Re: [CR] Continental Oval vs. Imperial Oval

(Example: Framebuilders:Bernard Carré)

From: <"brianbaylis@juno.com">
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 14:09:38 GMT
To: mitch.harris@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [CR] Continental Oval vs. Imperial Oval
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

Mitch,

Actually, I don't believe there is a Columbus track fork blade that is oval part of the way down. The Columbus blades like that are just road blades that someone (I've done it myself, Dave Moulton did it a lot) has squashed back to the round shape the blade was before the factory ovaled it.

I was looking at my 1951 Rene Herse yesterday and the fork blades are interesting. They are Reynolds 531 According to the decal on them (but the frame has the French version of 3 main tubes only decal on it) and they are the 16 x 29 oval at the top, then have a straight section down to just past the location of the center pull brake braze on studs, then the rapid taper Jan Heine mentioned that becomes very skinny and completely round at the bottom. The fork had about 10 feet of rake with a bend that would make a ski jumper very happy. The bike is built for 650B wheels.

Brian Baylis La Mesa, CA Gotta save my last post in my quota of 4 for something juicey.


-- Mitch Harris wrote:


So I wonder which Reynolds fork does my 70 or 71 Raleigh Pro have? This is the Carlton built Raleigh Pro with the new-style fully sloping crown. The blades are measure 27x17, so they are more oval than the (old) Continental, but not as wide as the New Continental which wouldn't be released until a few years after this Raleigh. The frame decal says the forks are Reynolds and that seems certain even though the fork decals are Carlton decals.

(Speaking of track forks, some of the Columbus track forks are round all the way up to the crown. But some Columbus track forks may begin as the Columbus road ovals because they are 28x19 oval at the crown and become round a couple inches below the crown.)

Mitch Harris Little Rock Canyon, Utah

On 8/3/05, gpvb1@comcast.net <gpvb1@comcast.net> wrote:
> Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 11:21:26 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Fred Rafael Rednor <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: Re: [CR] (New) Continental Oval vs. Imperial Oval
>
> > When did Reynolds introduce the 29 x 16 fork blade?
> >
> > If this was originally described as 'Continental
> > Oval', surely it is to differentiate from the round
> > or D-shaped blades which were common in Britain.
> >
> David,
> To be honest, by the time I started seriously looking at
> this stuff, all I recall are the 29 x 16mm blades (which I
> think are really elliptical.) Actually, that's not quite true.
> There were the round blades but I remember seeing those on
> bikes at the Kissena Park Velodrome in New York.
> Then again, it was so long ago and I was too young to really
> appreciate what I was seeing, much less commit it to memory...
> Cheers,
> Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia (USA)
>
> About 1976 (per e-RICHIE, earlier this morning).
> The NOS tubing that I have, which was purchased directly from Reynolds in
   1974, has the early (Imperial) blades....
> Greg Parker
> Dexter, Michigan