Re: [CR]'49 R O Harrison Shortwin...strange seat tube...seemselegant

(Example: Component Manufacturers)

In-Reply-To: <20060912154907.62460.qmail@web52503.mail.yahoo.com>
From: "neil foddering" <neilfoddering@hotmail.com>
To: dcwilson3@yahoo.com, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]'49 R O Harrison Shortwin...strange seat tube...seemselegant
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 18:44:44 +0000


I've owned a Jack Taylor curved seat tube model and a 1939 Baines Flying gate. I also own a Waller, and without having actually weighed them, I would say that there's not much to choose among them as far as weight is concerned. None of them strikes me as being a heavier frame than a conventional 531 DB frame.

I can't speak for the Shortwin, but its owner may well come along to the V-CC Rotrax Ride this Sunday, and if he does, I'll ask him, and pass on his comments. I do know that he races this machine - see reference to the Tin Can Ten results on http://www.harwoodcycles.com/vcrc.htm

The catalogue states, incidentally, that the Shortwin frame angles equate to 73 degrees head and 71 degrees seat on a conventional frame.

Neil Foddering Weymouth, Dorset, England


>From: Don Wilson <dcwilson3@yahoo.com>
>To: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
>Subject: Re: [CR]'49 R O Harrison Shortwin...strange seat
>tube...seemselegant
>Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Tom asked about dynamical implications and purposes of
>an R.O. Harrison with a seat tube attached to the DT
>forward of the bottom bracket shell. I've never ridden
>one. Its the first I've seen, so I can only speculate.
>
>
>First, it seems a remarkably elegant solution to
>shortening wheelbase. Compared to flying gates'
>framing complexities and curved seat tube metallurgy,
>this just seems to put those to shame from a design
>simplicity standpoint. And it appears to provide a
>wider effective bottom bracket angle, which might
>lessen the punishment of near vertical seat tubes and
>narrow bottom bracket angles in more conventional
>shortwheel base designs. And the real cleverness is
>that it keeps the chainwheel and pedals quite as
>nearly under the seat as would other shortwheel base
>designs. Lastly, aesthetically, it creates two
>trapezoids in the framing rather than the conventional
>trapezoid mainframe and triangular seat stay, chain
>stay and seat tube subframe. It's hard to know whether
>this would be a heavier a short wheelbase solution
>than other solutions or not without putting it on the
>scales. It looks like it would be slightly heavier
>than a curved seat tube solution, but perhaps lighter
>than a flying gate. In any case, very neat.
>
>Don Wilson
>Los Olivos, CA USA
>
>--- Tom Sanders <tsan7759142@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > I am on the UK Classic light Weights site looking at
> > a bike called a R O
> > Harrison Shortwin. The year seems seems a bit
> > uncertain being given in the
> > URL as 1947 and on the caption as 1949.
> >
>http://www.classiclightweights.co.uk/ROHarrisonShortwin1947.html
> > This has the seat tube joining the down tube a
> > couple of inches forward of
> > the bottom bracket shell. This gives a very strange
> > angle to the seat tube.
> > I am wondering if this is unique to this maker? Is
> > there a logic for this
> > arrangement that escapes me? Perhaps some of our
> > Brit members has some
> > light to shed on this? Never seen such an
> > arrangement before.
> > Tom Sanders
> > Lansing, Mi
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Classicrendezvous mailing list
> > Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> >
>http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvous
> >
>
>
>D.C. Wilson dcwilson3@yahoo.com
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>Note: This message may contain confidential and/or privileged
>information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to
>receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose or take
>any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have
>received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by
>reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>Classicrendezvous mailing list
>Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvous

_______________________________________________ Classicrendezvous mailing list Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvous