Kilroy1988 

Your point are perfectly made but are irrelevant to my study regarding the status of historic brands and builders. However, I do not mean to say the comments are irrelevant in general - they may not be within the scope of the study, but you and several others have brought up multiple perspectives and pertinent facts about frame building as a technology and in relation to cycling culture that are well worth keeping in mind as I move forward with the project. For example, I should absolutely be wary not to give the wrong impression to an audience that may be unfamiliar with the burgeoning custom steel frame market outside of the historic marques that the study will focus on. I will not want to mislead anyone into believing that the craft of steel frame building is a dying art, so it will be important for me to premise the observations and arguments being made with such things in mind.

Again, truly appreciated and thanks for your time.

-Gregory

(Edited to combine a double post.)

Jeff Neese

AI would do a better job of putting forth his position, and is a better writer. Check it out:

Q: Is there any type of cultural heritage that can be associated with the art of custom bicycle framebuilding and the relationship they have to both their customers, and the cycling world at large?

A: Yes, custom bicycle framebuilding can be considered a cultural heritage that is closely tied to the cycling world and the relationship between framebuilders and their customers.Custom framebuilding is an art form that has a long and rich history, dating back to the early days of cycling when bicycles were first invented. The craft of building bicycle frames by hand has been passed down through generations of artisans, and it is a skill that requires a deep understanding of both the materials and the tools used in the process.

The art of custom framebuilding is also intimately connected to the cycling world at large, as many framebuilders work closely with their customers to create bikes that are tailored to their specific needs and preferences. This close relationship between framebuilder and customer is a hallmark of the custom framebuilding industry and is often seen as one of its defining features.

In addition to this, custom framebuilders are often deeply connected to the broader cycling community and are frequently involved in events, races, and other activities that celebrate the sport of cycling. This connection to the cycling world is an important aspect of the cultural heritage of custom framebuilding and helps to keep the craft alive and thriving.

Overall, the art of custom bicycle framebuilding is an important cultural heritage that is deeply intertwined with the cycling world and the relationships between framebuilders, their customers, and the broader cycling community.

Q: Can custom framebuilding be considered an Intangible Cultural Heritage?

A: Custom framebuilding can definitely be considered an Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH). According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), ICH includes practices, expressions, knowledge, skills, and traditions that communities, groups, and individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage.Custom framebuilding meets this definition, as it is a practice that involves unique skills and knowledge passed down through generations of artisans. It is a tradition that is deeply rooted in the cycling community and represents a form of expression that is highly valued by both framebuilders and their customers.

The craft of custom framebuilding is also recognized for its cultural significance and has been the subject of various exhibitions, publications, and events that celebrate its importance as a cultural heritage. The preservation of this tradition is therefore important not only for its cultural value, but also for its economic, social, and environmental significance.

Overall, custom framebuilding can be considered an important Intangible Cultural Heritage that embodies the knowledge, skills, and practices of a community of artisans and reflects the cultural identity and values of the cycling world.

Kilroy1988 

All that AI-generator did was take a bunch of talking points out of the 2003 UNESCO convention and frame them in extremely general terms to suggest that frame building encompasses ICH. It also only spoke in the most general terms about frame building. There's no substance in either of those responses because the program has no idea how to approach the issue from a nuanced position or use any details that might be relevant to forming a particular kind of argument. Everyone who knows anything about the influences and functionality of frame building within the context of cycling culture at large could sit back and write either of those responses with minimal thought and the text of the 2003 Convention in front of them.

Both responses are also not relevant to my study, which is not to determine that frame building is recognizable as a form of ICH, but to answer a particular question about complex social, economic and cultural trends that have led to the decline in a particular, historic market for quality steel frames.

I'm sitting here having a conversation between doing other things during a weekend relaxing with my family. I don't need to try too hard to write succinctly or edit my writing because this isn't one of the many articles I've published or one of the hundreds of papers I've had to write to get through my graduate program in cultural heritage. But thanks for taking the time.

-Gregory

smd4

Don't let Ayn Rand bother you. He's fixated on the belief that all steel frames are the same, it's easy to make them, there are no differences, and that they're all mass-produced.

Jeff Neese

And just when I started to think I might understand what you're talking about, with any of this. I guess it's too nuanced for me. At least I understood the points the AI was making.

Have you talked to the guys over on the Framebuilding forum? Had any better luck over there? They're really the ones on BF you should be engaged with.

Kilroy1988 

I'm sorry, but, as already stated at different intervals throughout the thread, this weekend's conversation is literally the "brainstorming" session for the start of what will likely be a multi-year project. So no, I haven't had the time to ask everyone who might be involved yet. This Saturday I wanted to begin a light-hearted a back-and-forth within the C&V community and provided an initial prompt regarding the issue of preference for collecting vintage bicycles vs purchasing new bicycles made in the same way. This thread had gone off on wild but useful tangents!

I have already mentioned that the makers within the frame building community which I will be studying are those specifically building for marques that have historical significance due to their longevity and recognized success. I will certainly also be seeking the feedback of more recently established frame builders to ask their opinions about the cultural relevance of maintaining traditional brands, but I cannot reach out to everyone at once and the questions and members of that community that I would like to engage with will be far more specific than to post on a public forum. I will solicit the feedback of particular builders who have taken leads in the burgeoning industry of contemporary craft of frame building in an interview-style process. This is going to take a long time and a lot of effort, though, and as stated, I really appreciate all of the back-and-forth over the weekend because it's helped me to understand how the study needs to be framed, which elements clearly need to be excluded to gather focused results, etc. Cheers!

-Gregory

smd4

How is what he posted even close to "trolling??" Honestly, I have never seen that term used more widely in any other forum I visit. It's used to the point of absurdity on this Forum.

Kilroy1988 

Okay, it's Monday morning, had a lovely time discussing and developing the ideas in this thread over the weekend and I appreciate all of the input and perspectives, but spring break is over! Back to work full-time plus two graduate classes that don't end for seven weeks. I will not have the time (or probably enthusiasm) to engage with this project regularly for a while, although during my downtime I'll continue to flesh things out.

I would like to present a working thesis for the project based on all of the inputs thus far, but I still haven't had enough coffee this morning, so I will try to write up a succinct paragraph later today and post it here for the sake of those who have inquired and offered feedback thus far. Thanks again for all of your time and thoughts!

-Gregory

cudak888 

Didn't have time to read through everything, but I'm surprised at how many rejected Kilroy1988's post as an advertisement for new lugged frames and framebuilders.

I see it differently. Even if you're not personally interested in a new frame, the success of framebuilding in this day and age is necessary. They're the ones - more so than many local shops these days - who maintain the knowledge and tools for cold-setting frames, chasing threads, and repairing major damage. They're an essential component to the survival of this hobby, even if you never intend to buy a new lugged frame.

Smaller builders especially benefit from our support and vise-versa. They're much less likely to have a ridiculous waiting list and more likely to handle repairs at affordable prices. What's more, many of the smaller builders are less likely to be jaded over vintage steel vs. their own creations.

-Kurt

Kilroy1988 

cudak888 The conversation went off on many tangents as inquiring minds asked for relevant details about the study I am planning, which turned into a bit of a mess. Your response, however, is exactly of the general nature I had in mind when I initially posted the prompt and I appreciate your taking the time.

I hope more members will continue to post their own opinions about the relevance of supporting contemporary frame builders (whether from historic marques or more recently established brands) as opposed to collecting vintage bicycles. That's the exercise which I still believe will be relevant to the study and which I specifically think can be addressed through an open discussion on this particular forum.

-Gregory

Kilroy1988 

So far, I've had the following ten responses which I feel sufficiently address the prompt... I would love to have about 50 responses in the same vein!

