Re: [CR]Re (CR)Mike Appel frame:Why

(Example: Bike Shops:R.E.W. Reynolds)

Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 18:24:34 -0400
From: "Peter Jon White" <lists@peterwhitecycles.com>
To: t.kielman@comcast.net
Subject: Re: [CR]Re (CR)Mike Appel frame:Why
References: <052020042127.21464.40AD22D200074C60000053D82200750784020E03040A0705D29B@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <052020042127.21464.40AD22D200074C60000053D82200750784020E03040A0705D29B@comcast.net>
cc: "C.R. LIST" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>

t.kielman@comcast.net wrote:
> In response to PJW post that chainstay bridges are only for fender attachment.Why is it that so many bikes that have no eyelets or clearance for fenders are equipped with a bridge,which adds more labor and material to the building process?Are there no mechanical/engineering/stability/strength issues involved?
>
> Todd "all my bikes have bridges" Kielman
> Sweaty Chicago

It's easier to install the bridge than try to overcome the customer's expectation of having the bridge. Frames have historically had chainstay bridges because almost all bikes up until the early 1970s were equipped with fenders. People are used to seeing them. In production, they only take a minute or two to install.

--
Peter Jon White
Peter White Cycles
24 Hall Rd.
Hillsborough, NH 03244
603 478 0900 Phone
603 478 0902 Phax
http://www.PeterWhiteCycles.com