Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Classic & Vintage (https://www.bikeforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=181)
-   -   For the love of English 3 speeds... (https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=623699)

noglider 04-07-11 03:58 PM


Originally Posted by Schwinnsta (Post 12474075)
Why did this bike bring shuch a high price http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...K%3AMEWAX%3AIT?

eBay prices seem so inconsistant.

One can never say, but it is a very good specimen. I would expect that bike to fetch $300 or so. But timing is everything. All the seller needed was one buyer who was sentimental about the bike who hasn't shopped for long and doesn't have the patience of a spider. Better, of course, if there are two or three such people.

And there are so many factors in timing, such as holidays, time of day at end of auction, weather, and so on.

Schwinnsta 04-07-11 04:45 PM

The Brooks mattress style seems wrong. One would expect a B72 with a saddlebag rather than the Pletchor rack. The line of the front fender seemed slightly bent. Otherwise it is clean.

w1gfh 04-07-11 04:47 PM


Originally Posted by Schwinnsta (Post 12474075)
Why did this bike bring shuch a high price http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...K%3AMEWAX%3AIT?

eBay prices seem so inconsistant.

Maybe because men's frames are more often beat, scratched and missing parts, and this one was in very nice shape, it got a higher price? But those black Dare handgrips, wow; as clearly seen in some of the photos, they're split and rotting off the bars!

Amesja 04-07-11 04:53 PM


Originally Posted by Schwinnsta (Post 12474259)
The Brooks mattress style seems wrong. One would expect a B72 with a saddlebag rather than the Pletchor rack. The line of the front fender seemed slightly bent. Otherwise it is clean.

The cotters are put together wrong -both from the same side. Notice the cranks are not 180-degrees apart. I wonder what else is done wrong on that bike?

rhm 04-07-11 04:58 PM

$520 plus $100 shipping is crazy for a Raleigh Sports. With a little patience you can find five or ten of them for that price, and one of them will be in as nice shape as this. I suspect there's been a mistake, and we'll see it relisted by the same seller.

Velognome 04-07-11 05:15 PM

Wow! I could see maybe a 23" Sports turning that kinda money but there was absolutley nothing special about that one.

Eileen 04-07-11 05:15 PM

Mine:

http://gallery.me.com/ilynne/100080/IMG_0475/web.jpg

I really love this bicycle. The Peugeot may go to a new home, but this one is a keeper.

w1gfh 04-07-11 05:16 PM

What are those square white areas on the front forks? I saw similar reflective(?) areas on the forks of a 1965 Sports/Colt frame I had.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5307/...9288a66c40.jpg
'65 Sports "Colt" type frame by w1gfh, on Flickr

Amesja 04-07-11 06:24 PM

2 Attachment(s)
I finished another project so I need to find another one.

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=196844http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=196845

alr 04-07-11 08:20 PM

I think it is a square of very old and hardened reflective tape. My 1972 DL-1 is festooned with these tapes on the forks and chain stays. I think it is some effort to make it street legal since there are no front or wheel reflectors. That is just a hunch though. I am in the process of scraping mine off.

Schwinnsta 04-07-11 08:21 PM

More wrong on further examination of the eBay Sports. The rims appear not to be westwood and wrong tires. I think the front fender is bowed because of dented right fender stay. They also did not reuse the R nuts on the cotters when they misaligned the pedals.

Judging from the bids, there were a few who were willing to pay top dollar for the bike.

Amesja 04-07-11 08:37 PM


Originally Posted by Schwinnsta (Post 12475029)
They also did not reuse the R nuts on the cotters when they misaligned the pedals.

The R-nuts don't fit most all the cotters you can buy today except for some custom-milled ones.

wahoonc 04-08-11 03:50 AM


Originally Posted by Schwinnsta (Post 12474259)
The Brooks mattress style seems wrong. One would expect a B72 with a saddlebag rather than the Pletchor rack. The line of the front fender seemed slightly bent. Otherwise it is clean.

That is actually correct for that bike. If you notice is has Endrick pattern rims and no pump pegs. That makes it the Sports Standard which was a lower end model of the Sports, and it was most likely made in Malaysia, you can just see the little yellow sticker on the front of the seat tube just above the BB. It will have been made around 1971-72.

I have one of these, but not in nearly as nice a condition.

Aaron :)

Amesja 04-08-11 05:36 AM


Originally Posted by wahoonc (Post 12476046)
That is actually correct for that bike. If you notice is has Endrick pattern rims and no pump pegs. That makes it the Sports Standard which was a lower end model of the Sports, and it was most likely made in Malaysia, you can just see the little yellow sticker on the front of the seat tube just above the BB. It will have been made around 1971-72.

I have one of these, but not in nearly as nice a condition.

Aaron :)

The early 80's "Sport" (no S, really -that's what the decal says) I just did, and posted a pic of above, has a mattress saddle that isn't quite a Brooks. Nowhere on it does it say Brooks so I imagine that the saddle, like everything else on the bike is a licensed copy built entirely in Asia. Even the hub is a Shimano that plainly says "Made in Japan," and the rims are not Raleigh-patter although the BB and headset are Raleigh-type-ish. The cranks are cottered but the spindle is few thousandths larger in diameter and the BB shell is normal width but still 26tpi.

