dwscrimshaw
Retro Guru
Re: Re:
Yes, I guess that could well be an explanation.
torqueless":1sta8qdp said:
Yes, I guess that could well be an explanation.
Holdsworth Professional Track Frame?
- Thread starter dwscrimshaw
- Start date
dwscrimshaw
Retro Guru
Re: Re:
So these 'shop' 4-digit numbers, and any 3-digit numbers that might turn up, are assumed to be 'lazy' 5-digit numbers, i.e. part of the same system? e.g. '6776' is shorthand for '67076'? And neither you, Doug, nor you, Dave, have (yet) unearthed any 5-digit 'shop' numbers with a zero in the third position?
I tend to assume these 4D shop numbers are genuine and no '0' to maintain the 5 digits. The only system seen so far that use numbers to keep to the required number of digits is the 6D system. I still think we might have some doubts over these as Doug has pointed out. It would be good to see a genuine shop number with a 0 in the middle position to know for sure. When we only had #0014 in the 70's 4D we assume leading zero's as per the 6D system until #'s 168 & 591 turned up.
My feeling is the only system we can be confident makes use of zeros is the 6D one. All the rest have less than the required digits, normally, for low numbers. I am also tending to think that the 1970's 4D number up to ~5000 are a different group to the numbers above ~7000 as we have not seen anything between. One explanation is this new group of numbers including custom build in the early 70, (<5000) and shop numbers from 1970 (>7000). There could of course be other explanations if we doubt the validity of the 4D shop style number.
The 4-digit 'factory' numbers are a seperate story- talking of which- here's a possible 'factory' that might've passed under your radar?: http://www.classiclightweights.co.uk/bi ... ey-rb.html
Yes not got this number, I see this as part of the 70's 4D. I'll add it in. We do have another Stuart in the Database. This has a 6D number 037473, do you think this is the same firm? Decals are different. If so it would follow the pattern of Harding, DBS & Pollards, i.e. custom frames in the 70's 4D group being included in the new 6D.
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=351288
So these 'shop' 4-digit numbers, and any 3-digit numbers that might turn up, are assumed to be 'lazy' 5-digit numbers, i.e. part of the same system? e.g. '6776' is shorthand for '67076'? And neither you, Doug, nor you, Dave, have (yet) unearthed any 5-digit 'shop' numbers with a zero in the third position?
I tend to assume these 4D shop numbers are genuine and no '0' to maintain the 5 digits. The only system seen so far that use numbers to keep to the required number of digits is the 6D system. I still think we might have some doubts over these as Doug has pointed out. It would be good to see a genuine shop number with a 0 in the middle position to know for sure. When we only had #0014 in the 70's 4D we assume leading zero's as per the 6D system until #'s 168 & 591 turned up.
My feeling is the only system we can be confident makes use of zeros is the 6D one. All the rest have less than the required digits, normally, for low numbers. I am also tending to think that the 1970's 4D number up to ~5000 are a different group to the numbers above ~7000 as we have not seen anything between. One explanation is this new group of numbers including custom build in the early 70, (<5000) and shop numbers from 1970 (>7000). There could of course be other explanations if we doubt the validity of the 4D shop style number.
The 4-digit 'factory' numbers are a seperate story- talking of which- here's a possible 'factory' that might've passed under your radar?: http://www.classiclightweights.co.uk/bi ... ey-rb.html
Yes not got this number, I see this as part of the 70's 4D. I'll add it in. We do have another Stuart in the Database. This has a 6D number 037473, do you think this is the same firm? Decals are different. If so it would follow the pattern of Harding, DBS & Pollards, i.e. custom frames in the 70's 4D group being included in the new 6D.
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=351288
Hi Shaun,
That's very interesting. The number on your Thame branded frame certainly looks like a Shop "Holdsworth" . Do you have any history re original purchase date and whether it was repainted and re-badged as a Thame at a later date - a possibility previously proposed by Torqueless?
It looks like a Cronometro TT frame, a shop model that started life as a "Holdsworth" and later was sold as a Thame following 1975 dictum by Holdsworthy to stop branding their models as Holdsworths.
Re frame does it perhaps have holes drilled in Prugnat lug spearpoints as in Cronomero advertised in Kilgariff's 1974 blurry catalog?
Your number 69517 is very close to frame 69559 (a Xmas gift in 1973 with link + pic posted on a prior page) and so likely your frame is a 1973 as well. Does this make sense to you?
We know TJ Quick was shop main man at time and this high end machine is likely his build. What is style of numbering on your frame - I would suspect it is along BB edge?
Doug
That's very interesting. The number on your Thame branded frame certainly looks like a Shop "Holdsworth" . Do you have any history re original purchase date and whether it was repainted and re-badged as a Thame at a later date - a possibility previously proposed by Torqueless?
It looks like a Cronometro TT frame, a shop model that started life as a "Holdsworth" and later was sold as a Thame following 1975 dictum by Holdsworthy to stop branding their models as Holdsworths.
Re frame does it perhaps have holes drilled in Prugnat lug spearpoints as in Cronomero advertised in Kilgariff's 1974 blurry catalog?
Your number 69517 is very close to frame 69559 (a Xmas gift in 1973 with link + pic posted on a prior page) and so likely your frame is a 1973 as well. Does this make sense to you?
We know TJ Quick was shop main man at time and this high end machine is likely his build. What is style of numbering on your frame - I would suspect it is along BB edge?
Doug
Midlife":1xkxs3u2 said:I've got a frame decaled as a Roy Thame number 69517 I always wondered what it was?
Shaun
Attachments
torqueless
Senior Retro Guru
Re:
I doubt that the 'Stuart' name is anything more than coincidence.
I'm also a little embarassed by some of these earlier threads in which I over-confidently asserted my frame (and thence others) as being 'mid-'80s'. Thanks to your frame number threads, dwscrimshaw, I now accept mine as being from 1981-2.
More 'speculation':
It wouldn't surprise me if the more or less freelance framebuilders were simply left to work to their own numbering system from one end of their career to the other, unless circumstances obliged them to conform to an extant system. Thus Tommy Quick taking over from Reg Collard was presumably at some point left with Reg's last number, and carried on from there after his own fashion: What had been a 'first two digits=year' system became a purely sequential five digit system. I've no idea as to what Tommy's 'productivity' was, but as I've pointed out, 150 frames per year would lead to the 69*** numbers running out in 1975, coinciding with the change to Roy Thame badging. I don't think it is fanciful to suggest that '69***' numbering, as the product of one artisan framebuilder*, might not even have reached 69600 by 1975? (I am thinking of Shaun's frame here, and the LFGSS Roy Thame linked upthread)
Other 'outside' builders who might be sporadically commissioned to build some frames when back-orders threatened to pile up would likewise stamp the frame according to their own numbering systems unless specifically asked to do otherwise.
This is just my deduction based on the available evidence- or as much of it as I am aware of. That doesn't make it 'true', of course..
*An 'artisan framebuilder' being a person who single-handedly builds a frame from one end of the process to the other- tube-mitreing, lug-cutting, and brazing, or at least supervises and quality-controls all those stages that might be performed by apprentices.
I doubt that the 'Stuart' name is anything more than coincidence.
I'm also a little embarassed by some of these earlier threads in which I over-confidently asserted my frame (and thence others) as being 'mid-'80s'. Thanks to your frame number threads, dwscrimshaw, I now accept mine as being from 1981-2.
More 'speculation':
It wouldn't surprise me if the more or less freelance framebuilders were simply left to work to their own numbering system from one end of their career to the other, unless circumstances obliged them to conform to an extant system. Thus Tommy Quick taking over from Reg Collard was presumably at some point left with Reg's last number, and carried on from there after his own fashion: What had been a 'first two digits=year' system became a purely sequential five digit system. I've no idea as to what Tommy's 'productivity' was, but as I've pointed out, 150 frames per year would lead to the 69*** numbers running out in 1975, coinciding with the change to Roy Thame badging. I don't think it is fanciful to suggest that '69***' numbering, as the product of one artisan framebuilder*, might not even have reached 69600 by 1975? (I am thinking of Shaun's frame here, and the LFGSS Roy Thame linked upthread)
Other 'outside' builders who might be sporadically commissioned to build some frames when back-orders threatened to pile up would likewise stamp the frame according to their own numbering systems unless specifically asked to do otherwise.
