[CR] Modolo Hoods

(Example: Production Builders:Pogliaghi)

From: "JB" <jbfroke@gmail.com>
To: "classicrendezvous@bikelist.org" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3563.1273623549.34030.classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 20:05:18 -0700
References:
Subject: [CR] Modolo Hoods


Robbie,

I for one would likely purchase three (3) sets, either all natch gum colored or one (1) each of gum, off-white and black.

Ditto for Campies.

Down others' totem pole perhaps, but I'd pick weinnman and/or mafac over the former two.

J.B. Froke, Ph.D. Pebble Beach, CA

On May 11, 2010, at 17:19, classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org wrote:
> Send Classicrendezvous mailing list submissions to
> classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvous
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> classicrendezvous-owner@bikelist.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Classicrendezvous digest..."
>
>
> CR
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: size of market for modolo ergo hoods???? (Ken Freeman)
> 2. Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate" Racers?
> (P.C. Kohler)
> 3. FS: Lot of 20 Cycling T-shirts (Raymond Dobbins)
> 4. Re: Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate" Racers?
> (Ken Freeman)
> 5. Re: Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate" Racers?
> (Ken Freeman)
> 6. Re: Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate" Racers?
> (Ken Freeman)
> 7. Lot of 20 Cycling T-shirts is SOLD (Raymond Dobbins)
> 8. Skid Lid anyone? (gear@xmission.com)
> 9. Re: Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate" Racers?
> (P.C. Kohler)
> 10. Re: Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate" Racers?
> (Ken Freeman)
> 11. WTB: Bluemels shorty mudguards (Joe Bunik)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 16:17:42 -0400
> From: Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] size of market for modolo ergo hoods????
> To: marcus.e.helman@saab.com
> Cc: Rnitro1969@aol.com, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTilwxWJYqtJDrdTnh91R1qQh0MAtu4Feo0UyMEKP@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> I haven't looked lately, but are the AME faux-Modolo ergo hoods still
> available? Personally I stashed a few years ago, and won't need any for
> quite a while.
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 2:06 PM, <marcus.e.helman@saab.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Robbie,
>>
>> I don't need a pair of Modolo hoods, but how about some of those
>> Campagnolo shift lever covers? If you could make those in colors, I would
>> definitely want some.
>>
>> Anyone else?
>>
>>
>> Best regards/Med v?nlig h?lsning,
>> Marcus Helman
>> Royal Oak, MI
>>
>> Robbie Fellows wrote:
>>
>> greetings
>>
>> just feeling things out.
>> looking for opinions as
>> to the idea of making
>> modolo ergo hoods.
>> my thoughts as per usual
>> are that the market is really
>> small.but who knows and would
>> need many pre order to cover
>> initial cost.
>> i think they are model 919
>> but cant remember.
>> could be made in all sorts of colors.
>>
>>
>> thanks again.
>> robbie fellows
>> lakewood,ca.
>>
>> Nothing in this message is intended to constitute an electronic signature
>> unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message.
>>
>> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the person or
>> entity to which it is addressed. It may contain confidential and/or
>> privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination or other use,
>> or taking of any action in reliance upon this message by persons or entities
>> other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you
>> received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete it from
>> your computer.
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ken Freeman
> Ann Arbor, MI USA
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 13:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "P.C. Kohler" <kohl57@yahoo.com>
> Subject: [CR] Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate" Racers?
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Message-ID: <281749.49353.qm@web54403.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> "NOTE: A Gitane collector submitted specs for the 70s vintage
> TdFs that are definitely pretty stretched out: 72.5 degree
> parallel, 5.5cm of rake and 45cm stays.
>
>
> -Dave Mann, Boston, MA"
>
> "Stretched out"?!
>
> One of the joys of taking this stuff out on the road on a regular basis is explaining that, yes, this really is a RACING BIKE of its era and yes you really can put a fist between the seat tube and the rear tyre and still still won lots of real roadraces on such things. Honest. But why I am explaining the geometry of my proper steel racing machine to a guy riding a "racing bike" with a girl's sloping top tube that looks four times too small for him anyway?
