seat lug effects, was [CR]Veloworks/Sachs Lug reference site

(Example: Racing:Jacques Boyer)

Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 21:30:36 -0500
From: "HM & SS Sachs" <sachs@erols.com>
To: marcus.e.helman@gm.com, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: seat lug effects, was [CR]Veloworks/Sachs Lug reference site


Marcus Helman wrote:
>> While I am on the subject (and because it's kind of quiet at work this
>> morning) what are the merits, besides aesthetic , of the various methods of seat stay attachment?
>> These examples spring to mind:
>> 1. Raleigh Pros where the stays come in low on the back of the seat tube
>
>> 2. Italian bikes where the stays are fluted, and attach to the sides of the seat lug
>
>> 3. French bikes where the stays are capped with a flat piece that wraps farther up the side of the lug
>
>4. My old Tom Ritchey where the stays attached to the binder bolt
>> 5. English bikes where the seat stays appeared to wrap up and over the seat lug
>
>
>> 6. Cinellis with the bolt-nut-bolt attachment
>> 7. Herons where the caps for the stays are cast as part of the lug
>> 8. What about those Gianni Mottas with the narrow brake bridges?
>> 9. Insert your favorite here
>>
>+++++++++++++++++++++++
> There are two obvious issues, esthetics and manufacturability. Beyond those, there is only one functional issue that I know of: Being of stout thighs, I am at risk of thigh rubbing against seat stay top when riding something that combines relatively large size with "outboard" attachments. Your poundage may vary.

harvey sachs
mcLean va