[CR]Holdworth - built 58 cm

In-Reply-To: <MONKEYFOODkDX64kDn900002913@monkeyfood.nt.phred.org>
From: John pierce <tompks@mac.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 05:18:57 -0500
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: [CR]Holdworth - built 58 cm

I have a nice built Holdsworth, mostly Campagnolo NR, except crank. Green with original leather handlebar tape and a Brooks ladies saddle

I added. Probably about 1980's vintage. Get hold of me if you can make this bike a good home--I don't want to ride it a bunch and break

something. Tom Pierce.

On Oct 30, 2006, at 11:08 PM, classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org wrote:
> Send Classicrendezvous mailing list submissions to
> classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvous
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> classicrendezvous-owner@bikelist.org
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Classicrendezvous digest..."
> CR
> Today's Topics:
> 1. Wheel toe overlap (dan kasha)
> 2. Re: Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes? (Harvey M Sachs)
> 3. RE: Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes? (Mark Cutrufelli)
> 4. Re: Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes? (Jan Heine)
> 5. RE: Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes?
> 6. Colnago Super ID (Jacqueline Kamenzind)
> 7. Re: Toe-clip overlap even on "Good" bikes. (Bob Hanson)
> 8. Bottom Bracket Cup Identification (devotion finesse)
> 9. Re: Ciocc, De Rosa photos posted (John Thompson)
> 10. Re: Toe-clip overlap
> 11. FS Campagnolo hubs and rims (garry nold)
> 12. Under BB Cable Routing on 1949 Hetchins (Kevin Kruger)
> 13. "Interesting" Hetchins e-bay outing (Arthur Link)
> 14. ebay outing: Colnago Supers
> 15. RE:Outing an ebay auction, ...Rare US Cycling (Steve Birmingham)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 15:56:04 -0800 (PST)
> From: dan kasha <dankasha@yahoo.com>
> To: theonetrueBob@webtv.net, CR <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: [CR]Wheel toe overlap
> Message-ID: <20061030235604.90092.qmail@web38902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> Precedence: list
> Message: 1
> Bob,
> What size bikes are your bikes?
> I have a number of similar bikes (Raleigh international,
> supercourse, Zeus, PX-10, PXN-10, and most have marginal (if any)
> clearance as it is, and would have trouble with fenders.
> I am short, my bikes are in the 49 - 54cm range, or 19" to 21".
> I suspect that if these were larger bikes, this issue would go away.
> So I also ask, what was the size of the rivendell you are talking
> of?
> Finally, a funny one is one of my Zeus bikes (I can send you a
> picture if you want). It is a short bike, 49cm I would guess. I
> think they wanted to assure clearance (which it barely has) and
> gave it a very shallow head tube angle. The net effect is that the
> bike has very funky handling characteristics, as it becomes I guess
> what is now called a "long trail" bike. It is very fine and
> stable at speeds, but at slow speeds, it behaves almost as if it
> were unstable. Once used to it, it is fine, but strange feeling at
> first. And you know how you can hold a saddle and lead a bike
> along? Not with this one, the front end will just come around.
> So, in order to give it the clearance, they made rather funky
> handling characteristics.
> Just my two cents (centimes, pence, pesetas ...)
> Dan Kasha
> Seattle, Wa
> ---------------------------------
> Check out the New Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and
> get things done faster.
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:56:48 -0500
> From: Harvey M Sachs <sachshm@cox.net>
> To: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>,
> Subject: Re: [CR]Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes?
> Message-ID: <45469140.2090603@cox.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: sachshm@cox.net
> Message: 2
> Esteemed Listmeister wrote:
> "In my shop, over these many years I have observed that a lot of
> bikes do not have "toe clip clearance".
> But it is never a problem until someone accidentally discovers it
> while standing around static, or attempting a track stand or
> similar. Up until then, in actual use, it's darn near impossible,
> while underway, to turn the bike's front end enough to actually
> contact the toe or clip. At faster than a very slow walking speed,
> it is almost impossible to turn the front fork more than a very few
> degrees...
> But, once the bike owner discovers this "potentiality", they get
> upset and nervous about the "toe clip overlap".
> In real life situations, it has a very slight chance of really
> occurring.
> But maybe I am wrong? Any of you have actual experiences that
> indicate this toe clip clearance thing is a big problem?"
> *********************************
> Dale, a year ago I sold a Raphael Geminiani track bike from the
> 1960s or earlier (I think), because its toe clip overlap (w/o
> fenders) made it unsuitable for my commute. But, this may be the
> exception that proves the rule: One of my commuting routes
> includes two very tight 180 degree turns. For a ramp that goes down
> from the road to the tow-path below. Nothing is more than about 6'
> wide; occasionally there are other riders, runners, or fishers
> sharing the path. It was a real issue on that particular stretch,
> but I can't remember a comparable situation anywhere else. BTW,
> the courier who bought it from me came back many months later,
> happy as he could be with the bike (which I had bought from Sam
> FitzSimmons, who's an all-round good guy).
> harvey sachs
> mcLean VA.
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 19:02:40 -0500
> From: "Mark Cutrufelli" <rena.cutrufelli@comcast.net>
> To: <haxixe@gmail.com>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: RE: [CR]Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes?
> Message-ID: <000001c6fc7f$e2815250$0402a8c0@mark>
> In-Reply-To:
> <75d04b480610301528i3994b136h210ed08050159273@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset="us-ascii"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: list
> Message: 3
> -----Original Message-----
> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: Re: [CR]Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes?
> "I had a Jeunet with a fair bit of toeclip overlap... "
> My 1983 54 cm (c-t) X 54 CM Masi gran crit also has considerable
> toeclip
> overlap but I don't let in throw me.
> Mark Cutrufelli
> Laurel, MD USA
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:16:45 -0800
> From: Jan Heine <heine94@earthlink.net>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: Re: [CR]Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes?
> Message-ID: <a062309adc16c462ebf2d@[]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Precedence: list
> Message: 4
>> I wonder, is this really that much of a problem?
>> Up until then, in actual use, it's darn near impossible, while
>> underway, to turn the bike's front end enough to actually contact
>> the toe or clip. At faster than a very slow walking speed, it is
>> almost impossible to turn the front fork more than a very few
>> degrees...
>> But maybe I am wrong? Any of you have actual experiences that
>> indicate this toe clip clearance thing is a big problem?
> I have two experiences to share that came close to disaster...
> I lent my Rivendell, which has copious amounts of foot overlap, to a
> friend. Starting from a light, he wobbled a bit (the copious amount
> of wheel flop on this long-trail geometry did not help), and got his
> foot stuck on the wrong side of the fender/front wheel. With no way
> to turn the front wheel back to straight, down he went. He did not
> have to go to the emergency room, but blood was spilt. And the fender
> was bent, attesting to the efforts of my friend to get the wheel past
> his foot.
> A few years ago, I was riding the same bike in town. Even though I
> instinctively align my cranks correctly during slow-speed turns (even
> on my bikes that don't have toeclip overlap), there will be a point
> when one forgets or thinks it unnecessary: I was waiting for a gap in
> traffic to make a left turn. A gap opened up, but it was a small one
> - enough for a quick dash across the oncoming traffic. Even though I
> am "left-legged" and thus started the move with my left crank, my
> front wheel still was turned enough that the right foot upon
> completion of the first pedal stroke came down on the wrong side of
> the wheel. A terrible wobble ensued, but I managed to stay upright
> and complete my dash across the oncoming lane. But it was a close
> call, and a crash in front of a delivery truck would not have been
> pretty. They might have been able to stop - or maybe not.
> Toeclip overlap is unnecessary on bikes in my size (57 cm top tube
> length). It is the result of current bikes having higher trail
> figures than they used to have. If you look through the archives, you
> find that Chuck Schmidt measured racing bikes, and until maybe 1970,
> most had about 40-55 mm trail, usually with head angles of 72-73
> degrees. No toeclip overlap with that in most sizes, even with
> fenders. Once tires got narrower, trail figures had to increase to
> make up for the decreased pneumatic trail. So they did. But
> somewhere, somebody came up with the simplistic, inaccurate notion
> that "More Trail = Stable Handling," and touring bikes began to have
> even more trail than racing machines, despite their wide tires. And
> with wide tires and fenders, toeclip overlap becomes a real problem.
> (If somebody had examined the old bikes and thought about how they
> were ridden on poor roads at lower speeds, they might have questioned
> the "more trail = more stability" mantra, but instead most concluded
> that the old makers simply had no clue how to make well-handling
> bikes!)
> These issues were discussed in detail in an 8-page article in VBQ
> Vol. 3, No. 3, which goes into detail why bikes handle the way they
> do, and how trail-induced stability is but one component that affects
> handling. That article included 13 examples of bicycles that I have
> ridden. All but 3 don't have toeclip overlap. Their geometries were
> very different, and examining them all had interesting results.