This is just my deduction based on the available evidence- or as much of it as I am aware of. That doesn't make it 'true', of course..
*An 'artisan framebuilder' being a person who single-handedly builds a frame from one end of the process to the other- tube-mitreing, lug-cutting, and brazing, or at least supervises and quality-controls all those stages that might be performed by apprentices.
. It's exactly as you say, I'll post some pics later. Re:
Well, with Shaun's Cronometro 69517 and good evidence for 69559 being a December 1973 frame and with Dave's highest "69" frame reaching well into 600's it does seem pretty convincing these "69" frames reached into '74 and likely until Roy Thame branding in '75. So it is looking like the lower number "72" and "73" likely shop frames collected so far must be a separate system perhaps as Torqueless suggests assigned to frames by other builders.
Interesting that Shaun's frame was likely rebranded from a "Holdsworth" to a Roy Thame.
As always more numbers will help. Great brainstorming guys!!!
Well, with Shaun's Cronometro 69517 and good evidence for 69559 being a December 1973 frame and with Dave's highest "69" frame reaching well into 600's it does seem pretty convincing these "69" frames reached into '74 and likely until Roy Thame branding in '75. So it is looking like the lower number "72" and "73" likely shop frames collected so far must be a separate system perhaps as Torqueless suggests assigned to frames by other builders.
Interesting that Shaun's frame was likely rebranded from a "Holdsworth" to a Roy Thame.
As always more numbers will help. Great brainstorming guys!!!
Midlife
Retro Wizard
I'm sure my "Thame" started life as a Holdsworth Chronometro TT (not ultralite). I'll dig out some pics later,
There are lots of pics of Derek Cottington on his "Ultralite" which seems to show the seat stays shot in below the allen key seat cluster and I'm sure all Ultralights had the seat stays Italienate style brazed to the allen key area.
I wonder if the slightly later Cronometro TT frames came with vertical dropouts?
Shaun
There are lots of pics of Derek Cottington on his "Ultralite" which seems to show the seat stays shot in below the allen key seat cluster and I'm sure all Ultralights had the seat stays Italienate style brazed to the allen key area.
I wonder if the slightly later Cronometro TT frames came with vertical dropouts?
Shaun
dwscrimshaw
Retro Guru
All good helpful stuff. Looks like some realigned on the database needed, I'll go through Doug's comments latter, good to see another couple of number in there. It would be interesting to find a genuine shop number with a zero in the middle position or 4D without. I don't think we have a reliable number with the build part of the number less that 100.
dwscrimshaw
Retro Guru
Re: Re:
I doubt that the 'Stuart' name is anything more than coincidence.
I'm also a little embarassed by some of these earlier threads in which I over-confidently asserted my frame (and thence others) as being 'mid-'80s'. Thanks to your frame number threads, dwscrimshaw, I now accept mine as being from 1981-2.
That's no problem, always good to be challenged. The reason for putting out in the forums is to get others input as per the discussion here. The 6D prediction is fairly unaltered from the know production fix points and seems to work reasonable well although I do have some doubts.
torqueless":2lwufeyh said:
I doubt that the 'Stuart' name is anything more than coincidence.
I'm also a little embarassed by some of these earlier threads in which I over-confidently asserted my frame (and thence others) as being 'mid-'80s'. Thanks to your frame number threads, dwscrimshaw, I now accept mine as being from 1981-2.
That's no problem, always good to be challenged. The reason for putting out in the forums is to get others input as per the discussion here. The 6D prediction is fairly unaltered from the know production fix points and seems to work reasonable well although I do have some doubts.
torqueless
Senior Retro Guru
Re:
I think I might've just found another (6 digit factory) number:
https://hiveminer.com/Tags/holdsworth,p ... l/Timeline
Shaun: I don't think Derek Cottington's Cronometro is any more 'Ultralite' than yours? Not the one in those pics anyway, judging from comparison with the Kilgariff scans.
I think I might've just found another (6 digit factory) number:
https://hiveminer.com/Tags/holdsworth,p ... l/Timeline
Shaun: I don't think Derek Cottington's Cronometro is any more 'Ultralite' than yours? Not the one in those pics anyway, judging from comparison with the Kilgariff scans.
Similar threads
