Perhaps the better description of PX-10 quality is that it was very high
during the 1950's, tapered down during the 1960's, was passable
during the bike boom and 70's and then took a fairly remarkable upwar
d turn in the 1980's. My 1952 PH-10 has very thin lugs and quite a n
ice level of finish. 1960's frames go at very strong prices, mostl
y based on their merit. The 1970s bikes were probably the best value i
n the marketplace and I suppose Peugeot could sell all they could make.
That's never good for niceties like the finish quality of a productio
n bicycle. The 1980's bikes look just great and the custom ones are
spectacular.The1952 PH-10 carries a sticker from a shop in Nice. Dri
ving the great quality of Urago must have been that lower priced (pre
sumably) PH-10 next to it in a shop in the hometown of the Urago worksho
p. Peugeot set a benchmark for value in France and I suppose that comp
etition is one reason why French bikes are often so nice and provided go
od value.Joe Bender-ZanoniGreat Notch, NJ----- Original Message ----
-From: "P.C. Kohler" Date: Thursday, March 1, 2007 8:2
7 pmSubject: [CR]Late model Peugeot PX-10sTo: Classicrendezvous@
bikelist.org> I own a 1985 Peugeot PX (Columbus SLX and all Mavic co
mponents). > 100 per > cent French (well except the tubing and the
Mavic-labelled > Modolo > brakes!). Totally classic, totally CR
List worthy despite > falling beyond > that cut-off date "thing"
. She's one of the best riding machines > in my > admittedly sma
ll collection, beautiful finish and the build > quality is > frank
ly better than the "classic" Peugeots PX-10s of the 60s. A > lot
> better. Indeed, I think Peugeot reached their pinnacle c. 198
1-> 86. My > no. 1 coveted bike remains a 753 tubed 1981ish PY-1
0P. I paid > about $460 > for my PX so $250 seems... wel
l a bargain. > > http://www.wooljersey.com/
multipart/alternative> text/plain (text body -- kept)> text/html>
---> ______________________