Maybe I'm confused? I thought that bilaminates were fillet brazed frames that had non structural, purely decorative sleeves surrounding the tubes. These created the illusion of lugs, but the sleeves were merely decorative. The various Hetchins, Hurlows etc. were lugged bicycles that had pieces added to the ends of the lugs for decoration, but they were standard, lugged bicycles--not fillet brazed. Please correct me if I'm wrong? Are we using different definitions?
Hilary Stone wrote in Cycling Plus (August 2000/1?): "Bilamination construction was first introduced by Claud butler, as far as we can tell in 1948 on the first version of the Avant Courier model. Paris Cycles also used a similar construction method--so Claud Butler cannot claim it as a first but they mad it an art in itself. Although bilamination frames look as if they are built with lugs, they are in fact fillet brazed. The 'lug parts' are sleeves which feature cut outs just like the ends of the lugs. These are first brazed onto the end of each tube to be joined. The tubes complete with sleeves are then fillet brazed together. Claud Butler claimed that in test at the National Physical laboratory this type of joint proved to be 25% stronger than a conventional lugged joint. It certainly had other advantages too--non standard tube sizes could be built into frames easily and frame angles were not limited by the lug angles available. At the time of bilaminated design introduction. frame lugs were in also in short supply, so this was probably another consideration".
Later, Stratton Hammon Louisville, Kentucky, USA
>Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 13:10:48 -0400
>From: Richard M Sachs <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: Re: [CR] Final on Bilaminate frames
>help me out here...
>are you calling details added to lugs "bi-lams"?
>or are "bi-lams" what you call the process of adding
>details to a frame after its joints were bronze welded?
>my opinions these past two days are based on the