PilotFishBob 

You'd think the pain incurred from the recent 40's/50's Brit bike builds I've undertaken would bring me to my senses, but apparently you'd think wrong. Here we go again...

Came across a 1954 Gillott frame set last year, in mediocre shape but looked like it had potential. I knew it would be a lot work, but I also knew the model is uncommon, and the idea was appealing at the time. The price was low (for good reason), it was my size and - after some consideration - I caved. No alcohol was involved (this time).

Sadly, someone got their hands on it at some point and did the unforgivable, removing several braze-ons. Given the nature of the rear dropouts it would have been hard to adapt a hanger-type RD so likely fixed gear at that time. I'd like to try to restore it close to its original condition as I can and this project will span over this year and likely into next given time and financial constraints. That and fabricating/installing new braze-ons and finding appropriate parts will be a challenge. I decided to go ahead and post it here and get info from you folks that might help me with this.

As you can see, this thing has a lot of braze-ons remaining, quite a few for running a wire from a rear dyno to a front light.

PilotFishBob 

Removing some paint uncovered the extent of pain ahead. I could tell by the seller's photos that it had originally had a chainstay derailleur hanger and, with the wire run loops, a dyno mount in the rear - that was easy.





After I received it however, I found where an FD mount had been on the seat tube, above a cable stop on the rear of the tube angled towards the right side. I'm not sure what FD would have been used - possibly a modded Simplex Type 39 or similar?




Also found evidence of a removed braze-on on the RH chainstay a few inches rear of the bottom bracket. Not sure what this would have been - maybe the mount for an RD return spring for something like a Cyclo? How far into the 50's were those common? And the RD cable guides only accomodate 1 cable, not a dual setup that seemed common for that kind of thing. Not sure what to make of it.



Any input on what sort of shift rig this might have sported given those braze-on locations and year would be appreciated. I've done some research but I haven't figured it out quite yet. Thanks all!

TenGrainBread 

Wow, very cool bike.
My guess on RD - almost certainly a British Cyclo.
​​​​​

PilotFishBob 

Did a little more searching this morning and found this example on Flickr, coincidentally also an Alpine tourist - And I wasn't searching on the term "Gillott." Go figure. Only a single cable with a bell crank type rear derailleur, but that spring anchor is further back. The braze position on mine is quite the distance to stretch a spring, still scratching my head over here. I seem to have a talent for finding the strange ones.

TenGrainBread 

Cyclo derailleurs generally have a longer spring than the derailleur above, mounted closer to the bottom bracket. That's why I guessed Cyclo above.

​​​​​​

PilotFishBob 

Good info, thanks! That helps a lot with that particular issue, I'm still digging around on what FD would have been used. The Simplex Juy 56 was the down-pull successor to the Type 39 but of course came out 2 years after this was built. I would still use it of course but finding one anytime soon seems extremely unlikely and when one does appear it will no doubt have an exorbitant ask. I'll keep digging, the challenge is the big part of why I find these post-war British bikes interesting.

nlerner

Interesting similarities between that headbadge and the one from a 60s Ken Ryall I had for a few years:

merziac

Jan/Rene Herse had rod operated FD's at one point quite awhile back.

They were hand made from scratch, didn't look really complicated but did use a custom braze on.

There was a good article when they made it where they really drilled down, can't find it now but they show it here too and there's a link to a video.

https://www.renehersecycles.com/nivex-or-etap/

Really looks the part IMO.

PilotFishBob 

I've seen that, his Nivex-derived rd is pretty slick but too expensive for my tastes ( habitual bottom-feeder speaking here). I've lusted after one of the original Nivex but have never seen one for sale. However somewhere across the years I wound up with an Altenberger, which is close and maybe one day I'll find some use for that. I came across an article a while back from someone who fabricated his own Routens type FD, simple and elegant. One of the pictures preceding shows one similar to the Juy 56 I mentioned previously. https://bicyclespecialties.blogspot....r-project.html

cinelliguy 

Sorry...but that cage looks like a flattened out tuna can.

Guy

merziac

Agreed, hence it looks the part, that pic is the prototype I believe.

merziac

I think @scarlson made one from scratch as well, he would be your guy I bet.

We'll see if he chimes in.

scarlson 

Gillott, very nice. I have wanted one for years. I remember listening to an interview with Ron Cooper before he died, recounting his time at Gillott. He said he learned to braze on a forge, not with a torch. Crazy different times.

