Holdsworth Professional Track Frame?
- Thread starter dwscrimshaw
- Start date
dwscrimshaw
Retro Guru
One other observation on the font of the number stamping. As well as the Reg Collard vertical stack I can see two styles of edge of BB stamping with some sub-styles possible. Looking at the 69 and the 1 stamps in particular I thing 67117K, 66118K and possible 75128 in one group and 69441, 69517, 69573 & 69633 in another.
Interestingly the other two shop numbers with 4 digits look totally different and different again to the 70's 4D group we have.
First group
Second Group
Interestingly the other two shop numbers with 4 digits look totally different and different again to the 70's 4D group we have.
First group
Second Group
Attachments
torqueless
Senior Retro Guru
Re:
@CBguy:
For sure the 69559 story could use some clarification.. Apart from the fact that we have seen two distinct frames claiming that serial number! Iirc the owner has referred to the frame as having been a '16th birthday present' on one occasion, and an 'xmas present' on another? There was likely a six months-odd waiting period between commissioning the frame and recieving it anyway, so there is the question of where 'birthday' or 'xmas' fell during (or around) that period. It sure looks like another Cronometro TT from the one picture I've seen, although in that picture it is dressed up in orange'n'blue with 'Super Mistral' decals. I think he said it has been re-painted four times? It also has under-bracket gear cable runs, which could be a later modification.
I agree with your other points. There are sure to have been bulges and bottlenecks in 'shop' production for all kinds of reasons- fat years and lean years..
@dwscrimshaw:
Interesting that the first group (small non-italic font) contains 'k' frames, which denotes stock frames rather than custom builds. The second group are all '69xxx' frames stamped in the same italic serif font that features in the 'vertical stack' (unless proven otherwise) attributed to Reg Collard. Maybe the tools used were the 'principal builder's dedicated custom-build number-stamps', and Reg left them to Tommy?
@CBguy:
For sure the 69559 story could use some clarification.. Apart from the fact that we have seen two distinct frames claiming that serial number! Iirc the owner has referred to the frame as having been a '16th birthday present' on one occasion, and an 'xmas present' on another? There was likely a six months-odd waiting period between commissioning the frame and recieving it anyway, so there is the question of where 'birthday' or 'xmas' fell during (or around) that period. It sure looks like another Cronometro TT from the one picture I've seen, although in that picture it is dressed up in orange'n'blue with 'Super Mistral' decals. I think he said it has been re-painted four times? It also has under-bracket gear cable runs, which could be a later modification.
I agree with your other points. There are sure to have been bulges and bottlenecks in 'shop' production for all kinds of reasons- fat years and lean years..
@dwscrimshaw:
Interesting that the first group (small non-italic font) contains 'k' frames, which denotes stock frames rather than custom builds. The second group are all '69xxx' frames stamped in the same italic serif font that features in the 'vertical stack' (unless proven otherwise) attributed to Reg Collard. Maybe the tools used were the 'principal builder's dedicated custom-build number-stamps', and Reg left them to Tommy?
More "brainstorming":
Torqueless,
I read that sced's bike "69559" was a Xmas gift WHEN he was 16. Quote again; "I have a 1973 Super Mistral #69559 that was custom made for me as a Christmas gift from my parents when I was 16." Hopefully sced will be able to clarify my question re actually received at Xmas '73 or ordered at Xmas and perhaps not received until earlyish '74. And I agree with error by one owner or other on #69559 as two frames with same number - another point to clarify. This frame despite questions, remains the ONLY "69" frame number that also has any kind of date attached to it supporting the theory that "69 Shop series" stretched from '69 to '74 +/-'75.
The K or stock series of font as described by Dave in 1st group are (as you mention) described by Kilgariff as being built for stock and by builders outside of Putney shop other than Collard. Question is was the builder Quick (during Collard years) or another builder as Alec Bird or Charles Roberts Sr.? Interesting that number 75128 Dave includes in this 1st group is a Roy Thame and so points toward (can't be definite) being built by Quick with explanation for font that built in Quick's own workshop with his own stamps. Also I have seen another Roy Thame (221186) owned by Non-fixie and discussed in Bike forums that is similarly stamped as this 1st group. It is a number beyond the Thame "75" series and looks like an early 80's frame with photo of BB below: http://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vinta ... re-10.html
Dave,
I agree with Torqueless and have been thinking similarly that Collard's vertically stacked numbers across BB and later numbers along BB after Quick took over (as in your 2nd group) are a similarly looking font which would suggest these stamps belonged to the Putney shop and were used by both Collard and Quick while each were main builders in the shop.
Perhaps there should be another 3rd group of stamps including 7229 and 7314 which are both on a different position of BB and I think both different fonts to suggest were outside unaccounted builders during Quick era.
Wileyone,
Re [/quote]:
"My Tommy Quick Road Bike from 1985 is stamped in a similar manner. (i.e. edge of BB) Does anyone know when Tommy started at Holdsworth? I know he took over from Reg C in 1970 but when did he start there? "
Perhaps if you have a picture of your 1985 TJ Quick serial number, so as to compare as to which type of font it resembles, it might help clarify further? An '85 Quick would most certainly have been made in his own workshop.