>
> 72 parallel angles on a racing bike was the standard in the 1960s I think, certainly the PX-10 had these measurements from late 1950s through to about 1973. And I think 73 parallel was pretty much the standard for Italian machines of late 60s-mid 70s. There was recently some discussion if "Gran Criterium" was applicable to the Masi of the same name and by modern standards, certainly not and even maybe not by contemporary ones of the day. My '71 GC is a creampuff compared to even my '74 Colnago in ride and my '75 Gios all the more nimble and "racy".
>
> Contemporary British machines like the Carlton Giro d'Italia/Raleigh Professional were, if anything, more severe in geometry than the Continental stage racing bikes with higher bottom brackets and reflecting British preferences for timetrialling perhaps. Holdsworth Professionals started out as 73 parallel in 1971 went to 74 c. 1973-74 and even 75 parallel a year later which was found to be too twitchy and they went back to 74 but all still way stiffer than most Continental makes of the time. Falcon San Remo's were 73 parallel from their inception, I think, which made them very stiff compared to their 1960s contemporaries and with less fork rake than many British makes but still with those long 17 and some chainstays.
>
> Fork rakes seem to be LONG on French and British machines and shorter on Italian ones of the same era. More than angles, I think this really distinguishes the handling and one of the reasons Merckx was said to have both thoroughly disliked riding PX-10s and didn't master descending until he got Italian iron under him. And top tubes, likewise, longer on French and British frames. Ideally, I'd prefer to climb Mt. Ventoux on my PX-10 and descend it on my Gios or Colnago and time trial on a Raleigh/Carlton Pro.
>
> I don't collect pre-war machines, but suspect the average was probably 70 on French ones, maybe 71 on Italian. But immediate post-war doesn't look much different and Coppi looked like a sparrow stretched on the rack on those long top tube Bianchis of the day.
>
> Peter Kohler
> Washington DC USA
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 13:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Raymond Dobbins <raydobbins2003@yahoo.com>
> Subject: [CR] FS: Lot of 20 Cycling T-shirts
> To: Classic Rendezvous Bike List <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Message-ID: <871766.99273.qm@web63402.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> ?
> Lot of 20 used vintage-related cycling t-shirts, size XL, 100% cotton.? Price is $120, including shipping.
> ?
> Photos:? http://www.raydobbins.com/tshirts/tshirts.htm
> ?
> Thanks for looking.
> ?
> Ray Dobbins
> Miami, Florida, USA
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 17:07:30 -0400
> From: Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate"
> Racers?
> To: "Mann, Dave" <damann@mitre.org>
> Cc: "classicrendezvous@bikelist.org" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTilbFsVd0Y2PwB2EMPNvRUNQ8IjISZKau9cT2GgU@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Dave,
>
> I recall from a similar discussion on another forum that the transition in
> the PX-10 design was in the 1976/1977 time frame. But I have a 1968 or 1969
> PX-10, and while it is laid back, it's not as laid back as the Gitane you
> mention or my early '70s UO-8 (cheaper Peugeot at the start of the Bike
> Boom).
>
> Model, seat tube c-c, top tube, chainstay, wheelbase, seat tube angle, head
> tube angle, offset, trail, BB drop
> 1968/9 PX-10: 52, 54.5, 42, 100, 73, 73, 50, 50, 7.2
> 1970/4 UO-8: 55, 57, 45, 106, 72, 73, 57.5, 42, 7.1
> 1973 Super Course: 52.5, 56.5, 44.3, 105, 73.3, 72, 50. 54.3, 7.3
>
> Eyeballing the UO-8 and the 1936 picture, I'd guess the geometries are very
> similar, except the 1936 bike seems to have the head tube slightly laid back
> compared to my UO-8. Clearly from my measurements the 1968 bike (well, 30
> years newer!!) is much closer to what we'd see as a racer, than is the
> 1936.
>
> Your reference to the International note is interesting. After I read that
> many moons ago, I started looking for geometry similar to a late '60s
> Internat, and found the 1973 and earlier Super Course (also a Carlton bike)
> to be very similar, in terms of rake, angles, and chainstay. However, this
> couldn't be a true apples to apples comparison, since I couldn't measure an
> International.
>
> At the Ann Arbor Vintage Bike Show and Swap a few weeks ago, I saw a 1955
> East German Diamant racing bike - very similar to the 1936 Peug! If it had
> been $200 ...
>
> I definitely concur the 1963 geometry is tighter, but I wouldn't make any
> numerical guesses. It does look like my 1968, proportions/wise.
> Clearly any bike that can host a frame pump behind the seat tube has a few
> cm more chainstay than one that cannot!
>
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Mann, Dave <damann@mitre.org> wrote:
>
>> Short version of the question is this:
>>
>> Does anybody have access to a pre-war Peugeot racing bike
>> and could they document the frame geometry of it?
>>
>> http://www.peugeotshow.com/images/1936_2.jpg
>>
>>
>> The longer version of the question is this:
>>
>> I'm interested in understanding more about when the classic
>> road racing geometry began to emerge and separate itself
>> away from the longer wheelbased designs. Many 50 vintage
>> British bikes (Mercian, Raleigh) used 73 or 72 parallel
>> angles, longer stays in the 6.0cm range and longer stays.
>>
>> This longer, more relaxed geometry appears to have persisted
>> into the 70s being sold as a light tourer, amateur racer,
>> semi-pro racer or it would seem among production Gitane
>> Tour de Frances.
>>
>> In the write up on the Raleigh International, the author
>> (Ray Chong or Sheldon Brown?) states:
>>
>> "While the Professional was patterned after the popular Italianate style
>> popular in the early '70s, the International harkend back to an earlier ear.
>> The International frame was built for comfort, lightness and verastility,
>> while the Professional was built for stiffness and maneuverability. The
>> Internationals had very generous tire clearanbce (hence the need for the
>> long-reach Weinmann calipers) and relaxed angles."
>> See: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/retroraleighs/international.html
>>
>> The 1936 Peugeot's I posted a link to are interesting to me
>> in that they *appear* to both have the longer, more relaxed
>> geometry.
>>
>> By 1951, it appears that Peugeot was discriminating between
>> "sport", "course" (racing) and "course professional" (pro racing).
>> http://www.peugeotshow.com/images/cat1951R.jpg
>> Unclear what the geometries are here too.
>>
>> Again, in 1963, Peugeot makes the distinction between the
>> amateur racer and the professional racer and again, it would
>> be interesting to know if the professional was starting to
>> tighten up and steepen. That rear triangle looks shorter to
>> my eyes.
>> See: http://www.peugeotshow.com/images/1963_3.jpg
>>
>> In like manner, the Raleigh Professional looks to be a steeper
>> shorter layout by 1969.
>> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/retroraleighs/professional.html
>>
>>
>> The real question here is where did the short wheelbase
>> racing geometry start and when did it find it's way into
>> the mainstream in both British and French production bikes?
>>
>> NOTE: A Gitane collector submitted specs for the 70s vintage
>> TdFs that are definitely pretty stretched out: 72.5 degree
>> parallel, 5.5cm of rake and 45cm stays.
>>
>>
>> -Dave Mann, Boston, MA
>> -------------------------
>> THE BIKE GEOMETRY PROJECT
>> A community effort to document and compare bike geometries
>> http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/dirtbag-bikes/geometry-project.html<http://home.comcast.net/%7Epinnah/dirtbag-bikes/geometry-project.html>
>> -------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ken Freeman
> Ann Arbor, MI USA
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 17:11:24 -0400
> From: Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate"
> Racers?
> To: "Mann, Dave" <damann@mitre.org>
> Cc: "classicrendezvous@bikelist.org" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTil3UlCzIbMMiAHfxGoGK9CUlPAoueD0IhP5BOyw@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Let my correct my UO-8 numbers: the fork offset is 70 mm, not 57.5 mm, and
> the trail is 30 mm, not 42 mm. I have two of those frames, and one has the
> blades bent back a little.
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Dave,
>>
>> I recall from a similar discussion on another forum that the transition in
>> the PX-10 design was in the 1976/1977 time frame. But I have a 1968 or 1969
>> PX-10, and while it is laid back, it's not as laid back as the Gitane you
>> mention or my early '70s UO-8 (cheaper Peugeot at the start of the Bike
>> Boom).
