Mike, I'm not clear as to why you believe my points 1. and 4. don't make sense.
Bearing in mind that my points were reasons why British riders chose to ride road/path machines:
Point 1 was that with a road/path bike, they didn't have to own more than one bicycle (and often couldn't afford to) since they could use a road/path machine for commuting, recreation and racing, which, I'm told by people who rode in the 40's and 50's, was what many clubmen did.
Point 4 was that many road/path machines have different geometry to road bikes of the period, giving a sharper ride, which some riders preferred (and still do).
Hope this clarifies my meaning.
Neil Foddering Weymouth, Dorset, England
>From: "Bicycle Specialties" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: [CR]earward facing "drop-outs'
>Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 07:44:07 -0700
>Chuck Schmidt wrote:
>"Yeah, all those old geezers making bikes in the old days were idiots!"
>No-one is saying that any frame builder is or was an idiot. I just
>started this discussion as I believe as is often the case that fashion
>and custom is often followed without thinking.
>Neil Foddering wrote:
>On a bike designed for ultra-close rear wheel clearance, it makes sense
>have a rear-facing dropout - the wheel just has to be fitted in to the
>dropout slots, and moved forward as far as it will go. No need to
>about, making sure that the wheel is correctly aligned, as you would
>forward-facing dropout, and with the wheel spindle braced against the
>the track dropout, extra insurance against it pulling over.
>This is not the case with a single sprocket. There must be some forward
>movement to allow some slack in the chain so that it can be removed to
>get the wheel out.
>Neil then wrote:
>1. They could use the same machine for everyday use, club runs, grass
>hard track racing, or short distance time trials.
>2. Image. (As an analogy, who needs a 180 mph sports car for road
>3. Fashion - clubmates have one, so ride one to be part of the group.
>4. Ride preference - the geometry of these machines is often different
>pure road bikes.
>Well points one and four don't make sense. Whether the drop-out is
>forward or rearward opening doesn't effect the ride or the geometry.
>Points two and three are the only reasons that we have been stuck with
>these things for so long. It's about time we got rid of them.
>In rainy and cold Toronto.