"I am of the “preserving vintage” class. I admire those who still build bikes using old school methods and techniques but I am not interested in a new bike, whether it be a nod to the vintage design or not. I enjoy seeing and riding bikes that are 40-50 years or older, restored or not." - Kabuki12

"Difficult to argue with that tho I have no interest in much of anything pre-70 or so. For me the economics are the main issue. For a fraction of the price of new I can have a high performance machine that is better than I ever was - actually, several. I certainly admire and respect the skills/talents of today's builders, and it would be totally cool to have a oneoff custom, but they are way above my pay grade. For example - I recently picked up a 1985 Serotta frameset for $350, which may have been a bit overpriced but I liked it. Now, who can build me something any better than that?" - Steel Charlie

"I share Steel Charlie's sensibilities of the economics, though my era of interest is primarily 1945 - 1980. If one looks at the custom builders from the 1930s onward (after the begin of the rise of mass production), custom builds were largely the domain of the affluent, enthusiasts who were looking to enhance their status, people who genuinely had difficulties getting a good fit otherwise, and people seeking performance improvements. Looking towards today, not that much has changed beyond the materials of choice. As I don't presently fit either of the aforementioned categories (I aspire to becoming affluent still, but it's a race against the clock), I have found that being an opportunist suits my interests - at least for the time being. I definitely would like to have a custom bicycle made for me by one of our present day masters of the craft at some point - as I appreciate their talent and what they produce. Perhaps I'm playing a game of chicken here - presuming they will still exist when I'm ready, but that's where I am." - USAZorro

"I enjoy a good steel lugged bicycle frame and particularly appreciate those made in the 70’s and 80’s. Many so-called ‘production’ frames of that era are as well engineered and manufactured as custom or bespoke frames of the same era, even if they lack some of the fancy touches typically found on custom made items. Am also fortunate to be able to engage with and order product from some of those making new frames in the vintage style. Even though the price is high in comparison to good quality vintage frames that would likely perform as well, any artist who intends to put food on the table and a roof over head needs to be supported." - rccardr

"I have a…ahem…few bikes. They’re all old. The majority are from one-man or very small shops. Some of them are still building bikes. Every once in a while I post a WTB ad for a Jeffrey Bock or Mark Nobilette bike (also Gilmour, Fattic, Kvale, DiNucci, Gangl…) and sometimes get a comment suggesting that I simply order a new one. But part of what I enjoy about my collection is the search. I enjoy “rescuing” a bike, cleaning it, returning it to its original, or near, condition. I enjoy learning, or imagining, the history of the bikes. I have several ex-pro bikes as well - those are special in their own way. This has also been an exciting learning process for me. I want to hold in my hands, put my tools on, and ride bikes from the marquee names of American frame building. I can do that if I find them for $300-$1,000 because I can almost always pass them on for near whatever I have spent on them. I have, on occasion, bought a bike and had the builder repair and/or repaint the bike. That’s not cheap, but is a cool experience that straddles the line on this issue. It’s also true that I like to own a lot of stuff. My house is too big. I have too many clothes. My kids have too many toys... Any 2 or 3 of my bikes would be enough of course. Selling a bunch and ordering a custom bike or 3 would be sweet too of course. I can imagine an evolution in my journey that leads to ordering a new custom bike, just not yet." - alexihnen

"Just yesterday, riding home from work, with a tailwind, I tried to make a list of builders I would chose from if I were to get another new frame and fork. 15 years ago, when I chose Richard Sachs, the list was longer. 6 years ago, I was communicating with Dario Pegoretti and planning to pick up a Luigino during a trip to Italy with my wife. The dollars earmarked for that bike went down the tubes in a plumbing fiasco and now it is too late. A trip to Nevada for a Dela Santa fitting will never happen either. Maybe there are currently active builders with experience building and perfecting their lugged steel race bikes that are raced and your research could expose them. They are the only ones I would consider in the future." - Classtime

