![]() These have NOTHING in common with any 1932 design, although that is the oft-repeated neo-Schwinn ad copy. So, ya got a handle of where I can get some, local to me, 5 bucks a pound yum, yum Lobsters please.I got a frame. I think, in your case, Lobster dude, retired, Either Schwinn, cheeped out or it slipped through inspection. The faster production moves the greater odds of error slipping through human inspection.Ĭomparatively, considering the difference of 54-when?, the 'heavy duty', in my opinion, is not as strong as prior. Understanding this, which I've understood for decades. It's gone now, a little off topic, subject yet an clearer understanding of what's heavy and the evolution to simplify, less man power and increased automation too achieve the strength and durability Schwinn has been known for. A neglect had to be solved to entertain a machine suitable as industrial purpose. IDK but maybe that difference we see in earlier frames being stronger, the newer frames, which are basically near same until Chicago closed, were breaking and so, Schwinn beefed em up for 65, 'Heavy-Duti. To the extent that, that a full sized cruiser, ballooner became a 'Middleweight' at the same time the factory completely reengineered the system's frame shops, before 1963 to wit. it's not really the wheel sizes but the actual frames in all scales became weaker and lighter. I mean, Electro forging wasn't new but, the frames and apparent system, less manpower and increased automation was. " middleweight?' Yet it actually, appears to be what really happened, not in as much as 1954, just because of S7 wheels but at the time This more automated EF machinery system began. Upon seeing these catalogs or order sheets from 67 and 80, I was surprised to note the use of 'Middleweight' at least for the 80 cruiser. Since the name 'Heavy-Duty showed up in 65 catalog, probably 1st production is summer -fall 64. That would be, like, a double improvement to element moisture and strengthen the connection.Īs GT mentioned, about the change in frame manufacturing, well, at least it' happened before 63 and I'm thinking 59 sounds like a good spot. That air hole could be allowing the top canti- tubes to flex tighter into the bar. While the 63 is caped and spot joined weaker than 54. It might be the same in newer frames, around 1980 vs older 60-70's B/C my 80 canti-tubes are open at the tips, a hole- air breather or moisture out let. And I mean, better than a bead or wraparound weld to reinforce them. It's a real good looking joint on canti too front of bar. However, the 80, its forward canti connections look like they were pressed together while hot and become flexible so, added pressure can form the tube tighter into the bar. So, once I realized I could see this from above without flipping the frame, my 26" 63 (black) Hornet is near identical to the 80. One side is just slight welded tighter than the other and your looks like it may be too. That nice bright yellow is a lot easier to shoot. At first, I thought it's tighter but got to looking more at yours and stuck a flashlight into mine, under, over, and around, and it's actually about the same. But Been looking closer and inspecting, it's just like your yellow, only a little tighter on one side. Yeah, as said, difficult to shoot and get the angles I need with the black.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |