Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
-
- Posts: 151
- Joined: 27 Oct 2009, 6:45pm
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
During my audax days, there was a chap who often had a pipe on the go as he rode along . He was an amazing chap and rider.
Trying to remember his name?
Trying to remember his name?
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
bagpussctc wrote:During my audax days, there was a chap who often had a pipe on the go as he rode along . He was an amazing chap and rider.
Trying to remember his name?
Yeah - but did his pipe ever dropout?
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
bagpussctc wrote:Elswick Hopper at a price .
1937_Elswick_Hopper_44 by rebalrid, on Flickr
Another British brand consigned to the pages of history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elswick_Hopper
Interesting triangulation there of the tubes on the step-through frame; don't think I've seen that particular type before.
I also note the different location of the mudguard mounts on the two bicycles; the mid-fork mount is something I associate with clubman-style cycles, but is there any advantage over having them at the dropouts?
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
good spots both.
The frame triangluation as depicted is (IMHO) basically pointless; the conventional place for a lady's frame to break is where the top tube joins the seat tube. I don't think that will be altered in any way by the added stays. As depicted, the frame will probably just be less comfortable to ride.
Having the mudguard stay mounts set two or three inches up the fork both allows the stays to be a little shorter and provides some improvment in the chances of avoiding a mudguard jam; if there is something that starts to jam, it may release itself, because the gap between the mudguard and the tyre will open up slightly as the mudguard moves, initially.
However a frame with a mudguard fitting at the dropout is (very simply) a lot cheaper to make, so that is what we are likely to end with....
cheers
The frame triangluation as depicted is (IMHO) basically pointless; the conventional place for a lady's frame to break is where the top tube joins the seat tube. I don't think that will be altered in any way by the added stays. As depicted, the frame will probably just be less comfortable to ride.
Having the mudguard stay mounts set two or three inches up the fork both allows the stays to be a little shorter and provides some improvment in the chances of avoiding a mudguard jam; if there is something that starts to jam, it may release itself, because the gap between the mudguard and the tyre will open up slightly as the mudguard moves, initially.
However a frame with a mudguard fitting at the dropout is (very simply) a lot cheaper to make, so that is what we are likely to end with....
cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
another "Happy Couple" advertisement.
Interesting that they have written "B.S.A" rather than "B.S.A." on the poster.
Today I think the ASA might have something to say about 'perfect in every part'
Interesting that they have written "B.S.A" rather than "B.S.A." on the poster.
Today I think the ASA might have something to say about 'perfect in every part'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
'perfection' varies; check out the shape of those fork ends...
from 1903
from 1951
70' is £3.50. This would have made it a very inexpensive new bike at the time.
from 1903
from 1951
70' is £3.50. This would have made it a very inexpensive new bike at the time.
Last edited by Brucey on 26 Aug 2019, 9:42am, edited 1 time in total.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
- Posts: 151
- Joined: 27 Oct 2009, 6:45pm
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
JohnW wrote:bagpussctc wrote:During my audax days, there was a chap who often had a pipe on the go as he rode along . He was an amazing chap and rider.
Trying to remember his name?
Yeah - but did his pipe ever dropout?
I am on my bike .
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
we've had the 'happy couple' several times over. This is different; a chaperon or, er, the happy threesome...?
Last edited by Brucey on 26 Aug 2019, 10:24am, edited 3 times in total.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
Brucey wrote:we've had the happy couple several times over. This is different; a chaperon or, er, the happy threesome...?
Looks like the Cotswolds.
John
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
Mm
That is odd.
Maybe even a bit spooky.
The norm in ads of a certain age is to have two women looking admiringly at a single man who has been wise/refined enough to buy a particular product.
Edit
Agh, just seen the second ad in that post.
That's the norm.
That is odd.
Maybe even a bit spooky.
The norm in ads of a certain age is to have two women looking admiringly at a single man who has been wise/refined enough to buy a particular product.
Edit
Agh, just seen the second ad in that post.
That's the norm.
Sweep
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
Sweep wrote:Mm
That is odd.
Maybe even a bit spooky.
The norm in ads of a certain age is to have two women looking admiringly at a single man who has been wise/refined enough to buy a particular product.
Edit
Agh, just seen the second ad in that post.
That's the norm.
spooky indeed! I just put that in as a contrast!
More;
Last edited by Brucey on 26 Aug 2019, 10:18am, edited 1 time in total.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
That parabike was of course given a fashion makeover by the italians - can't remember the italian company.
Sweep
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
Sweep wrote:That parabike was of course given a fashion makeover by the italians - can't remember the italian company.
there have been many versions; I'm not even sure the frame layout was first used by BSA, with or without hinges.
In more recent times Pashley have made this frame design, but without hinges. The result is something that is comfy to ride, but it is not a partcularly durable frame design.
cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
Sweep wrote:Mm
That is odd.
Maybe even a bit spooky.
The norm in ads of a certain age is to have two women looking admiringly at a single man who has been wise/refined enough to buy a particular product.
Edit
Agh, just seen the second ad in that post.
That's the norm.
Nah - they're laughing at his tie.
Re: Vintage Bicycle Advertisements; good, bad. ugly...
Brucey wrote:we've had the 'happy couple' several times over. This is different; a chaperon or, er, the happy threesome...?
...or the two at the back saying "wot about her, then?"
---o0o---
I've had this one on my office wall for a few years now:
Still trying to work out which handle works the stirrup-pump and which one turns on the gas.
Have we got time for another cuppa?