Weird bike.

JohnDThompson 04-08-11 10:19 AM


Originally Posted by Amesja (Post 12475107)
The R-nuts don't fit most all the cotters you can buy today except for some custom-milled ones.

The "R" mark is actually a little disc press-fitted into the open end of the nut. You could conceivably pop them out of the Whitworth thread nut and press them into a more standard nut to use them with new production cotters. Most new cotters have threads that project beyond the end of the nut, so you'd likely need to trim the threaded section first.

w1gfh 04-08-11 06:32 PM

I'm about to buy a cone wrench set to make an adjustment to the back hub on the old Raleigh Sports (crank turns while the bike walks). Are they standard size, or do I need a special vintage Raleigh size?

Amesja 04-08-11 06:38 PM

15mm and 17mm if I recall correctly.

wahoonc 04-08-11 07:32 PM


Originally Posted by w1gfh (Post 12474356)
What are those square white areas on the front forks? I saw similar reflective(?) areas on the forks of a 1965 Sports/Colt frame I had.

Those look like they may have been added by a PO. There was a "kit" that was put out at some point to add a piece of white reflective tape to each side of the front fork on all Raleigh bikes to meet some standard. I have a copy of the directions somewhere.

Aaron :)

gna 04-08-11 08:04 PM


Originally Posted by w1gfh (Post 12479727)
I'm about to buy a cone wrench set to make an adjustment to the back hub on the old Raleigh Sports (crank turns while the bike walks). Are they standard size, or do I need a special vintage Raleigh size?


Originally Posted by Amesja (Post 12479753)
15mm and 17mm if I recall correctly.

Are you sure? I thought the front hub cone takes a 15mm and the SA hub takes a 16mm...I'll have to go look.

Doohickie 04-08-11 08:52 PM


Originally Posted by w1gfh (Post 12464814)
That Batavus looks bulletproof. Meanwhile, it's funny to think these guys probably made my bike.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3111/...45fea231fd.jpg
Raleigh Factory, Radford, Nottingham, 1966

That's when my DL-1 was built. It has a 65 12 date code on the AW hub.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...1/DSC00040.jpg

Amesja 04-09-11 08:55 AM


Originally Posted by gna (Post 12480101)
Are you sure? I thought the front hub cone takes a 15mm and the SA hub takes a 16mm...I'll have to go look.

I just checked and I was wrong above. The wrenches needed are 15mm and 16mm.

I know I did a bike very recently with a 15/17 combo though because I remember being surprised about it because 17mm isn't that common. Perhaps it was the Shimano 3S I did the other week. I must have gotten the two mixed up.

The Park cone wrenches come 13-14 and 15-16 which is an issue unless you also have the 15-16 combination as you can't use both sides of the wrench at both times. It is nice that they have this selection so you don't have to buy a whole second set of the Park 13-14 & 15-16 wrenches

You really do not need the 17-18mm wrench as those are pretty darn rare in my experience. When you do run into the rare 17mm it is usually on the outside anyhow and you can mostly get away with using a regular wrench on the outside unless you are must adjust the cone while on the bike. Even so, you can buy all four of the wrenches on Amazon for under $30 shipped via that link I gave above.

if you buy cone wrenches stay away from the Avenir set. They seem like a great deal for 2 matching multi-wrenches but I've got a set of those and they are almost totally worthless. If a cone is even remotely tight the wrenches will strip getting it loose. I never over-tighten them when assembling so they are fine for that IMHO but you can't use them to take off old cones that have been on a long time or have been over-tightened from the factory. That afore-mentioned Shimano 3S was so tight that I almost killed my 15mm and was using a standard 17mm on the outside. That Avenir combo cone system wouldn't have lasted a second.

Sixty Fiver 04-09-11 09:35 AM

It is properly called a spanner and the rear hub cone tool looks like this... and is 16mm.

http://budgetbicyclectr.com/media/ca...file_78_16.jpg

Amesja 04-09-11 09:55 AM

Silly Brits ;)

Spanner:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_Y...12/Spanner.JPG

16mm Cone Wrench:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/_Y..._tzc/DCW-2.jpg

gna 04-09-11 10:05 AM


Originally Posted by Sixty Fiver (Post 12481592)
It is properly called a spanner and the rear hub cone tool looks like this... and is 16mm.

http://budgetbicyclectr.com/media/ca...file_78_16.jpg

I'm going to try to find one of those. FWIW, the thinner, the better on an SA Hub--can be tough to get it in and out.

Amesja 04-09-11 10:51 AM

The PCW-2 cone wrenches from park are plenty thin. I've never had an issue with them.

Although I wouldn't turn down the antique wrench if it were a gift. I appreciate antiques and curiosities. I might even use it -but is not necessary.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:51 AM.


Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.