My recollection is that the finish on even the top Crescents was pretty rough, probably worse on average than the famously inconsistent finish of Raleigh. Never owned a Crescent, but I saw a few in the shops In The Day, and they certainly weren't meticulous. There is no particular reason to expect the stainless ones were finished any better. But the stainless model was an interesting idea, and I personally like the graphics of the orange and the blue 531 models as well. Plus, in the 60's and 70's, all things Swedish were considered cool, or in the case of the long legged Swedish models in the Crescent ads, hot.
Regards,
Jerry Moos Big Spring, TX
Mark Bulgier <Mark@bulgier.net> wrote:
Dale wrote:
> Does anyone on the CR-list have one of these bikes?
http://ebay.com/
> I have seen maybe three of these in my life and that was quite a while
> ago but my distinct lasting impressions were that they gave some
> Swedish "MASTER CRAFTSMEN" a bad reputation... I.e., they were
> extremely rough in execution. The lug lining or pin striping was also
> very sloppy...
The seller sent me 11 pretty good closeup photos, and I put them up at:
http://bulgier.net/
Unfortunately they only reinforced my belief that the starting bid is too high. If Dale thought the original pinstriping was rough, wait 'til he sees this one. It looks like it was done with the brush you paint a barn with. An ugly barn.
The BB shell is so cheezy, and with brazing so lumpy, that I wonder if maybe the shell was replaced at some point? By an amateur or beginner repairman at that - no pro framebuilder I know would let work like that out of the shop. Could the vaunted Crescent Stainless really have been that cobby originally? Yuk.
I fear the seller, if he reads this , may take offense, but none is intended. There's nothing wrong with putting a bike up for auction, just because I think it's ugly! Especially a historically interesting, collectable bike like this.
Mark Bulgier
Seattle WA USA