>
>As for the comment about the reliability of Rebour as a source of
>information. It is well-known that he survived wholely on his ties
>to the French bicycle industry. His editorial and design
>remuneration were wholely based upon his ties to French industry.
Rebour also illustrated Campagnolo's French ads at the time. In fact, he discussed every small change in Campy components, while often overlooking changes of French components. For example, he chronicled the development of the first Campagnolo Gran Sport derailleur in great detail. It appears that he had a special affinity for Campagnolo, whether commercial or because he liked the products.
When looking through the "Dancing Chain," you'll find a Rebour drawing for almost every Campy product made in the 1960s.
So while Rebour's affinity certainly was for the cycle industry - as
can be seen when he makes excuses for Campy cranks breaking! - it
wasn't for the French industry alone. It is noteworthy that he didn't
do much work for the British, and their products weren't much used or
featured in France.
>One last point is that Verot & Perrin (Stronglight) continued to
>supply French pros with steel cranks until the begin of the 60's.
>Either this shows a corporate distrust of their own alloy product or
>decided lack of will-power to promote the new. Either way, it makes
>me very doubtful of any claim of inate benefits of the alloy crank.
Hmm... maybe they didn't see one superior to the other. If you were concerned about light weight, you'd get the alloy, which had a proven track record of more than 20 years by the 1950s.
But there was a reason why some chose the steel. Chuck thinks it's because the racers were concerned about cranks breaking. Rebour claims it's Q factor... I don't know, but I haven't seen any evidence that contradicts Rebour on this one. -- Jan Heine, Seattle Editor/Publisher Vintage Bicycle Quarterly c/o Il Vecchio Bicycles 140 Lakeside Ave, Ste. C Seattle WA 98122 http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com