>>
>> Model, seat tube c-c, top tube, chainstay, wheelbase, seat tube angle, head
>> tube angle, offset, trail, BB drop
>> 1968/9 PX-10: 52, 54.5, 42, 100, 73, 73, 50, 50, 7.2
>> 1970/4 UO-8: 55, 57, 45, 106, 72, 73, 57.5, 42, 7.1
>> 1973 Super Course: 52.5, 56.5, 44.3, 105, 73.3, 72, 50. 54.3, 7.3
>>
>> Eyeballing the UO-8 and the 1936 picture, I'd guess the geometries are very
>> similar, except the 1936 bike seems to have the head tube slightly laid back
>> compared to my UO-8. Clearly from my measurements the 1968 bike (well, 30
>> years newer!!) is much closer to what we'd see as a racer, than is the
>> 1936.
>>
>> Your reference to the International note is interesting. After I read that
>> many moons ago, I started looking for geometry similar to a late '60s
>> Internat, and found the 1973 and earlier Super Course (also a Carlton bike)
>> to be very similar, in terms of rake, angles, and chainstay. However, this
>> couldn't be a true apples to apples comparison, since I couldn't measure an
>> International.
>>
>> At the Ann Arbor Vintage Bike Show and Swap a few weeks ago, I saw a 1955
>> East German Diamant racing bike - very similar to the 1936 Peug! If it had
>> been $200 ...
>>
>> I definitely concur the 1963 geometry is tighter, but I wouldn't make any
>> numerical guesses. It does look like my 1968, proportions/wise.
>> Clearly any bike that can host a frame pump behind the seat tube has a few
>> cm more chainstay than one that cannot!
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Mann, Dave <damann@mitre.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Short version of the question is this:
>>>
>>> Does anybody have access to a pre-war Peugeot racing bike
>>> and could they document the frame geometry of it?
>>>
>>> http://www.peugeotshow.com/images/1936_2.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>> The longer version of the question is this:
>>>
>>> I'm interested in understanding more about when the classic
>>> road racing geometry began to emerge and separate itself
>>> away from the longer wheelbased designs. Many 50 vintage
>>> British bikes (Mercian, Raleigh) used 73 or 72 parallel
>>> angles, longer stays in the 6.0cm range and longer stays.
>>>
>>> This longer, more relaxed geometry appears to have persisted
>>> into the 70s being sold as a light tourer, amateur racer,
>>> semi-pro racer or it would seem among production Gitane
>>> Tour de Frances.
>>>
>>> In the write up on the Raleigh International, the author
>>> (Ray Chong or Sheldon Brown?) states:
>>>
>>> "While the Professional was patterned after the popular Italianate style
>>> popular in the early '70s, the International harkend back to an earlier ear.
>>> The International frame was built for comfort, lightness and verastility,
>>> while the Professional was built for stiffness and maneuverability. The
>>> Internationals had very generous tire clearanbce (hence the need for the
>>> long-reach Weinmann calipers) and relaxed angles."
>>> See: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/retroraleighs/international.html
>>>
>>> The 1936 Peugeot's I posted a link to are interesting to me
>>> in that they *appear* to both have the longer, more relaxed
>>> geometry.
>>>
>>> By 1951, it appears that Peugeot was discriminating between
>>> "sport", "course" (racing) and "course professional" (pro racing).
>>> http://www.peugeotshow.com/images/cat1951R.jpg
>>> Unclear what the geometries are here too.
>>>
>>> Again, in 1963, Peugeot makes the distinction between the
>>> amateur racer and the professional racer and again, it would
>>> be interesting to know if the professional was starting to
>>> tighten up and steepen. That rear triangle looks shorter to
>>> my eyes.
>>> See: http://www.peugeotshow.com/images/1963_3.jpg
>>>
>>> In like manner, the Raleigh Professional looks to be a steeper
>>> shorter layout by 1969.
>>> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/retroraleighs/professional.html
>>>
>>>
>>> The real question here is where did the short wheelbase
>>> racing geometry start and when did it find it's way into
>>> the mainstream in both British and French production bikes?
>>>
>>> NOTE: A Gitane collector submitted specs for the 70s vintage
>>> TdFs that are definitely pretty stretched out: 72.5 degree
>>> parallel, 5.5cm of rake and 45cm stays.
