Re: [CR]ebay outing: de rosa 40th anniversary one-off frame


Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:26:13 +0000 (GMT)
From: gholl@optonline.net
Subject: Re: [CR]ebay outing: de rosa 40th anniversary one-off frame
In-reply-to: <002101c7cd35$92d51f70$6401a8c0@DELL>
To: Charles Andrews <chasds@mindspring.com>
References: <002101c7cd35$92d51f70$6401a8c0@DELL>
cc: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>

The appeal (or lack thereof) of all bikes is subjective. The only thing I see in this bike is it's putative uniqueness. I can well see why de Rosa made no more. It strikes me as large, clumsy and with a paint job that does little to alleviate the overall effect. I imagine its destiny will be with a big rider with a taste for one-off bikes. George Hollenberg MD Westport, CT, USA


----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Andrews
Date: Monday, July 23, 2007 11:00 am
Subject: [CR]ebay outing: de rosa 40th anniversary one-off frame
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org


> The frame of this bike is interesting:

\r?\n>

\r?\n> http://cgi.ebay.com:80/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=280136690549&ssPa

\r?\n> geName=ADME:B:SS:US:1

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Once De Rosa began making frames with cast lugs, it appears that

\r?\n> not

\r?\n> very much work went into finishing said lugs. No thinning to

\r?\n> speak of,

\r?\n> and while the shorelines of the lugs were probably touched up a

\r?\n> little,

\r?\n> the castings were likely precise enough that not much of that

\r?\n> was

\r?\n> required either. The end result is presentable enough, but a

\r?\n> bit crude

\r?\n> and clunky to my eye. The lack of obvious hand-work gives those

\r?\n> later

\r?\n> De Rosa frames a strange sterility that has never done much for

\r?\n> me. The

\r?\n> same is true of many, if not most, of Italian frames post-1978

\r?\n> or so.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> This De Rosa appears a little different. The chromed head-lugs

\r?\n> would

\r?\n> have required polishing, so some material might have been

\r?\n> removed, and

\r?\n> might account for the thinner appearance of the lugs. But note

\r?\n> the

\r?\n> seat-lug: no chrome, but it sure looks like someone took a file

\r?\n> to it,

\r?\n> because it looks nice and thin.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Also, these lugs look a little different from De Rosas usual of

\r?\n> the

\r?\n> time. Simpler.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> The older De Rosas, from before the cast-lugs, show many signs

\r?\n> of

\r?\n> hand-work, and are far more attractive than the later ones.

\r?\n> There is a

\r?\n> delicacy to the best ones that is hard to find in nearly any

\r?\n> other frame

\r?\n> similar-style frame of the period, as well as an obvious hand-

\r?\n> wrought

\r?\n> quality that is a pleasure to see.. Not all the old ones are

\r?\n> equally

\r?\n> nice, but nearly every one I've seen (not many, as they appear

\r?\n> to be

\r?\n> quite rare in this country) is extremely tasty.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> This one-off bike on ebay recalls some of that hand-wrought

\r?\n> quality to

\r?\n> me..and thus, I'm *really* glad its far to big for me, as I

\r?\n> would be

\r?\n> horribly tempted to bid on it. I'll be very curious to see

\r?\n> where it

\r?\n> ends.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Charles Andrews

\r?\n> Los Angeles