> Because the main difference between these bikes is the amount of fork
> offset (rake), some intrepid readers of Bicycle Quarterly have had
> their forks re-bent to increase the offset (rake) and thus eliminate
> toeclip overlap. Others had new forks built. All so far have been
> very pleased with the results, which closely mimic the geometries of
> the older bikes that so many riders like. Several follow-up articles
> discussed these, and tested bikes with different forks to highlight
> the differences. (A J. P. Weigle Randonneur with two forks and a
> Kogswell 650B bike with three forks.)
> Maybe toeclip overlap isn't a problem for some riders... but even as
> an experienced rider, I prefer my bikes without. On track bikes, I
> don't think it is a problem. Neither on racing bikes that are not
> ridden in town. But all other bikes can and should be designed
> without it.
> And don't get me started on excessive wheel flop (the result of too
> much trail), which I think is even more dangerous, as it makes it
> hard to ride in a straight line. Unfortunately, passing cars don't
> always give enough room for a sudden weave...
> --
> Jan Heine
> Editor
> Bicycle Quarterly
> 140 Lakeside Ave #C
> Seattle WA 98122
> http://www.bikequarterly.com
> ------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 00:36:23 +0000
> From: hersefan@comcast.net
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: RE: [CR]Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes?
> Message-ID:
> <103120060036.8153.45469A870005376000001FD92200760180020E000A9C9D0A08@
> comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> Precedence: list
> Message: 5
> Some of the best bikes I've ridden have toe-clip overlap. Its just
> the way they come out if you make certain design choices. In fact,
> on some small bikes, if the bike doesn't have toe-clip overlap I
> get concerned that something stupid was done in the design to avoid
> it which could make the bike dangerous at high speed. Classic
> example is some old Trek bikes with slack headangles and short fork
> rakes that are very dangerous at high speed. Crashing at 30mph is
> much worse than tipping over at an intersection.
> My Baylis is one of my best riding bikes - and at about 56cm ct
> with a 54.5cc top tube, it has overlap. Just isn't much of a
> problem, and the bike is a dream.
> Bikes with fenders, though, should NOT have overlap. Bad Bad Bad.
> Your foot can get stuck between fender and wheel, the fender
> collapses, and you crash.
> But - a bike with fenders is often a machine that uses wide tires
> and carries a front handlebar bag as well. And such bikes want
> very low trail which means very long fork rake for a given
> headangle. So, if running out of front center, design the bike
> with 72 headangle, run wide tires, use lots of rake, use a
> handlebar bag if you want to dial things in, and then you've made a
> machine with lots of clearance (depending on top tube and
> seatangle of course). The crazy thing is that such bikes loaded up
> front (and in many cases without a load) handle like a dream!
> Plus, the wide tires (if very high quality) are about as fast as
> the skinny tires. So you can have it all! And if you don't
> believe it, then you haven't ridden the right bike.
> Mike Kone in Boulder CO
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "Mark Cutrufelli" <rena.cutrufelli@comcast.net>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>> Subject: Re: [CR]Toe-clip overlap - even on "Good" bikes?
>> "I had a Jeunet with a fair bit of toeclip overlap... "
>> My 1983 54 cm (c-t) X 54 CM Masi gran crit also has considerable
>> toeclip
>> overlap but I don't let in throw me.
>> Mark Cutrufelli
>> Laurel, MD USA
> To: Classic rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: [CR]Colnago Super ID
> Message-ID: <20061031013003.99516.qmail@web32411.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> Precedence: list
> Message: 6
> Hello to all from a first timer,
> I have an early 70s' Colnago which I would like to learn more
> about. I purchased it with powder coating, so lacking are the
> decals. It has
> clues that lead me to believe it is from 1973. This being the fork
> crown with
> only the clover on top and the only braze-ons being the cable
> guides on the top
> of the BB and the rear mechanical cable stop on the drive chain
> stay. What
> really puzzles me are the fork tube lugs that are typical enough,
> yet I haven't seen a
> Colnago with this cut. How do I describe this? Well, you know
> how it is that
> the lugs from the seventies have a small semicircular cut within
> the lug. My
> frame lacks this detail. Basically, it looks the same though this
> detail is
> lacking. This feature in of itself is not unusual and found on
> many other frames. My
> Trek from 81 has the same cut (Cinelli I believe on the Trek).
> Otherwise, the
> clovers are on both fork lugs, seat lug and BB shell bottom.
> Additionally, the fork reinforcements (triangular inner brazed
> stiffeners have two holes each. A larger one above the
> smaller hole. Finally, this frame is assembled with pins visible in
> the bottom
> bracket.