>>>
>>>
>>> -Dave Mann, Boston, MA
>>> -------------------------
>>> THE BIKE GEOMETRY PROJECT
>>> A community effort to document and compare bike geometries
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/dirtbag-bikes/geometry-project.html<http://home.comcast.net/%7Epinnah/dirtbag-bikes/geometry-project.html>
>>> -------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ken Freeman
>> Ann Arbor, MI USA
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ken Freeman
> Ann Arbor, MI USA
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 17:22:51 -0400
> From: Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate"
> Racers?
> To: "P.C. Kohler" <kohl57@yahoo.com>
> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTilzufG6_zYE7zJiftUfBbNPfkxW_fxIgUhbHcbT@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Not to fight about the numbers, but I want to point out that my 52 cm 1968
> or 69 PX-10 measures out with 73/73 angles. It's not built so I can't tell
> you how it rides. Your generalization is not good.
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 4:22 PM, P.C. Kohler <kohl57@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> "NOTE: A Gitane collector submitted specs for the 70s vintage
>> TdFs that are definitely pretty stretched out: 72.5 degree
>> parallel, 5.5cm of rake and 45cm stays.
>>
>>
>> -Dave Mann, Boston, MA"
>>
>> "Stretched out"?!
>>
>> One of the joys of taking this stuff out on the road on a regular basis is
>> explaining that, yes, this really is a RACING BIKE of its era and yes you
>> really can put a fist between the seat tube and the rear tyre and still
>> still won lots of real roadraces on such things. Honest. But why I am
>> explaining the geometry of my proper steel racing machine to a guy riding a
>> "racing bike" with a girl's sloping top tube that looks four times too small
>> for him anyway?
>>
>> 72 parallel angles on a racing bike was the standard in the 1960s I think,
>> certainly the PX-10 had these measurements from late 1950s through to about
>> 1973. And I think 73 parallel was pretty much the standard for Italian
>> machines of late 60s-mid 70s. There was recently some discussion if "Gran
>> Criterium" was applicable to the Masi of the same name and by modern
>> standards, certainly not and even maybe not by contemporary ones of the day.
>> My '71 GC is a creampuff compared to even my '74 Colnago in ride and my '75
>> Gios all the more nimble and "racy".
>>
>> Contemporary British machines like the Carlton Giro d'Italia/Raleigh
>> Professional were, if anything, more severe in geometry than the Continental
>> stage racing bikes with higher bottom brackets and reflecting British
>> preferences for timetrialling perhaps. Holdsworth Professionals started out
>> as 73 parallel in 1971 went to 74 c. 1973-74 and even 75 parallel a year
>> later which was found to be too twitchy and they went back to 74 but all
>> still way stiffer than most Continental makes of the time. Falcon San Remo's
>> were 73 parallel from their inception, I think, which made them very stiff
>> compared to their 1960s contemporaries and with less fork rake than many
>> British makes but still with those long 17 and some chainstays.
>>
>> Fork rakes seem to be LONG on French and British machines and shorter on
>> Italian ones of the same era. More than angles, I think this really
>> distinguishes the handling and one of the reasons Merckx was said to have
>> both thoroughly disliked riding PX-10s and didn't master descending until he
>> got Italian iron under him. And top tubes, likewise, longer on French and
>> British frames. Ideally, I'd prefer to climb Mt. Ventoux on my PX-10 and
>> descend it on my Gios or Colnago and time trial on a Raleigh/Carlton Pro.
>>
>> I don't collect pre-war machines, but suspect the average was probably 70
>> on French ones, maybe 71 on Italian. But immediate post-war doesn't look
>> much different and Coppi looked like a sparrow stretched on the rack on
>> those long top tube Bianchis of the day.
>>
>> Peter Kohler
>> Washington DC USA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ken Freeman
> Ann Arbor, MI USA
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 15:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Raymond Dobbins <raydobbins2003@yahoo.com>
> Subject: [CR] Lot of 20 Cycling T-shirts is SOLD
> To: Classic Rendezvous Bike List <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Message-ID: <631176.27780.qm@web63404.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> ?
> The t-shirts are sold.? Thanks.
> ?
> Ray Dobbins
> Miami Florida USA
>
> --- On Tue, 5/11/10, Raymond Dobbins <raydobbins2003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Raymond Dobbins <raydobbins2003@yahoo.com>
> Subject: [CR] FS: Lot of 20 Cycling T-shirts
> To: "Classic Rendezvous Bike List" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Date: Tuesday, May 11, 2010, 4:45 PM
>
>
> ?