"The idea of supporting a very traditional company with a long standing reputation figured prominently in my decision to purchase an Alex Singer bicycle (delivered 12/21, but more or less planned for a couple of decades). Beyond skills being passed down, there is a direct bloodline stretching back over 80 years there. The theme there is difficult to explain, but after some study can be felt. They produce bikes, not frames. They are custom bikes and great efforts are made to build a bike to suit the customer, but there are things outside of the parameters of what they do that they will not build. The age of components there loses some importance, and the only priority is the suitability of a component to the task at hand. For example, my bike has a Specialites TA crankset that is from essentially current production, and Mafac brakes that were last produced forty years ago and Campagnolo 9 speed era parts from twenty five years ago. When you are have been producing one of a kind machines for over eighty years, the timeline can be blurred and it can be made to work, but it would make no sense in a production setting. As for the frame, there are fittings to guide the Ergopower cables mixed with box pinstriping as was the fashion in the 1950s….and following on a conversation that I had with Olivier about. how I loved the French bikes from the early 80s when they started to incorporate elements of Italian bikes, he built my frame with Italian long point lugs and gave it chrome on the head lugs, front fork ends, and stay ends - “Italienne” style as you would see on Italian bikes from the 1950s-1960s ( and beyond as well). I find it an incredible thing to be able to order such a bike today, and even astounding that I could specify some details but have the builder take the concept and run without putting a foot wrong. If you search YouTube, you can find some videos made by visitors to the shop that document the details of some of the frame building processes and how they have remained largely unchanged for decades. So I can post photos of my bike built just over a year ago on this forum dedicated to vintage and classic bikes, and nobody would give me any static about being off topic." - El Chaba

"Interesting ,I am more into late 80's-early 00's steel frames. I own three road bikes with lugged steel frames,two filet brazed lugged steel frames and one filet brazed aluminiumium frame. Basso, Vetta, Somec, Daccordi, Tomasinni and De Rosa are producing quality frames entirely made in Italy.As for pre 90's made roadbike frames, unless it is Reynolds 753, Reynolds 653,Reynolds 531c, Columbus EL OS, Columbus Max, Columbus Overmax and Excell tubing,I see no point for me to buy a mid range frame with Columbus SLX, SL and SP or standard Reynolds 501 or 525 tubing.The 3Rensho and Merz Allez Specializeds are definitely classics in their own right,same as the Merckx MXLeader and Merckx Corsa Strada. If you can afford to buy a nice older frame then do it, you won't regret it. You will buy something that has a soul and has true mark of craftsmanship." - georges1

"so how does this relate to vintage bikes? amongst my herd i have a 1956 viking tour of great britian, a 1955 olmo, an early 60's torpado professional that was raced in canada, a 1959 frejus TDF that was acquired from the original owner who raced it, a 1901 gormully Jeffrey, a 1950 claud butler... and when i ride them, it goes to the space in my head that does something that is hard to describe in words. i'm 68 with a finicky knee, so hard riding is in the rear view mirror, but riding a very vintage bike just feels stately, connected to an era that i like. i can imagine all the riders who enjoyed those machines on the many years, the roads and scenery they viewed, the cars (or carriages) that they shared the road with. those bikes were there, functioning and alive in that time period. am i just being silly and waxing romantic? maybe, but you don't have to go very fast to get some breeze on your face, and a few snappy corners can reveal the old thoroughbred under your saddle... the flex and give of wooden rims. Modern bikes are at the beginning of their stories, and i can respect the engineering and expertise that goes into new technology, but there is the energy of history in the elder steeds of yesteryear, and if you have the right amount of romanticism or sappiness cursing through your veins, it's the best therapy for the soul." - cocoabeachcrab

"I see it differently. Even if you're not personally interested in a new frame, the success of framebuilding in this day and age is necessary. They're the ones - more so than many local shops these days - who maintain the knowledge and tools for cold-setting frames, chasing threads, and repairing major damage. They're an essential component to the survival of this hobby, even if you never intend to buy a new lugged frame. Smaller builders especially benefit from our support and vise-versa. They're much less likely to have a ridiculous waiting list and more likely to handle repairs at affordable prices. What's more, many of the smaller builders are less likely to be jaded over vintage steel vs. their own creations." - cudak888

