Holdsworth Professional Track Frame?

[CBguy]

Dave,
On your list, there are certainly loads more shop frames beginning with digits 69 (total of 12 to date) compared to frames attributed to other years (1or2/ yr.). Makes one wonder re explanation. One frame that points to early 70's "shop" frames being continued on with a "69" number into early 70's is frame #69559 belonging to "sced" of Bike Forums.

Evidence, albeit anecdotal, for this argument as "sced" states: "I have a 1973 Super Mistral #69559 that was custom made for me as a Christmas gift from my parents when I was 16." He also describes the process of ordering details of frame and kit. See posts 14 &15:
http://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vinta ... model.html

Also here's a pic from another thread started by "sced". It certainly has the appearance of a custom shop frame with a mix of an integrated seat post bolt, Prugnat S lugs and absence of fender eyelets usually associated with the Pro and shot in seat stays different than what was usually associated with Super Mistral.
http://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vinta ... -here.html

Doug

 

[dwscrimshaw]

Thanks yes agree something could be going on. I have seen that picture so many times and did't tie it to this number. Up dated now. Interestingly I do have this link to a Roy Thame Cronometro Ultalite with same number. Whats the chances of two frames with same number? could be a mistake of some is wrong somewhere.

https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/224693/

 

[CBguy]

The frame in lfgss link you give is a different frame altogether wrt sced's as lfgss frame is a definite Cronometro Ultralite with different seat stay treatment and is lugless. Likely a number error here.

Thanks yes agree something could be going on. I have seen that picture so many times and did't tie it to this number. Up dated now. Interestingly I do have this link to a Roy Thame Cronometro Ultalite with same number. Whats the chances of two frames with same number? could be a mistake of some is wrong somewhere.

https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/224693/

 

[dwscrimshaw]

The frame in lfgss link you give is a different frame altogether wrt sced's as lfgss frame is a definite Cronometro Ultralite with different seat stay treatment and is lugless. Likely a number error here.

Thanks yes agree something could be going on. I have seen that picture so many times and did't tie it to this number. Up dated now. Interestingly I do have this link to a Roy Thame Cronometro Ultalite with same number. Whats the chances of two frames with same number? could be a mistake of some is wrong somewhere.

https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/224693/

Agreed, i'll drop the link

 

[dwscrimshaw]

Interesting to speculate as to what might have happen with 1969 shop frame numbers. If you take the highest number and divide it by say 150/yr. that gives you over 4 years production taking you into 1973. But some shop frames carry low shop numbers in early 70's so could reduce the usage of 69 #'s mean they would have continued longer. I notice we have not found any shop Pro's after 69 yet. If this were sold with 69 #'s then they did them to the no chrome 69 spec. We then have one very high 1974 number, which looks odd, and now two (I just found one) Roy Thame frames only in 1975.

On these limited examples it could be said the shop actually stop holdsworth frames in 1974 with some 1969 numbers being used up to this year too. Who knows, I guess you have to take the number at face value, but at the same time consider it could be a later frame by anything up to 4-5 year.

 

[dwscrimshaw]

Dave,
On your list, there are certainly loads more shop frames beginning with digits 69 (total of 12 to date) compared to frames attributed to other years (1or2/ yr.). Makes one wonder re explanation. One frame that points to early 70's "shop" frames being continued on with a "69" number into early 70's is frame #69559 belonging to "sced" of Bike Forums.

Evidence, albeit anecdotal, for this argument as "sced" states: "I have a 1973 Super Mistral #69559 that was custom made for me as a Christmas gift from my parents when I was 16." He also describes the process of ordering details of frame and kit. See posts 14 &15:
http://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vinta ... model.html

Also here's a pic from another thread started by "sced". It certainly has the appearance of a custom shop frame with a mix of an integrated seat post bolt, Prugnat S lugs and absence of fender eyelets usually associated with the Pro and shot in seat stays different than what was usually associated with Super Mistral.
http://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vinta ... -here.html

Doug

The next one on the list is interesting too, track frame, Campag dropouts, but Mistral style Prugnat I head lugs. this also has the more typical 69 WO stay and integral bolt. Square fork crown on this one.

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en_ ... AEpelfGEIJ

Interestingly it has the same concave DO attachment and the stamping on the BB is the same, particular the 69. Also Riveted head badge and claims to be original paint. I guess this just goes to confirm the wide variation on shop builds based on customer requirements.

