Re: [CR] Desperado Cycles

(Example: Books:Ron Kitching)

Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 00:08:20 -0800
From: "verktyg" <verktyg@aol.com>
To: <Carb7008@cs.com>, <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <4b332.1d166b2e.3892947a@cs.com>
In-Reply-To: <4b332.1d166b2e.3892947a@cs.com>
Subject: Re: [CR] Desperado Cycles


Jack,

I have books, copies or links to about 20 of these lists of tubing specs. They're all a little different.

Was it due to misinformation, typos, errors in converting from inch to metric dimensions, BWG to inch or metric dimensions or the frequent changes that the tubing manufacturers made over the years.

For example in the late 70s and early 80s, Reynolds, Columbus and Vitus increased the wall thickness of the tubing in their chainstays on their lighter tubing sets by 0.1mm. This may have been due to cracking problems???

Another example, for years there have been arguments over whether Tange #1 or #2 was the lighter tube set. One chart says one thing another contradicts it. Even some of the Tange factory charts conflict.

These lists or charts are handy guidelines but very few bicycle tubes were ever drawn as accurately as the published dimensions. ;-)

Chas. Colerich Oakland, CA USA

Carb7008@cs.com wrote:
> Please excuse if this is off-topic or previously covered but site contains
> interesting bike tubing info.
>
> http://desperadocycles.com/The_Lowdown_On_Tubing/Tubing_Properties_For_Non_T
> rue_Temper_Tubing.htm
>
> Jack Romans
> Sacramento, California