PhilFo 

Perhaps what could be studied could be the "culture" of craftsman and apprentice. If you look at any "community" of gearheads, you're going to find master craftsmen and apprentices creating the top-shelf goods, and a factory of assembly-linee workers creating the pieces which keep the company afloat.
This is true for most, if not all, groups with shared interests, such as this one. Photography has Leica, Hasselblad, Rollei, among others, for the rollfilm cameras. Custom builders of sheet film cameras are just as sought after as custom bicycle frame builders, and the materials are hardware-store common, but it's the attention to detail which sets apart one from the other. A Wisener will take exactly the same photo as a used Nagaoka, the same goes for a modern assembly line Shen Hao and a Linhof Technical camera. Same photo, and in the case of the latter two, both are assembly line cameras. To what end though? You can make the exact same photo with a used Nikon FM10 (Cosina production) as you can with a limited edition SP 2005. The Nikon reissue of the S3 and the SP, along with their respective lenses would be a good place to look into how a cutting edge company had to completely reverse engineer the camera since all of the original tooling and original designers were gone. Much early production was hand-fitted, so there were only guidelines to the material specification, and rigid adherence to results.
There are examples like this across user/collector communities around the world. One thing you're going to have to reconcile is the access question and how preservation of a now-bespoke-technique speaks to who had access in the past, and who has access today. This is possibly the more important question, as there are some parts of the past which should be remembered, but definitely not put into current production by anyone.

rossiny

I'm of the rebuilding/updating vintage and reselling to someone who'll use the bike dailey, then they might get a new steel bike built because they see how good they ride. I road a new Rossin back in the 80s and always thought I'd stay Italian, then bought an old 70s Raleigh Super Course with Cappella lugs and was amazed on the ride with updated wheels and shifters etc. Then I tried titanium and love that, so don't knock anything till you try 😀 it....

Steel Charlie

The scope of his project is beyond encompassing. UNESCO has nothing to do with it. Pick a part that can be dealt with realistically. At this point his project is something like "how do you feel about winter?" and then selecting the responses that are pleasing.
What I wrote in the previous post was constructive criticism. I presumed that he is intelligent enough to process it.

C9H13N 

I am mostly interested in "preserving vintage" for a lot of reasons:

1. my favorite thing is about this hobby is finding a disused and/or neglected thing and bringing it back to life. For this reason I don't buy completed builds by other vintage enthusiasts and I don't even like to buy from flippers who sell "ride ready" bikes because it's a waste of time, money and resources to redo anything the previous owner did to the bike. Flippers who just resell things they find at garage sales or whatever are cool with me.

2. to go along with the first point, part of the thrill is that even a well planned build on a vintage frame will have some surprises and detours, making the project last longer. I don't want to finish a project in a single afternoon or weekend, it's more fun to think it over for weeks/months. This also keeps the project number down as I have limited space.

3. it's nice to know that if a bike doesn't fit or its riding characteristics aren't what I wanted, I can pass it along easily.

I do appreciate small builders. I have a Davidson and a Bob Jackson, both very vintage, but I don't see myself buying a new custom steel frame any time soon, if ever.

Kilroy1988 

I really haven't given any details about the scope of the project because it hasn't been narrowed down yet. I am not sure if I will focus on historic Italian, British, French, Japanese or American brands that are still building classic frames, nor do I know if I will be incorporating elements from outside influences such as the tubing manufacturers. I haven't said anything of the sort yet but obviously I cannot research all of the multiplicity of economic, social and cultural trends which got us from point A to point B over the course of time regarding the diminishing number of steel frames being produced by many of these manufacturers despite what can only be considered a resurgence in interest for steel framed bicycles over the last decade. The market for vintage steel, the desire for more highly customized or modern styles of steel frames produced by boutique builders, economic constraints, and other factors undoubtedly all play a role in answering the general questions I have at this point.

However, saying the scope of the project is "beyond encompassing" is simply a statement of your ignorance regarding the general issues that I am attempting to discover and discuss during the course of the research - many of which I have by now laid out clearly in this thread - as well as the methodology required to meet the standards expected in the field of cultural studies. This is a simple project, and the goals are relatively straightforward compared to many studies that are conducted by professionals in the fields of cultural heritage and anthropology.

