In all likelihood they are. Larger balls simply won't fit, and smaller would let the spindle out farther. Sometimes using smaller balls than intended can work to advantage to push the spindle out, but usually they end up riding the edge of the spindle's bearing area which is unacceptable.

Another clue to correct or incorrect ball size is whee the cups it in the frame. Larger would widen the effective BB size, smaller would narrow it.

Yes those details of the bike I noted too. Nothing too extraordinary, apart from the aformentioned brake levers and handlebars. The bidding was rather fierce for it, ending at £255 which is well above a regular Sports model. I wonder if it's purely the brake lever/handlebar that has people interested. I was wondering how rare they are, I've personally never seen another like that.
Probably right about the top tube, and also the ad says 24" wheels where I suspect 26" is meant.

Very old, rare, excellent condition. Can't speak for the tyre size but it's an exceptional old bike

Finally - The Sun Makes an Appearance!
 

It's been pretty gloomy around here lately. The only time the sun shines is when I am trapped in my cubicle at work. Until tonight, that is. I finally got the DL-1 out for a good, long ride tonight; and of course I took some photos. Enjoy...

http://i1073.photobucket.com/albums/...psifjjxec3.png


http://i1073.photobucket.com/albums/...psocjlxzoj.png

http://i1073.photobucket.com/albums/...pswds0f5q0.png

I believe =The Roadster is ready for Pepin. But am I?

Beautiful bike and shots. I really like that headlight.

@DQRider, those are beautiful photos. I'm envious.

Gorgeous bike and scenery.

Our forecast calls for 73 on Saturday and 83 on Sunday! I can't wait.

Okay, it's torn apart again. I tried to take pictures, VV, but I wasn't able to take anything meaningful. Here's what I found.

1. As assembled, the spindle rotated smoothly with no play.

2. The long end of the spindle was definitely on the drive side.

3. No evidence of any cross-threading or galling of the threads. Everything screwed in and unscrewed smoothly, and were clearly meant to be installed where I assembled them.

4. The lock ring definitely only screwed onto the drive-side cup, which is weird, since both cups had the correct threads for the sides they were on...that is, the direction they turned to tighten was the same direction the respective cranks turned during normal pedaling. The lock ring was definitely threaded to be on the drive-side cup...again, no evidence of cross-threading or galling, everything in good shape.

5. If not for the lock ring, the chromed adjustable cup would be fine for a fixed cup on the drive side, and the painted cup on the NDS could be adjustable. However, the painted cup is definitely originally assembled as the fixed cup on the non-drive side. It's not chromed and shiny, but is dull and dark grey, inside and out.

6. I only disassembled things, I didn't do a test assembly of the spindle turned around and see what the crank clearance was like on the NDS cup, to see if anything was different.

7. Before I disassembled, I tapped a cotter in on the drive-side crank. The end of the spindle was flush with the outer side of the crank, like it should be. However, again, it was bound tight against the cup. Given the galling on the inner surface of the crank, I can only assume this has been a long-term issue with this bike. I wish I'd paid more attention to the fit of everything before I disassembled it the first time...I just assumed the tightness and grumbliness was due to dry, gummed-up grease (though there was plenty of that).

I might take you up on that offer of the crank, @Velocivixen. Let me mess with it for another day or two to see if I can figure something out, but I can't imagine anything I could do differently that would make a difference.

The mystery is solved. It is a factory error. The fixed cup with the LH threads should be on the drive side. The spacing of the DS crank was designed for the fixed cup sitting flush with the BB. There is no room in the design for the adjustable cup and lock ring.

OK, this is very straightforward.

How far in the fixed cup goes is irrelevant since the issue is strictly between the spindle, crank (located by the cotter) and cup. Moving the cup deeper into the frame won't change anything.

You have a few options on how to correct.

1- if it'll accept them, try smaller balls on the right side, which will move the spindle out a bit. 3/16" is likely too small, but maybe 6mm (available on the internet) may work and will buy you about 0.20mm.

2- move the outboard shoulder on the spindle out a bit as I described earlier (scroll back a bit). (still my favorite)

3- if you feel you can spare it and still have enough for a wrench, thin the outer wall of the fixed cup a hair by holding it flat against a belt sander. Good for at least 0.5mm which should be all you need.

4- if the hub of the crank can spare it, pare it back 1mm or so via the belt sander, or a die grinder. This may buy you over 1mm, but really depends on the crank/chainring weld.

Since it all went together except for the rub, you should only need 1mm or less. Any of the ideas above should give you that except for the 6mm balls. But if you're not comfortable with taking the 1mm from any one part, you can use a mix of 2 or more methods each each contributing a hair to get you the clearance you need.

If it were mine, I'd combine thinning the cup wall with moving the cotter position, since these are the two easiest (if you have access to power tools)

The crank isn't fouling against the fixed cup. His is over on the NDS. That's the problem. So except for thinning the fixed cup, the other solutions should be enough to get the crank to clear the adjustable cup.

As bizarre as it seems, this is apparently the case here. The BB shell must have been threaded in reverse. I think your only option will be finding a spindle with an offset that will make it all work. Weird. Trying flipping the spindle for fun.

Your BB assembly will always want to come loose.

Thank you! That's what happens when you spend half the year in the workshop. Yes, that headlight matches the character of the rest of the bike better than the later chrome bullet style.

Both of them are all but useless, of course. They do help others see me, but they don't provide any illumination at all. I wonder if people had better night vision back when we weren't staring at screens all day...

You know, that is counter-intuitive. You would think that since the crank is moving clockwise on the right side and counter-clockwise on the left, RH threads on the right and LH threads on the left would be the way to keep the BB from coming loose. Apparently not, because BBs are always threaded the other way around.

Wow, this is a strange mystery. So as I understand it the cups are on opposite sides than usual, and the lock ring is mated to the cup that is now on the drive side. Interesting.

You know you are correct sir the English style of bottom bracket is counterintuitive in a normal situation

That's because the spindle does not bear directly on the cup, but rides on a ball bearing that reverses the direction of the precession.

Raleigh Haskell - updated Raleigh 5 speed Sports with disc brakes:

http://www.bikemastertool.com/media/...png?1434471427

Discs, the new " bacon slicers".

Wow, what a beautiful chainring and crank!! I thought those days were long gone, but this is one of the nicest I've ever seen.
Who ever came up with that design did a brilliant job.

The chainring and crank is probably the only part I like. If it's an updated Sports, @NormanF, where are the fenders? And the leather saddle?

Aftermarket fenders should fit, probably with smaller 32-35 c tires and of course a Brooks B-67 would be the perfect replacement saddle.

I wouldn't change anything about it: the design is clean, simple and timeless.

I previously mentioned a poor little ladies' Raleigh Sports that I found for a neighbor years ago and which she let rust in her yard. It's been in the garage for a year and my bride mentioned she'd like to have a handy bike to ride around the 'hood, so I fixed this up for her.
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment...p;d=1423085967

New tires, tubes and cables, lots of lube and a little cleaning. Subbed a nice Ideale saddle for the original plastic Brooks sprung saddle. Works fine.
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment...p;d=1460676683
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=515885

1968 Raleigh Superbe
 

Here's the '68 Superbe I bought a couple months back after a wiping it with an oily rag and lubing all bearings and hubs. Paid $50 for the bike and put another $75 in tires, tubes, saddle, fender bolts, and a sweet grip shift set and cables from from @YoKev.

http://i1281.photobucket.com/albums/...pssc1pz06p.jpg
Notice it has no dynohub, lights, or pump brackets. Sheldon said Superbes only "usually" come with that hub and lights, so I imagine this is how it came from the shop. Which is not to say said shop didn't swap everything to upgrade a return customer's Sport. I've seen other '68 Superbes without pump brackets. There's no sign they were broken off, so I assume the pump brazeon guy was sick in 1968.

Also notice it has a vinyl Raleigh mattress saddle instead of a B72 and no rack or saddlebag. This is solely because you forum members haven't kicked down.

Fun to tool around the hood in, but boy to I need a larger sprocket. What's recommended?

Hey; back in the '80s I didn't have a road bike. The club was doing a 'Metric Century' from Jamestown to Yorktown VA and back, which is 100K. So I scrounged around and put together an 'English' bike with 3-speed Sturmey-Archer coaster brake hub. No fenders or chain guard. I put a front caliper brake on it too. Tell you what, I made it, and I even passed a few guys on the way back. That is one bike that makes me wonder what happened to it. I got a new TREK 420T after that.