My Jack Taylor from '59 uses a French Le Cyclo, 5-speed. It shifts pretty well, for the era. Now, the Taylors were inveterate francophiles with their component choices, but still, it was not uncommon to see Cyclo rear mechs on bikes from that era. I'd concur, I bet the Cyclo pressed steel mount was brazed there to the chainstay. Cyclo derailleurs are still pretty cheap. I bet you can find one affordably and cut/braze its mount on, along with something for the spring. Springs came in a variety of lengths, it seems. Most of them I've seen (French Le Cyclo, British Benelux, whatever) go nearly all the way to the bottom bracket.

For the FD, how about a Simplex Juy 53 or 53b? Huret also made something similar. Right era, right cable routing/mounting. You could see one of these being mounted to a brazed-on tab for its main shaft. This could well have been what was done. I can't see a British Cyclo Benelux working (right side pull, at least from that era as the left side pulls didn't come out til 57). The cable stop, if it is original, says it can't have been a suicide lever model, and its right hand side location tells some sort of story about what may have been mounted there.

I have a Juy 56. I got it for about a hundred dollars, which I thought was ok. I hate using it. It is clunky and has a lot of play in the slides. This combined with its reverse operation (high normal; the spring moves the derailleur to the big ring and the cable moves it to the small) means every shift must be planned well in advance, and must occur with zero load, or else it doesn't happen. Also, adjustment is very difficult. But it is a very cool derailleur, and marks a milestone in front derailleur design, with its demountable and adjustable outer cage plate and wide range capability.

As for lever operated handmade front derailleurs:

Now you mention liking the Routens type FD, specifically. That is very interesting, as he is one of the less-vaunted constructeurs, but also one of the more innovative, outside-the-box thinkers. His FD design reflects that, with the twin guide tubes and the flattened tube for the outer cage. It's almost Bauhaus level in terms of clever design.

The Alex Singer derailleur made from bicycle spokes is probably the lightest, but also looks flimsy. I've never used one. It just appears that way to me. I know of a guy who worked with Ernest Csuka to make a stronger one using thicker motorcycle spokes, but I'm forgetting who he was. It uses a single tube brazed to the back of the seat tube.

It's true, the René Herse style derailleur is pretty simple and possibly ugly. I made a René Herse style front derailleur. It was not so hard. Due to the covid shutdown, most of the metalworking I did to make it was with simple hand tools: files, hacksaw blades, drill, and a jigsaw with metal cutting blade. The hardest part was getting the square tube and the square rod that fits inside it to telescope smoothly. That took hours of filing. Maybe there is some proper telescoping square steel tubing out there. I couldn't find it. This would not be a problem with round tubing, which is a point in favor of the other designs, which use round tubes as their sliding guides.

Here are some pictures of mine. The full thread is here.



In practice, the thing shifts ok. Downshifting is great. Bangin every time. Like a toggle switch. The double is a pretty wide range, so the biggest problem is overshoot when going up to the big ring. I've never dropped the chain off the inside, for what it's worth. Reaching back to shift and then finessing the lever for the upshift is kind of a pain when on singletrack in the dark. Don't ask me why I end up riding singletrack in the dark on a randonneur bike, ok? It's just something I've gotta do.. All other times, it's just fine aside from having to baby it up to the big ring to avoid overshooting.

Huret and Simplex also made lever-operated front derailleurs during the '50s. These could be easily mounted and wouldn't look out of place, if you wanted. They are also not unaffordable. The last ones I picked up were under $50 for the Simplex and under $100 for the Huret. Have not had the chance to use them yet, however.

PilotFishBob 

Thanks scarlson . I have a Juy 53 in my collection, planning to use that with a Juy 51 on a frame I posted on earlier that is still waiting for its turn, hopefully later this year on that one as well but my plate is pretty full so not sure. But if I come across another one that does make sense as an option. I think on this bike the cable operated FDs are appropriate since the frame has brazed-on left and right shifter bosses so I will forgo the lever-operated types though I do like them.

I've already adopted the mindset that finding the parts themselves will take a while, but I've been fairly lucky at stumbling across the right thing sooner or later and hopefully that holds true here. Getting an idea of where to start regarding restoring the braze-ons based on what they should accommodate is a big first step and the input I'm getting here is very useful.