-Gregory

jamesdak 

Where did all the snarky people come from? Not used to seeing that here on the C&V.

Kilroy1988 

A working summary for the study:

This study will focus on the contemporary production of classic steel bicycle frames in a region or country where the historical production of similar frames formed a notable part of the local culture, with the frame building craft being influential at a community level by contributing to economic stability, maintenance of a skilled professional labor force, and, over time, the development of a sense of heritage associated with particular marques and individuals who are the recognized "bearers" of craft, ranging from the frame builders to company owners, as well as association with successful professional athletes. The spatial area incorporated into the study will have at least some historic brands that remain in business and still produce classic steel frames for a limited clientele. The most likely study areas will be the entirety of either France, Italy or England, in order to engage with the most data possible given limited contemporary production in these places that were historically full of craftsmen and companies producing classic steel bicycle frames working in similar economic, social and cultural contexts.

The study will assess the market trends which led to the general diminishment of the craft (including the introduction of new technologies that have taken large shares of the market) but in particular will focus on the contemporary market and culture of steel bicycles, which is highly influenced by the availability of used bicycles that have unique sense of value ascribed to them by historic association with particular craftsmen and brands, professional racers, feelings of nostalgia, and unusual technical or aesthetic details. The objective is to understand whether the market for vintage bicycles is influential for the safeguarding of the cultural heritage associated with maintaining the production of steel bicycles at historic firms. Is the cultural value ascribed to new frames build by historic firms diminished by the fact that so many vintage frames bearing the same (or similar) brand recognition are available on the open market? Is it possible that the values ascribed to vintage frames can be associated with new frames built by heritage brands, or are "vintage" and "classic" frames mutually exclusive? If so, do these distinctions impact the choices made by consumers who identify with classic steel bicycle culture and affect the viability of continued production of classic frames at historic brands?

If there are satisfactory answers to these and related questions, then what significance can be attributed to the conclusions? Do the communities that engage with the historic brands, ranging from employees and business owners and their families and friends to clientele (near and far), ascribe cultural significance to the continued production of classic frames? What economic, social and cultural considerations have contributed to their choice to continue production despite economic trends of decline in favor of technologies such as carbon fiber? What aspects of heritage are felt as being upheld by continuing the tradition, and which are feared might be lost if the tradition fails? How does the perception of recognized or hopeful clientele influence the determination of craftsmen and business owners to continue production, and what kind of factors have already been or might become "breaking points" that lead to the eventual discontinuation of production of classic steel frames by historic brands?

-Gregory

Steel Charlie

As a retired professional anthropologist, please allow me to wish you the very best of luck with your study.

iab

So you have no experience in any project like this or any where the scope hasn't been determined and have nothing to add. Thank you for your .02.

I find it interesting that most in this thread have immediately have taken the viewpoint of the builder and not the community that purchases from the builder. I thought that was the focus when the OP posted here and not pursuing frame builders, but I am wrong a lot. I would find that a more interesting avenue of pursuit. It does take a builder and the user of the product to make any sort of culture. Take for instance the purchaser of the the latest wonder bike, rides with the A group on Wednesday night and thinks Strava is the greatest thing since the invention of the derailleur. If interested in them, read the "We are going to yell at you" thread in the 41. That is an interesting bunch of people.

Now that's not the type of community buying from a lugged steel builder. On the other hand, neither am I. While I appreciate the craft involved with a well-made object, I don't care much about the maker, I separate the two. I appreciate the art, not the artist. I have owned many finely made frames from completely anonymous builders. Why should a particular builder be recognized over another. The answer is typically better marketing, which we know is mostly liquor and guessing. So I have no particular cares if the lugged steel frame goes the way of the buggy whip. There will always be bikes and the method of construction in the end is not the end all be all.

Kilroy1988 

Funny. I'm glad all of the anthropologists and cultural heritage professionals I've worked with are the sorts who ask questions and provide constructive feedback with a positive perspective rather than saying things like the following on DAY TWO of a project proposal:

"I think your proposal/goal is beyond nebulous and more than unlikely to be realized"

"The scope of his project is beyond encompassing... Pick a part that can be dealt with realistically. At this point his project is something like "how do you feel about winter?" and then selecting the responses that are pleasing."