 

[CBguy]

Dave,

Yes, I have been looking at the style of stamping of the Shop frames. It appears for "69" frames until at least #69226 they all have a unique style of large numbers stacked vertically on top of one another across the bottom bracket. I have to suspect this is Reg Collard's unique style. All these bikes fit the bill for frames he would have built as they are all Pros other than #69226 which is an obvious custom tourer he likely built as well.

Your 69441 and as you point out the next one with a photo of numbers (69573) have a different style of stamping i.e. along edge of BB. Collard is said to have retired in 1970 and so I suspect this is further evidence that these particular numbered frames were built after Collard left i.e. later than 1969.

I have sent messages some time back to some of the owners of these other "69" frames requesting pics of BB numbers for further evidence.

Time will tell. We need more frames with good BB photo of numbers and good history (as #69559) to clarify.

Doug

[/quote]
The next one on the list (69573) is interesting too, track frame, Campag dropouts, but Mistral style Prugnat I head lugs. this also has the more typical 69 WO stay and integral bolt. Square fork crown on this one.

Interestingly it has the same concave DO attachment and the stamping on the BB is the same, particular the 69. Also Riveted head badge and claims to be original paint. I guess this just goes to confirm the wide variation on shop builds based on customer requirements.[/quote]

 

[torqueless]

Re:

Perhaps when Tommy Quick took over from Reg Collard as principal shop framebuilder, he, or someone- reasoned that on balance it was thenceforward preferable to keep using the 69*** number sequence, until they ran out, since shop production was nowhere near one thousand frames per year? Or maybe Tommy just assumed the extant number system was purely sequential, or favoured that system, as opposed to 'first two digits=year', the 'oversight' not being noticed until such time as it seemed pointless to revert back?

Then perhaps any other 'outside' builders building for the shop would be advised as to whatever number Tommy was up to, and asked to use the next number, or indeed the same number- but with the 'first two digits=year' in place of the '69'? (This would explain a "high '74" number, for example.)

At 150 frames per year You would end up with something like this:

1969: 69001-69150
1970: 69150-69300
1971: 69300-69450
1972: 69450-69600
1973: 69600-69750
1974: 69750-69900
1975: 69900-?

That takes it up to (or beyond?) the change to 'Roy Thame' badged frames. Side note: After that change, presumably the shop would be obliged to re-badge any older shop 'Holdsworths' that came back to the shop for a re-finish as 'Roy Thame' too?

 

[dwscrimshaw]

Yes, all very interesting to speculate on. We do see some evidence of the shop numbering being used as it should be, ie we have a few numbers for the period 71 to 73, then we have that high 74 number too. If the shop was busy as I believe has been pointed out and they used outside contract builders to presumable the progress through the 69 numbers would be quicker.

As to who built what and how the numbers were used I guess this will remain speculation until/if more number come to light with some history attached to them. Also numbering style might help. I am just looking at the pictures of the BB number 7314 & 75128, they both look different again.

On a slightly different tack, would it be fair to say a Pro, either Rod or Sprint, would he built to a fairly consistent specification as per that documented in the history site, and a Pitsa, particularly a shop build, could be any specification you like as per some of the shop Specials. Although the 1970 catalog lists a sprint or track pro a Pista built with some Pro components would be difficult to distinguish. Could explain why mine is hard to pin down.

 

[torqueless]

Re:

I am just looking at the pictures of the BB number 7314 & 75128, they both look different again.

Have you positively identified those two as Holdsworth models? Let's also not forget the widespread practice at the time of shops applying their own name/decals after re-finishing frames of other make, (I don't know whether Holdsworth did this) which could further muddy the waters of this supposed 'outside contracted builder' thing? I'm pretty confident my own '75 mystery frame was thus falsely badged when I first got hold of it.

It just occured to me that my suggestion in my last post above explains e.g. a "high '74" number, while leaving e.g. a "low '74" number or "high '70" number unexplained. Do you have any 'low' numbers prefixed by '72-'74 or 'high' numbers prefixed by '70-'71 that would invalidate my general thesis? I guess '75128' would be one, except that it is likely from beyond the date when the '69***' numbers would be used up anyway..
..but then of course it would be logical to expect that whoever might've been using '69***' numbers throughout the seventies simply moved on to '70***' numbers once they had reached '69999'. If that were so, by my thesis one would expect the sudden reappearance of 'low' year-prefixed numbers coinciding with the move from '69999' to '70000', whenever that was..