1960 Peugeot PX10... Gravster!

[zidortri]

What was the steel specific clear coat you used?
Cheers

That one...
Actually I proceeded as follow.
First I stripped the paint off the frame and polished everything - except the chrome obviously.
Then I applied that metal specific clear lacquer on the polished steel lugs and left it to dry for a couple of days. Actually I applied three layers of this protective coating.
Then I masked those parts which had received that transparent clear coat.
Then I sprayed the frame.
And eventually I removed all the masking and sprayed the whole frame - including the polished steel parts that had already received a specific clear lacquer treatment.
Therefore the polished steel lugs have six layers of clear lacquer... Which should be more than sufficient to provide ample protection against rust.

 

[zidortri]

At this stage it might be interesting to look at the solution that was chosen for the fork.

When I acquired the frame it came complete with its original fork with its distinctive Nervex Pro fork crown and thin Reynolds 531 blades. Its total weight is around 670gr... quite respectable actually for a 1960 fork.

However I opted for a different fork - whose early life was spent on a mid seventies Peugeot PR10 frameset... before being fitted on a Peugeot PX10 that I also happen to have.
Actually on the below pictures with the two frames the Gravster sits in the background - with the horrible blue epoxy coating, and in the foreground is that other early 1960s Peugeot which was not fitted with an original PX10 fork but instead with a white PR10 fork... which is actually the fork that will be fitted on the Gravster.

To put it simply I just swapped the fork.

There were a few reasons why I did this.

First I was concerned about the sturdiness of what was then regarded as a light racing fork - especially in view of its intended gravel usage.
I felt that a PR10 fork with its thicker blades and above all its deeper fork crown would provide a more robust option to face the rough shocks from the trails and the stress of powerful braking - more on that braking topic later.
Maybe that's not the case but from a visual perception standpoint the PR10 fork looks much sturdier that the PX10 one.

The second reason why I fitted the PR10 fork on the Gravster was as that I wanted to spare the PX10 fork not only because it's rarer but also because I needed it for that other Peugeot PX10 from the early 60s that I own - the one on the foreground on the below picture with its originally yellow painted Nervex Pro lugs.

And the last reason why I used that PR10 fork instead of the original PX10 one is the clearance.
As gravel is the main intended usage of the Gravster I will need to fit a 35mm front tyre. Having taken measurements of the two fork I realized that there was almost a 10mm difference between the two forks in term of clearance - in favor of the PR10 one.

For all those reason I opted for the PR10 fork to be fitted on the Gravster - even if its almost 150gr heavier (820gr as opposed to 670gr for the PX10 fork)

 

[zidortri]

Obviously the fork will havecfollowed the same painting process as the rest of the frame - with the chromed fork crown and lower lugs masked.

 

[zidortri]

Once the frame and the fork were painted and clear lacquered, and decals had been applied I fitted the headset, the downtube gear cable stops, bottom bracket, the seat post, the seatpost binder, the stem and the handlebar...

 

[zidortri]

The headset is a Stronglight P3 with the four-pin top nut. It also boasts as most headset from that era brake cable stop hanger.
Beside the picture of the Gravster's headtube fitted with the Stronglight P3 headset is a picture of the headset itself - picture courtesy of velobase.com

 

[zidortri]

The downtube gear cable stops are Campagnolo'.
To be perfectly honest I have to admit that I have never been impressed with these plasticky flimsy looking bits...
But, in this very instance they will fit perfectly on this Peugeot PX10 frame as they will act as a reminder of the infamous Delrin material that was widely used on numerous components arming these Peugeot. Remember the Delrin clamp of the Simplex lateral push front mech....
Well I haven't forgotten and decided to have that benign historical nudge...

 

[zidortri]

The bottom bracket is also a Stronglight... But a modern one, although it fits a French standard bottom bracket shell.

It features a 107mm JIS standard oversize titanium axle, that I recovered from an old build of mine fifteen years ago.

Originally that bottom bracket came with BSA cups. I found matching French thread cups that would accomodate the rather unusual DR-21531SW-2RS 21.5x31x14 bearings.

These cups are therefore for 31mm OD bearings - unlike the IRD cups which are meant to accomodate 28mm OD bearings.

These 31mm OD bearing cups exist in BSA, ITA, French and Swiss standards... Quite handy if one need to fit an oversize bottom bracket axle.

The full set - axle, bearings and cups, weight 173gr.

 

[zidortri]

The seatpost is a zero setback silver Origin8 one with a 26.4mm diameter - to match the diameter of the seat tube.

I could have used a periodically correct Simplex seatpost - the one with a riveted plaque just below the saddle carrier is a real must, but such vintage seatpost with its 20mm setback would not have fitted my optimal geometry.

And having the right position is probably the most important thing for me - along with braking efficiency.

Hence that seat post...

In addition, it looks nice - it's silver, and once cut it's reasonably light - around 230gr.

 

[zidortri]

As a result - or should I say, in order to offset the slightly more modern aspect of the seatpost, the seatpost binder is an original Mafac one from that era whose slightly rusty appearance makes it fit perfectly the overall aesthetic of the frame.

 

[zidortri]

The stem is a 1950s Pivot one with a quite interesting handlebar clamp - opened towards the front instead of downward. It almost looks likes it's ready to jump
(picture courtesy of velobase.com)