Good day to you, sir.

-Gregory

Andy_K 

I haven't read this entire thread, so forgive me if this has already been addressed. I appreciate shops like Alex Singer and Mercian where traditional methods are still used by a small number of craftsmen to produce frames in the same basic way they have been for decades, and I see that this is a very different thing than private builders who are producing custom frames. I wonder though, how you classify someone like Doug Fattic who has gone to Europe and apprenticed with builders there to learn the craft and then returned to the U.S. to practice it. I understand that you view geography as an important factor, but when there is a clear line of continuity, does that not constitute a continuation of the tradition, especially in a craft like this where apprenticeship is such a part of the tradition? The same argument could be made regarding Faliero Masi's move to California and the builders like Brian Bayliss who came out of that shop. In general, I think there is a very strong frame building tradition in the U.S. with a few traceable lines of succession.

The other thing I was wondering about is the degree to which innovation is part of the tradition. You mentioned Paris-Brest-Paris. My understanding is that fostering innovation was a central goal behind events like PBP. So to a large extent, moving the state-of-the-art forward is the tradition. In my mind, that puts someone like Peter Weigle and his collaboration with Jan Heine squarely in the PBP tradition, though again there's the geography factor there.

Finally, @iab's earlier comments about custom building versus production building made me think of Sacha White and Speedvagen. Sacha White developed quite a reputation as a custom builder under the Vanilla brand, then started Speedvagen as a way to scale the business in the face of wider demand. This seems to mirror the early trajectory of companies like Colnago, Bianchi, and Pinarello, which have been mass production shops for a very long time.

Kilroy1988 

Great thoughts, Andy_K, and thanks for taking the time to share. To your first point, the significance of continuity among builders who have apprenticed with or worked alongside builders/brands and then moved on to help maintain the heritage elsewhere has not been lost on me, but I think there's some depth and importance behind the communities ranging from employees and their families and the clients through the years that are beholden to particular brands. Compare it to the UNESCO ICH Representative List's nomination for the "Mediterranean diet," which I mentioned as an example earlier. This was a successful joint nomination by seven nations situated along the Mediterranean coastlines but did not include everyone. Examples were provided from each country along with the nomination that inevitably left out many traditions within the greater "diet" as it was being recognized. Those examples were provided purposefully but not meant to be representative of the entire culture being celebrated by the recognition. I cannot possibly encompass the entire diversity of the tradition of classic steel frame building as it still exists, so I've started to focus in what I feel is arguably a respectful way to express the cultural significance associated with the tradition without getting overwhelmed.

To your second point, innovation is critical to maintain almost any tradition as a "living tradition," but there are also some things that do not change in relation to the significance ascribed to a cultural tradition. In the case I am currently looking forward to making, the traditional methods of frame building may be the desired "tradition" to carry on, particularly within the context of historic firms in a region where the craft has survived since its heyday. That does not mean that the companies cannot be innovative and also producing other frames alongside the classic steel, much like we see with most Italian builders that still have such offerings. Cinelli, Tommasini, Colnago, Stelbel, etc, all have advanced frames made from materials carbon fiber and titanium in their catalogs in order to meet market demands and remain economically viable and have purposefully held onto the tradition of offering classic steel frames in close association with the heritage which they represent.

The comment by iab which you refer to regarding custom vs. production is an excellent one and I do not think should be a factor in discounting any particular makers from the study, as long as the contemporary offerings are still being produced using traditional methods by employees working in the selected region of study.

Cheers!

-Gregory

Chr0m0ly 

I don’t know how to build a bike frame. I would love to apprentice with a knowledgeable builder myself one day. These are my gathered thoughts from books, magazine articles, and yes, posts about bicycle building over the past several years. As well as buying and trying vintage bicycles of various designs for different purposes, and with different philosophies behind what makes for a “good bicycle”.

