re: [CR]Help Identifying a Mystery Tandem Frame


Example: Racing:Jacques Boyer

Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:51:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Fred Rafael Rednor <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
Subject: re: [CR]Help Identifying a Mystery Tandem Frame
To: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
In-Reply-To: <43BDC596.7030501@cox.net>


So what's the _threading_ of the bottom brackets? Whether it's French or English will tell you a lot about country of origin. As for Harvey's comment about the "road's-eye-view" of the front BB shell... that's not uncommon even for many nicer French tandems. Obviously those produced by makers such as Herse or Singer will be much different but if you've seen things like Uragos or LeJeunes this one should not surprise you.
     Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia (USA; but in
                   my basement, it could be Lille)


--- Harvey M Sachs wrote:


> Thanks, Steve, for setting a lively puzzle for us to toss

\r?\n> about. Maybe J

\r?\n> ohn Thompson is right, and it is British, but I'd vote for

\r?\n> French, a prod

\r?\n> uction bike at that, and late 70s date. My reasons are

\r?\n> neither conclusive

\r?\n> nor flattering, and there is one Big Hole in my theory, so

\r?\n> here's the ar

\r?\n> gument:

\r?\n>

\r?\n> The sheet metal "cross lug" bridge looks like a production

\r?\n> fitting that I

\r?\n> haven't seen catalogued, but I haven't seen most catalogues.

\r?\n> That and t

\r?\n> he cable stops, generator mount, and similar braze-ons are

\r?\n> the cheap-o st

\r?\n> ampings we so frequently saw on French lower-line bikes of

\r?\n> the era. They

\r?\n> work ok but don't please my eye at all. I particularly note

\r?\n> the near crim

\r?\n> inal negligence about the appearance of the eccentric BB from

\r?\n> the bottom,

\r?\n> where it is unseen and also suffered damage at the hands of

\r?\n> a bad wrench

\r?\n> with malice aforethought. I think the execution of this area

\r?\n> would have

\r?\n> embarrassed Bob Jackson. There's a braze-on on the left

\r?\n> chainstay for a h

\r?\n> ub brake cable (Atom, of course). What doesn't fit so well

\r?\n> in my "theory

\r?\n> " are the Shimano ends. But, I have those on a late 70s

\r?\n> Austro-Daimler,

\r?\n> so they were penetrating Europe by then. Even there, note how

\r?\n> the "bottom

\r?\n> eyes" of the intermediate or lateral stays differs from that

\r?\n> of the chai

\r?\n> nstays and seatstays. This makes me wonder whether some

\r?\n> amatuer replaced

\r?\n> a broken drop-out with a pair of Shimanos that were lying

\r?\n> about and thus

\r?\n> in jeopardy. I've been known to commit such a crime myself.

\r?\n> :-)

\r?\n>

\r?\n> But, do check the bb threading; I'm eager to be proven wrong.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> harvey sachs

\r?\n> mcLean va

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Steve Demchak wrote:

\r?\n>

\r?\n> >> DISCLAIMER: I'm a neophyte to the KOF world.

\r?\n> >>

\r?\n> >> I bought this mystery tandem frame yesterday. It wasn't

\r?\n> fun carryi

\r?\n> ng it home on my fixie. Fortunately, two of Seattle's

\r?\n> Finest didn't har

\r?\n> ass me about taking a whole lane. It has Shimano rear

\r?\n> dropouts with a 1

\r?\n> 22-mm spacing. The fork has Brev. Campagnolo dropouts. The

\r?\n> rear bottom

\r?\n> bracket shell is 68-mm. Supposedly it takes 27-inch

\r?\n> wheels, but the di

\r?\n> stance from the dropouts to the cantilever brake posts are

\r?\n> 290-mm, which

\r?\n> matches my beater 700-wheeled hybrid.

\r?\n> >>

\r?\n> >> Would anyone have any guesses as to the maker of the

\r?\n> frame?

\r?\n> >>

\r?\n> >> WARNING: Lot's O'Pictures

\r?\n> >> http://home.comcast.net/~DeeVee/

\r?\n> >

\r?\n> >

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Nice frame!

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Just a guess, but the lamp/generator brackets and seat stay

\r?\n> treatment

\r?\n> make me think "English." What's the threading on the BB

\r?\n> shells?

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Maybe a Bob Jackson?

\r?\n>

\r?\n> -- John (john@os2.dhs.org) Appleton WI USA