> Presently, the frame is assembled with a mix of Campagnolo
> parts, but
> eventually
> as the NOS collection matures, I would like to give this Colnago the
> justly deserved restoration. It is 56cm.
> Any light shead on this mystery will be greatly appreciated.
> This
> bicycle handles just SUPER. Hence the model name no doubt.
> Thank you in advance,
> Carl Kamenzind
> Seattle WA 98126
> 206-937-0364
> ---------------------------------
> Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited Try it today.
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:39:36 -0700
> From: theonetrueBob@webtv.net (Bob Hanson)
> To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR] Re: Toe-clip overlap even on "Good" bikes.
> Message-ID: <2876-4546A958-2912@storefull-3272.bay.webtv.net>
> Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
> MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
> Precedence: list
> Message: 7
> Okay, perhaps I can be more clear on the basic issues I hoped to
> raise.
> First of all, I'm not saying: "old bike good, new bike bad" Also,
> I do
> in fact have several bikes with shorter wheel bases, and steeper head
> and seat tube angles... which is to say they're more "racing" bike in
> their geometry.
> I also did not mean to say that a hand built KOF bike, for example,
> always "should" have have either more antiquated, or touring or
> randonneur geometries in order to be considered really swell bikes
> in my
> eyes.
> I too would agree with Dale that it is certainly not absolutely
> necessary to have a virtual Easy Rider bicycle with a stretched front
> end which could allow fender clearance vast enough to even accomodate
> arctic expeditionary boots. I personally can make do quite
> comfortably
> with some overlap as well... and I can easily accept only occasionally
> becoming stymied (at an abrupt stop and start situation, for example),
> when on a bike with some shoe or toeclip overlap.
> I'm still genuinely curious if there is in fact a real prejudice these
> days (perhaps subconscious) against relaxed geometries and in favor of
> something leaning in the direction of what I guess I might call a
> "criterium" bike, before it would be commonly considered a "Well
> Handling" bike.
> It occurred to me that many KOF builders today, had begun perfecting
> their art during the waning of the 1970s. By that time so many of the
> more popular, and admittedly better built bikes, such as Colnago,
> Masi,
> Confenti, and basically any of the top-end flagship bikes of any of
> the
> the big manufacturers, were ALL truly designed as Racing bikes. ~ So,
> could this not have had a significant influence on what was
> perceived as
> a superior overall design for a bike?
> And, no offense intended here to any of the fine modern builders
> who we
> all so greatly admire, and who I also happen to think do far better
> work
> in general than most of the Pantheon of noted earlier builders.
> What I definitely have noticed is that I've seen little to indicate
> that
> anyone (in the US, at least) had ever even attempted to follow in the
> traditions of the French constructeurs, for example. Masi as a style
> model?... Definitely. But Herse?... Well, not that I know of.
> And, If
> I'm wrong here about American builders please excuse my ignorance.
> I should modify that last comment by saying: I have not seen this
> rather recently - because I have now seen Velo-Orange's move in that
> direction, as well as examples of at least one gorgeous Randonneur by
> Peter Weigle, some bikes by Peter White and also for that matter,
> Rivendell's plunge toward the realm of 650B cycles... and likely
> others
> as well. But, again, that is today.
> I think that what had surprised naive little me today was that a bike
> built with a certain expressed criteria in mind by the purchaser, had
> been built something frustratingly counter to those wishes.
> I think what I was picking up from that older gent today was his
> frustration that, although he knew he was not at Burger King, he still
> wanted to have things HIS way - regardless of cost... yet, he was
> blocked from this by an attitude that his way wouldn't be any
> good; and
> that he really should have a faster or better handling/steering bike
> than he really wanted or needed.
> He did mention that his previous bike was considerably heavier.
> However, it was also a Singer, purchased new in the mid 1960s. He
> gave
> it to his son around 1990 - who now still happily rides it
> somewhere on
> the West Coast. Maybe this colored the degree of his
> frustration... and
> also my own sympathy and empathy.
> Bob Hanson, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 20:49:24 -0500
> From: "devotion finesse" <devotion_finesse@hotmail.com>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]Bottom Bracket Cup Identification
> Message-ID: <BAY122-F20F9160E2CA40C30A8BA77F5F90@phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Precedence: list
> Message: 8
> List:
> Do these look familiar to anyone? There is no manufacturer name
> that I can
> identify. Any thoughts?
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=002&sspagename=STRK
> %3AMESE%3AIT&viewitem=&item=120047840984&rd=1&rd=1
> Thanks,
> Matthew Bowne
> Brooklyn, New York