Frame assembling is done with simple tools and brazing is not the hardest skill to pick up.

bicycle building is about talking to the rider, and getting the information from that rider that you need in order to make a frame that pleases them. “The rider” can vary between someone who asks you to “make a frame the fits my body measurements” to “I need a top tube length that’s 55.25 long because I have an old back injury that shortens my reach and I’m going to use this 80mm stem in order to put tops of the drop bars 10mm ahead of the front wheels axle so I have the balance between stability and flick-ability that I’ve come to enjoy after my years of riding.

That person could have all the specific requirements for their new frame and understand everything that goes into the ride that they want, or they could be very specific and be mistaken as to what dimensions are needed to create the ride feel that they are after.

And that experience navigating between what a customer says they want, and what the customer actually needs to get the bike that they want, would be a big part of what gets handed down in the passing of a craft to the next generation.

then there are subdivisions within frame design models for their intent. I’m not interested in hammering up hills trying to be faster than my last time, or my racing competitor, so a builder with a stellar racing bike reputation would have less interest to me than one who can make a frame that’s stable going downhill with 25lbs in low riding front panniers, and 15 in a roll tucked behind my saddle.

a good builder will know what frames they enjoy building and if they exclusively make competition frames would send me to one who specializes in touring frames. And many are interested in and are equally skilled making either style and anything in between.

but the skill of a custom maker really comes down to the ability to navigate what a customer is trying to achieve, compare it to what they are asking for, and making sure those two requests are in alignment.

say I was interested in hammering up steep hills and I wanted a light frame in a premium tube set. Well I also weigh over two hundred pounds and a premium race weight tube set could make a frame more flexible than the ride feel I want to achieve. On the other hand I might be a super smooth spinner and even though I’m a bigger guy, a narrower gauge could be right for me. People can ride heavy or light in the saddle, unweighting for road irregularities or ploughing through them.

The people experience in frame building is what I believe we’re talking about when we say the culture of traditional bespoke bicycle crafting. That’s what’s absent from ordering a custom frame overseas by filing out a form online.

do I have that right?

i would be very VERY interested in a modern made classic lugged frame because I have a longer inseam for my height that makes fitting a vintage frame a slight compromise. I use a frame one size larger than my height would suggest so that when I raise my saddle to the appropriate height for my long inseam my handle bars don’t end up 10cm below saddle height. As I mentioned I ride touring bikes and if I wanted to get aero then this would be less of an issue but I only want around a 30mm drop from saddle to bars, efficient and out of the crosswind but still comfy for all day rides.

so my interest in a custom is from the (slightly) difficult to fit perspective.

Big frame and shortish stem with “a fist full of seatpost” in the French fit tradition works extremely well for me, and I don’t have immediate plans (or finances) to go custom, but yeah, if I had the means I’d do it. Ideally I’d go full constructor with racks, lights, and fenders all made to fit the frame. When they don’t need to be adjustable you can make the farkles lightweight and blended into the frame seamlessly.

that would be very cool.

repechage

Regarding the USA, as this forum primarily has American based participants, lugged or traditional frame building has created a subculture at best. The Complete Book of Bicycling by Sloane from 1970 was the textbook explaining adult bicycles, and did a decent job of bringing adults aware of bicycles again.

To identify a bicycle as influencing American Culture in the last 60 years look to the Schwinn Sting-Ray. They may not have invented the type but they became The Standard and were widely known and copied for over a decade with tens, then hundreds of thousands produced. Widely copied, but the Sting-Ray was the defining bike.

Americans are a mass production society. This individual builder and their audience creating a cultural influence is quaint by comparison, and not a general cultural factor.

Set the wayback machine to Christmas 1966, my big and only Gift was a Schwinn Sting-Ray, 3 speed Stick Shift- it took much lobbying to influence that decision as it was 20% or more beyond the "copies".
The evening it was brought home the entire apartment building came out to see it, Everyone wanted to ride it, including ALL the adults, many photos taken. The Sting-Ray was around since the middle of 1963. It had captured the imaginations of a wide swath of people.
I cannot see nor imagine any bike with such interest beyond the market to which it was designed in my lifetime.