Hi Norris,
Many thanks for this.
Ellis Briggs had slightly mis-stated the frame size on the eBay listing - the seat tube is 22.5" c-to-t, and the top tube is 23".
What was the wheelbase on your Ultimate? Did the bike do well?
Best,
Wyndham Pulman-Jones Girton, Cambs., UK
On 17/10/09 00:58, "Norris Lockley" <nlockley73@googlemail.com> wrote:
> So much for the surmising and the history, now for the frame, particularly
> as the friend I wanted to speak to about the possible history of the E-B
> Flyer model, is out of contavt somewhere sunning himself in Spain.
>
> Had Simon's frame not been of the Sun Manx TT design I would have taken it
> for the double of a very similar, at first glance, late 40s Ossie Jackson
> bike that I have lurking somewhere in a dark corner of one of my stores.
>
> Everything about this frame shouts late 1940s /early 50s, but it has a
> number, given on the eBay advert. and Briggs' records should be able to
> place it..so it might well be a 1957. However a couple of years ago I spoke
> to Peter (Briggs?) one of the remaining directors of the firm about some
> oldish E-B frames that I have, and also about the rare double-curved seat
> tube SWB frame. Apparently that was news to him..and he admitted that his
> memory did not go back far and did not know much about the firm's activities
> in the 40s and 50s.
>
> It is a pity that Simon has not given us some dimensions to go by, although
> thathe eBay advert stated the size to be a 23". However the top-tube looks
> too long for the frame, mainly because the seat tube angle is very slack.One
> of the advantages in building this design of frame, as with the Baines
> "gate" design, is that the builder is not restricted steepening his seat
> angle or of shortening the length of the top-tube...it can be shortened
> quite a way without in any way interfering with the length of the rear
> triangle.
>
> The question of why Briggs chose this design has to be asked because neither
> the wheel nor the mudguard appaer to tuck under the angled seat tube. I
> reckon that the frame could have accepted a standard seat-tube and still
> managed the 39" wheelbase. Even with the rear wheel at the leading edge of
> the drop-outs, all that might have been needed is a simple flute in the rear
> of the tube, like Hetchins and many others have done.
>
> However the bike does look very interesting and obviously it rides well.
>
> The round fork blades really are 1940s style with that hockey-stick sharp
> bend at the bottom. The lugs are an English brand, might have been Davis or
> Vaughn..but they were seldom seen outside the Hopper factory in Lincolnshire
> where they were used on the special Lincoln Imp model, although the Nervex
> Pro-type pipe on theD/T-to-head-tube lug is not of the Hopper design.
>
> The bottom-bracket cluster is well contrived and constructed along the lines
> of a bilaminate lug. The bottom bracket shell was bought with the two
> chainstay pipes formed into it. The bottom end of the down tube has had a
> decorative sleeve, possibly the pipe cut off a standard bracket shell,
> brazed on to it to strengthen the joint with the seat tube, and the bottom
> end of the seat tube too has received a decorative sleeve...all nicely
> crafted. The D/T is simply bronze-welded onto the bracket shell. The really
> neat and thoughtful part of the cluster is the addition of the two bracing
> steel fins either side of the down tube..added just to provide more lateral
> strength to the bracket in the absence of the seat-tube joint. Routens in
> France also used a similar idea made up of off-cuts of tubing.
>
> The short strutts that brace the chainstays and the seat tube are 100% Sun
> Manx TT. I once tried that design on a heavy laden touring bike but dont
> know whether it conferred greater rigidity on the frame or reduced bracket
> flex...but I suppose there's more chance of it doing more good than harm.
>
> The chainstays appear to be the very popular rapid round-to-round taper,
> with the larger diameter end at the bracket having been cut away to provide
> the shorter rear triangle. As was evident from recent discussion of such
> chainstays on the List, supplies of these were available for some years into
> the 60s. I still have three pairs. The rear drop-outs look to be Stallard
> standard road models...a type which seemed to have petered out long before
> 1957...but who knows what is left in the cardboard boxes.
>
> The aspect of the frame that is difficult to explain fully, if at all, is
> the D/T transfer. This really is a rarity..a never-seen-before. For anyone
> to go to the lengths of producing a specific transfer such as this one, at
> considerable expense, they must have had a long production run in mind. Or
> perhaps they thought that they would push the boat out for this special
> model...by lashing out on an expensive and distinctive transfer. My own
> reading of this situation, is that these transfers were probably produced
> for the earlier twin curved seat tube frames. and were put into use on the
> new model. But I admit I could be very wide of the mark on this one.
>
> I reckon that Simon has bought himself a very very rare bird with this one..
> possibly the only one in captivity!...but I am not even going to attempt a
> guess at the one of the down-tube.
>
> If you want to see how this Shortwin-cum-Manx TT model has evolved into the
> Ultimate, then check out the CR's Brtish Isles section and look up Matt
> Gorski's MKM Ultimate. I took the design two stages further in its
> development...pictures can be seen at:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/
>
> Norris Lockley,
> Settle UK