
> >Catalogue No. 17. It fits between the pivot bolt for the jockey wheel
> >and the lower assembly of the derailleur body. This is for the Colnago
> >cleaning up for the Cirque. I'd be much obliged if someone could turn up
> >spare.
> >
> >Dan Artley
> >Parkton, Maryland