[CR]Re: FB STEEL" HUBS NOT ALLOY!


Example: Production Builders:Cinelli:Laser

Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 07:06:24 -0800 (PST)
From: "Dale B. Phelps" <losgatos_dale@yahoo.com>
To: hersefan@comcast.net, Phil Sieg <triodelover@comcast.net>, t.kielman@comcast.net
In-Reply-To: <121220040648.12658.41BBE9A80003F2E3000031722205886172020E000A9C9D0A08@comcast.net>
cc: "C.R. LIST" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: [CR]Re: FB STEEL" HUBS NOT ALLOY!

Hey Mike I was attempting sarcasm, it didn't seem to come across that way though

I don't think the sellers were out to "gouge" anyone, whether the steel hubset was 16 bucks or 60, more importantly to me at the time, I felt Phil's slam on one of our listmember/dealers about profits and digital cameras was obtuse--

Dale Phelps, Longmont

hersefan@comcast.net wrote: But wouldn't a serious buyer want alloy? The cool thing about prewar goodies is that the alloy revolution started around 1935 or 1936. FB's were very common on top tier French bike - but the ones to have are alloy. I'm sitting here staring at a bike that needs alloy FB's, but not steel ones ( everything else on the bike is alloy). These hubs may be the Victory cranks of the past.

Also, a lot of prewar stuff just doesn't get top value. Thank goodness - the stuff in my mind is the coolest (1935-1938 or so) but nobody is really after it.

I'd pay a few hundered in a flash for NOS alloy - but I've ignored the steel ones. Plus, our UK friends seem to unearth quite a few FB hubsets. Now for that prewar alloy one....

Mike Kone in Boulder CO


-------------- Original message --------------


> Pfft, Phil, have another martini and chill out, if these hubs todd snatched are

\r?\n> the ones I was looking at on squee-bay, the combined total buy it now price was

\r?\n> what, 16 bucks?

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Another merchant out there to screw us poor cyclistes, pocketing loads of profit

\r?\n> and not even buying a digital camera to assure further graft PFFT

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Dale Phelps

\r?\n> Longmont CO

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Phil Sieg wrote:

\r?\n> Todd,

\r?\n>

\r?\n> I hope everything turns out well but I have a real problem in this day and

\r?\n> age with folks listing a bunch of items with pictures pirated from other

\r?\n> WWW sites. A basic digital camera doesn't cost that much. A picture is

\r?\n> still no guarantee, but a "loving hands at home" version taken against some

\r?\n> Gawdawful shag-carpet background, even if a little blurry, makes me think

\r?\n> at least there's a good chance the seller has the item in his possession.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> If one is going to using other photos, one should state in the auction that

\r?\n> the accompanying photo isn't representative of the item up for auction.

\r?\n> It's dishonest to do otherwise. Steven confirms what my still-learning

\r?\n> eyes thought. The rear hub looks to be at least able to accommodate a 5sp

\r?\n> freewheel, and isn't a single speed.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> I apologize if the seller is a list member and takes offense, but this

\r?\n> seller puts quite a few items up frequently and has a rather long list

\r?\n> now. Some of those profits should go for a camera, I think.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Phil "Still working on the first martini so I'll mellow out later" Sieg

\r?\n> Knoxville, Tennessee

\r?\n>

\r?\n> At 18.28 11.12.04, t.kielman@comcast.net wrote:

\r?\n> >The picture of the hubs in this auction is taken from the Italian

\r?\n> >components page of the CR website.I grabbed a pair from the seller after

\r?\n> >checking his feedback for transactions with CR members.All positive,and

\r?\n> >possibly a listmember himself.Even if they are not correctly dated,they

\r?\n> >seem to be lovely hubs.

\r?\n> >

\r?\n> >Todd "if it looks too good to be true......" Kielman

\r?\n> >Chicago

\r?\n> >Still ignoring the collective wisdom of an entire civilization......