> Lot of 20 used vintage-related cycling t-shirts, size XL, 100% cotton.? Price is $120, including shipping.
> ?
> Photos:? http://www.raydobbins.com/tshirts/tshirts.htm
> ?
> Thanks for looking.
> ?
> Ray Dobbins
> Miami, Florida, USA
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 16:39:01 -0600
> From: gear@xmission.com
> Subject: [CR] Skid Lid anyone?
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Message-ID: <20100511163901.83axofolkwwco08s@webmail.xmission.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
> format="flowed"
>
> Hi All,
>
> A little while ago, I sold an early Brancale helmet, and it sparked a
> little bit of chatter about contemporary hardshell helmets, including
> the Skid Lid. Lo and behold, today I found a Skid Lid lurking in a
> box. Anyone want it? It would make a good display or something. I'll
> offer it here before ebay, for, say, $15 shipped? I really don't know
> what to ask for it. Trade me something, I don't know.
>
> Anyway, if you want to see what it looks like, contact me and I'll
> send pics. It has the front visor, interior padding with several of
> the sizing foam dots in there, too. Strap is good, helmet shows use,
> but it's a real looker still. To quote R. Dangerfield in Caddyshack,
> '...uh, looks good on you, though."
>
> Thanks,
>
> Greg Overton
> waiting for snow, near
> Denver, Colorado
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 15:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "P.C. Kohler" <kohl57@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate"
> Racers?
> To: Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Message-ID: <613494.15681.qm@web54409.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 5/11/10, Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate" Racers?
> To: "P.C. Kohler" <kohl57@yahoo.com>
> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Date: Tuesday, May 11, 2010, 5:22 PM
>
>
> "Not to fight about the numbers, but I want to point out that my? 52 cm 1968 or 69 PX-10 measures out with 73/73 angles.? It's not built so I can't tell you how it rides.? Your generalization is not good."
> ?
> Not alas a generalization of mine. But the spec'd frame angles from a 1970 catalogue. 52 cm is small and I suspect most of these catalogue spec's for angles, weights etc. were for a 56 cm. My '69 PX-10 sure?isn't a 73 and she's a 62 cm c-c.
> ?
> Peter Kohler
> Washington DC USA
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 19:28:50 -0400
> From: Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate"
> Racers?
> To: "P.C. Kohler" <kohl57@yahoo.com>
> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTinY900iTIt95VWNcxgkYBDoZN1ME9tgGqBnCRRz@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Well, this makes sense, that they were different for different sizes. Many
> smaller Italian road racing frames have a steeper seat angle in smaller
> frames - my 52 cm Mondonico is about 75 degrees.
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:59 PM, P.C. Kohler <kohl57@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> --- On *Tue, 5/11/10, Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>* wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [CR] Pre War Peugeot Racing Bikes and "Italianate" Racers?
>> To: "P.C. Kohler" <kohl57@yahoo.com>
>> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>> Date: Tuesday, May 11, 2010, 5:22 PM
>>
>>
>> "Not to fight about the numbers, but I want to point out that my 52 cm
>> 1968 or 69 PX-10 measures out with 73/73 angles. It's not built so I can't
>> tell you how it rides. Your generalization is not good."
>>
>> Not alas a generalization of mine. But the spec'd frame angles from a 1970
>> catalogue. 52 cm is small and I suspect most of these catalogue spec's for
>> angles, weights etc. were for a 56 cm. My '69 PX-10 sure isn't a 73 and
>> she's a 62 cm c-c.
>>
>> Peter Kohler
>> Washington DC USA
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Ken Freeman
> Ann Arbor, MI USA
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 17:19:09 -0700
> From: Joe Bunik <jbunik@gmail.com>
> Subject: [CR] WTB: Bluemels shorty mudguards
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTinBI61vMg9VWDAgrbZk6KTyKGC79qcbnMHdXQZT@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Does anyone have an excess pair of these (used is fine, reasonable
> price required) in aluminum or silver? Am hoping for a 35 to 40mm
> inner width...
>
> Thanks
> =- Joe Bunik
> Walnut Creek, CA USA
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> End of Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 89, Issue 46
> *************************************************