Well I'll disagree with Jan on this one - Lack of typical Barra features does not rule out Barra (just might make it less likely).
Sitting in front of me is a Fontaynalloy frame - an aluminum frame sold through a British distrubutor (but identified in advertising as being of Continental origin) which has seatstays that look like the ones in the photo.
We simply don't know who made the frame - I've thought it was not Barra for resasons similar to what Jan uses in this argument - but at the same time myself and Jan upon inspecting it did not at all rule Barra out as having been the maker. And that was while inspecting the bike in person close-up!
Also, we don't have a good view of the fork in the photo - who knows, maybe its a Barra frame with a steel conventional fork (I might be scared to use an aluminum fork from that peroid on cross!) which would necessitate a different stem.
So I say once again we still don't know - but I would say Barra is still well in the running.
Mike Kone in Boulder CO
> I looked at the photo, and noticed a few things:
\r?\n>
\r?\n> 1. Mike is correct, the brakes look a lot like early Barra cantilever brakes.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> 2. The bike does appear to have a fixed seat height (the seat tube
\r?\n> extends upward and the saddle is attached directly to that). Barra
\r?\n> did that quite often, but so did other makers.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> 3. The seatstay attachment on the seat cluster does not look like
\r?\n> Barra. Compare to p. 91 in "The Golden Age of Handbuilt Bicycles."
\r?\n> The Barra seatstays curve inward and attach to the center of the seat
\r?\n> tube. Robic's extend further forward. Rene Vietto's Barra from the
\r?\n> 1948 Tour de France in Cycle History No. 12 (p. 163) has the same
\r?\n> cluster - as does every Barra I have seen.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> 4. Barra usually used a direct-clamp stem, whereas Robic's bike has
\r?\n> a traditional expander type.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> 5. The two handlebar pinch bolts were done by many builders - Barra,
\r?\n> Singer, Daudon and others.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> So not a Barra, and not even sure it's aluminum.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> A few more notes:
\r?\n>
\r?\n> 6. No rubber handrests: At least in France, Mafac pioneered the
\r?\n> rubber hand rests around 1949. Prototypes were used in the 1948
\r?\n> Paris-Brest-Paris. Many bikes through the 1950s did not use them.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> 7. Is that a Maxi-Car rear hub? Also appears to be attached with
\r?\n> nuts, not wingnuts or QR. Perhaps because if you have a flat in
\r?\n> cross, you just get a new bike?
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Jan Heine
\r?\n> Editor/Publisher
\r?\n> Vintage Bicycle Quarterly
\r?\n> c/o Il Vecchio Bicycles
\r?\n> 140 Lakeside Ave, Ste. C
\r?\n> Seattle WA 98122
\r?\n> http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> --