derek cottington!!!!!!!!!!!!!
there's a name for VH1 Where Are They Now?
moppy haired teenager atop a Holdsworth (lugless) Italia mod frame, painted 'Faema' white/red... jeez, louise. that's a list thread in itself.
and alf, joe mummery, martin roach, mick ballard... any brits care to update the file on the 70s t.t. heroes? e-RICHIE chester, ct
On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 08:20:59 -0700 (PDT) David Feldman
<feldmanbike@yahoo.com> writes:
> If anyone is able to view some issues of "Cycling"
> from the early to mid '70's you'll see some
> interesting component trimming there, too. The most
> extreme was a bike ridden by either Alf Engers or
> Derek Cottington that had it's Campagnolo hub and
> pedal barrels slotted--the hub axle was painted in
> world champions' stripes that were clearly visible
> through the slot! This in addition to the usual
> half-taped bars, hoodless brake levers, Campionissimo
> Seta Extra tires on 24 spoke wheels. I don't remember
> seeing weight specs on any of these bikes, it's just
> how most of them were pictured with a few closeup
> shots of interesting details. I haven't ever traveled
> to or lived in Britain, it's just that in Los Angeles
> ca. 1970 it was easier to find "Cycling" than
> "Bicycling.
> David Feldman
> Vancouver, WA
> --- Jan Heine <heine@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > While working on issue 4 of Vintage Bicycle
> > Quarterly, dedicated to
> > the famous technical trials, I came across a few
> > interesting facts.
> >
> > Not only were the trials rigorously administered, so
> > there is no
> > doubt about the light weights - you will see the
> > results sheets in
> > VBQ 4 and 5.
> >
> > Also, in one event, Lionel Brans (a constructeur)
> > entered a machine
> > built with a Caminargent frame. To Americans, this
> > may seem puzzling
> > - how can Brans be the constructeur when Caminargent
> > built the frame?
> > Clearly, the French cyclotourists considered the
> > person who put the
> > bike together, who made sure fenders, lights, racks,
> > derailleurs and
> > all worked together, the constructeur. For them, the
> > frame is only
> > one part of the bike, maybe more important than
> > fenders, wheels or
> > other parts, but not by that much. In fact, it was
> > common among some
> > smaller builders to buy a raw frame, add braze-ons,
> > paint and decals,
> > build the bike, and sell it under their name.
> >
> > I have felt similarly about my Rivendell. While
> > Rivendell provided
> > the raw frame to my specs, the finished product
> > (shown in VBQ 3) is
> > very different from anything you can buy from Walnut
> > Creek. When
> > people ask me what I ride, I am reluctant to say "A
> > Rivendell,"
> > because I don't want Grant et al. to get in trouble
> > because somebody
> > wants to order a bike with different clearances from
> > standard, with a
> > custom front rack, custom handle-bar bag QR,
> > aluminum fenders, custom
> > light mounts, etc.
> >
> > Of course, most of the well-known constructeurs made
> > frame and bike,
> > so that distinction does not apply. But it becomes
> > apparent that the
> > constructeur is NOT a framebuilder as we understand
> > it.
> >
> > And finally, how did those bikes get so light? First
> > of all, many of
> > the older components were/are amazingly light.
> > Second, a lot of
> > drilling, and more importantly cutting.
> >
> > Which gets me to my question: How much is saved by
> > drilling out
> > parts? Somebody must have before/after weights, or
> > be able to compare
> > drilled vs. undrilled parts.
> >
> > I suspect the savings are small - Ernest Csuka once
> > told me how they
> > spent an hour to drill out a chainring, and then
> > weighed it. They had
> > saved 2 or 3 grams. I think to really save material,
> > one had to cut
> > away whole sections. How about pedals with the
> > center sections cut
> > away, so that the spindle is exposed? Or headsets
> > with exposed balls.
> > You'll see those in VBQ 5 (in fact, it's vol. 2, No.
> > 1), part 2 of
> > the technical trials.
> >
> > What is the point, you may ask? And you are right.
> > The point was not
> > to make superlight bikes, and many critics at the
> > time were quite
> > scathing about constructeurs "who exploited the rule
> > book." The point
> > was to make lightweight bikes (a good randonneur
> > went from 33 lbs. in
> > 1933 to 24 lbs. in 1936) that held up for hundreds
> > of miles on the
> > worst roads imaginable. Bikes that carried a load
> > and handled well on
> > mountain roads. Bikes that resemble the wonderful
> > randonneur bikes
> > built in France from 1946 onwards. And that goal was
> > achieved.
> >
> > Shameless plug: Read all about it in Vintage Bicycle
> > Quarterly. Info
> > at
> >
> http://www.mindspring.com/
> >
> > Jan Heine, Seattle
> > _______________________________________________
> > Classicrendezvous mailing list
> > Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> >
> http://www.bikelist.org/
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
> http://calendar.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Classicrendezvous mailing list
> Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> http://www.bikelist.org/
>
>
_______________________________________________
Classicrendezvous mailing list
Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
http://www.bikelist.org/