I must say that my cranks do appear identical to those from the catalog Eddie posted, and also the same as the Record Ace posted on Eddie's site. The arm / spider is not one piece. The arms do have nice slim, sculpted lines, and have better polishing / finish than fairly common cranks (I'm only 43 but wasn't raised on alloy alone Harvey!).
For reference, the left has 3 stampings on the back: "S" "K" (both near the spindle), and "V" on the upper part of the arm The right is stamped "J" on the back of the arm.
Like many matters with old bikes, things like component specs and changes weren't always clear and deliberate I'd argue.
I'll repost these to ebay, with the caveat that they're believed to be RRA, as evidenced by the 1935 catalog, but they're not the same as later models w/ a 1 piece forged arm/spider. Those who disagree are welcome not to bid!
And many thanks to Eddie for that catalog page you posted.
Alan Cote Williston VT
On Jan 10, 2010 9:17am, Edward Albert <ealbert01@gmail.com> wrote:
> Harvey et. al.
> I am sorry to disagree but the early RRA's had the exact crankset that
> Allan has up on Ebay. Please to to my website http://www.vintagebikelife.com
> click on main menu, then on "general update and information" There you
> will find a PDF file. It is an article from Cycling Oct 9, 1935 showing
> the RRA that was released the year before. Look closely at the crankset.
> It is definitely the one Allen is showing and not the one that Peter put
> up a picture of.
> Edward Albert
> Chappaqua, NY, USA
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Harvey Sachs hmsachs@verizon.net> wrote:
> Thanks, Peter Kohler, for pointing out Alan Cote's error, that his cranks
> for sale (eBay 180454670191) are lower line Lenton rather than Raleigh
> Record Ace, and for the reference to your pictures of the actual RRA
> cranks http://tinyurl.com/
> Given Alan's notes on the history of the item, I'm sure it was
> inadvertent. Still, for those grounded in cotterless aluminum who wonder
> how us old guys find some of the legacy steel so attractive, it's
> worthwhile to look at both pairs of cranks. I call out two differences:
> The first is construction. The real RRA is a forging, as used also by
> Magistroni, Stronglight, and others for their top-line units. Note the
> smooth fillet where spider joins arm. The Lenton attaches a stamped
> spider with a forged (or cast) crank with a splined fitting, a much less
> expensive manufacturing operation. The other difference is aesthetics.
> The RRA just plain has grace of form. slender everywhere, honoring the
> strength of the material and manufacturing process. The Lenton just plain
> looks cruder with its large circle of sheet metal surrounding the spline
> fitting.
> One of my favorite steel cranks is the late cotterless Campagnolo 3-arm,
> although I think the RRA is even prettier. Personally, I think I prefer
> the Paramount to the RRA. Of course, beauty is in the eye of the
> beholder, but construction methods are objective.
> harvey sachs
> mcLean VA
> _______________________________________________
> Classicrendezvous mailing list
> Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> http://www.bikelist.org/
_______________________________________________
Classicrendezvous mailing list
Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
http://www.bikelist.org/