Non-fixie's Roy Thame BB:
Torqueless,
I read that sced's bike "69559" was a Xmas gift WHEN he was 16. Quote again; "I have a 1973 Super Mistral #69559 that was custom made for me as a Christmas gift from my parents when I was 16." Hopefully sced will be able to clarify my question re actually received at Xmas '73 or ordered at Xmas and perhaps not received until earlyish '74. And I agree with error by one owner or other on #69559 as two frames with same number - another point to clarify. This frame despite questions, remains the ONLY "69" frame number that also has any kind of date attached to it supporting the theory that "69 Shop series" stretched from '69 to '74 +/-'75.
The K or stock series of font as described by Dave in 1st group are (as you mention) described by Kilgariff as being built for stock and by builders outside of Putney shop other than Collard. Question is was the builder Quick (during Collard years) or another builder as Alec Bird or Charles Roberts Sr.? Interesting that number 75128 Dave includes in this 1st group is a Roy Thame and so points toward (can't be definite) being built by Quick with explanation for font that built in Quick's own workshop with his own stamps. Also I have seen another Roy Thame (221186) owned by Non-fixie and discussed in Bike forums that is similarly stamped as this 1st group. It is a number beyond the Thame "75" series and looks like an early 80's frame with photo of BB below: http://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vinta ... re-10.html
Dave,
I agree with Torqueless and have been thinking similarly that Collard's vertically stacked numbers across BB and later numbers along BB after Quick took over (as in your 2nd group) are a similarly looking font which would suggest these stamps belonged to the Putney shop and were used by both Collard and Quick while each were main builders in the shop.
Perhaps there should be another 3rd group of stamps including 7229 and 7314 which are both on a different position of BB and I think both different fonts to suggest were outside unaccounted builders during Quick era.
Wileyone,
Re [/quote]:
"My Tommy Quick Road Bike from 1985 is stamped in a similar manner. (i.e. edge of BB) Does anyone know when Tommy started at Holdsworth? I know he took over from Reg C in 1970 but when did he start there? "
Perhaps if you have a picture of your 1985 TJ Quick serial number, so as to compare as to which type of font it resembles, it might help clarify further? An '85 Quick would most certainly have been made in his own workshop.
Non-fixie's Roy Thame BB:
Attachments
dwscrimshaw
Retro Guru
Interesting, the non-fixie number looks very similar font/Stamping to the first group with the K stock frames, re the '1' and '6'.
Its interesting to peculate on who 'own' the stamps. It would not untypical for employees/craftsmen in engineering firms to have to supply their own small tools. Such a kit would be built up during an apprenticeship, that was certainly my experience. Not sure if this necessarily carries over into the bike shop situation, so the shop may have its own set or the builder may retain them.
Its interesting to peculate on who 'own' the stamps. It would not untypical for employees/craftsmen in engineering firms to have to supply their own small tools. Such a kit would be built up during an apprenticeship, that was certainly my experience. Not sure if this necessarily carries over into the bike shop situation, so the shop may have its own set or the builder may retain them.
Dave,
Granted re tradesman having their own personal tools, but the stamps for branding conceivably are a little different? There is talk by Kilgariff of Collard and presumably Quick as main man, besides building in Putney shop, also building out of their own home workshop and perhaps not unreasonable to think they would have had separate stamps at each site? Or perhaps as Torqueless suggests when Collard retired he passed on his stamps to Quick for use in the shop?
Questions.
I purposely chose word "brainstorming" over "speculating' which implies less science.
As always, need more evidence, maybe pic of Wileyone's '85 Quick numbers will help.
Doug
Granted re tradesman having their own personal tools, but the stamps for branding conceivably are a little different? There is talk by Kilgariff of Collard and presumably Quick as main man, besides building in Putney shop, also building out of their own home workshop and perhaps not unreasonable to think they would have had separate stamps at each site? Or perhaps as Torqueless suggests when Collard retired he passed on his stamps to Quick for use in the shop?
Questions.
I purposely chose word "brainstorming" over "speculating' which implies less science.
As always, need more evidence, maybe pic of Wileyone's '85 Quick numbers will help.
Doug
torqueless
Senior Retro Guru
Re:
'221186' looks suspiciously like a date-stamp to me; i.e. 22nd November 1986.
A lot can happen to a frame in forty years..
I got a new bracket shell put in my '75 'mystery' frame (which does happen to have a 5-digit 'first two digits=year' serial number with a zero in third position) around the turn of the millenium.
I took the bare frame, minus forks, to a long-established North London lightweight shop, discussed options with the guy in there, and left the frame with him. It was a good few months before I got a phone call telling me my frame was ready to pick up. I've no idea who actually did the work, but they did a fine job, and I know that because the shell they were replacing had itself been a replacement shell from a few years before (in another city) that had been put in badly- so far out of alignment as to be unrideable if you valued your knees at all.
Anyway the point is that on neither occasion of BB shell replacement was anything stamped on the new BB shell. I guess the first 'replacer' had the option of stamping the new shell with the old number, since it was there in plain sight on the original shell he was replacing. The second 'replacer' didn't have the option, since the original number was gone, and now only existed on the fork steerer, and the forks were still with me.
I actually have an inherited set of those number stamps myself, so if I chose to, I could stamp the original number, or any number, back into the BB shell.
So.. you know.. in that situation I wonder what the established frame builder etiquette might be? I can't be the only person who has had to get a BB shell replaced, although I am probably among a smaller number of people who've had to get one replaced twice in as many years...
Agreed... moreover it is getting rarer to find these forty year-old machines still with their original owner/commissioner, who presumably knows the whole story of their bike- what it had done to it when, and what it was like before it was done..
'221186' looks suspiciously like a date-stamp to me; i.e. 22nd November 1986.
A lot can happen to a frame in forty years..
I got a new bracket shell put in my '75 'mystery' frame (which does happen to have a 5-digit 'first two digits=year' serial number with a zero in third position) around the turn of the millenium.
I took the bare frame, minus forks, to a long-established North London lightweight shop, discussed options with the guy in there, and left the frame with him. It was a good few months before I got a phone call telling me my frame was ready to pick up. I've no idea who actually did the work, but they did a fine job, and I know that because the shell they were replacing had itself been a replacement shell from a few years before (in another city) that had been put in badly- so far out of alignment as to be unrideable if you valued your knees at all.
Anyway the point is that on neither occasion of BB shell replacement was anything stamped on the new BB shell. I guess the first 'replacer' had the option of stamping the new shell with the old number, since it was there in plain sight on the original shell he was replacing. The second 'replacer' didn't have the option, since the original number was gone, and now only existed on the fork steerer, and the forks were still with me.
I actually have an inherited set of those number stamps myself, so if I chose to, I could stamp the original number, or any number, back into the BB shell.
So.. you know.. in that situation I wonder what the established frame builder etiquette might be? I can't be the only person who has had to get a BB shell replaced, although I am probably among a smaller number of people who've had to get one replaced twice in as many years...
Agreed... moreover it is getting rarer to find these forty year-old machines still with their original owner/commissioner, who presumably knows the whole story of their bike- what it had done to it when, and what it was like before it was done..
dwscrimshaw
Retro Guru
OK, had a run over the number and look at Doug's comments again. We seem to have both 4 and 5 digit numbers for the shop some of which have issues with frame ID or actual digits. So as these still seem to carry the shop style and are different to the other 4D 70's number group I have kept them where they are for now, but expanded the bold red text used else where for such anomalies.
I think it is reasonable to assume use of 69 numbers up to 1974 and RT decals in 1975. Looking at the proposed year use by Torqueless I have gone for 125/yr as I have also seen this quoted for shop build volumes and is less than the hectic 3/wk. It also happens to put sced #69559 roughly in the middle of 1973 giving a happy coincidence of 6 months lead time for Christmas delivery. The reality is we only have one fix point for this number use assumption, so any reply we get from sced might mean further adjustment.
I have added comments and table to second page of excel file and updated the prediction at the top.
Any further observations most welcome.
I think it is reasonable to assume use of 69 numbers up to 1974 and RT decals in 1975. Looking at the proposed year use by Torqueless I have gone for 125/yr as I have also seen this quoted for shop build volumes and is less than the hectic 3/wk. It also happens to put sced #69559 roughly in the middle of 1973 giving a happy coincidence of 6 months lead time for Christmas delivery. The reality is we only have one fix point for this number use assumption, so any reply we get from sced might mean further adjustment.
I have added comments and table to second page of excel file and updated the prediction at the top.
Any further observations most welcome.
dwscrimshaw
Retro Guru
Just found reason to pick a hole in my argument above. I am not sure it is logical to suggest the frame number for #69559 would be allocated at the beginning of the lead time, certainly not 6 months in advance of delivery. Its far more likely to be at the start of the actual build. I think I read some comment of about 7 wks build time during busy periods so assuming the bike was ready for December delivery beginning of Nov is more plausible.
So I have adjusted the number/year to 115 to put #69559 around 10/12 of the 1973 range. This drops production back a bit towards the 100 mark suggested further up as being more manageable and puts our only fix point for the period in a more logical position I hope.
So I have adjusted the number/year to 115 to put #69559 around 10/12 of the 1973 range. This drops production back a bit towards the 100 mark suggested further up as being more manageable and puts our only fix point for the period in a more logical position I hope.
dwscrimshaw
Retro Guru
CBguy":2veav84q said:Dave,
Granted re tradesman having their own personal tools, but the stamps for branding conceivably are a little different? There is talk by Kilgariff of Collard and presumably Quick as main man, besides building in Putney shop, also building out of their own home workshop and perhaps not unreasonable to think they would have had separate stamps at each site? Or perhaps as Torqueless suggests when Collard retired he passed on his stamps to Quick for use in the shop?
Questions.
I purposely chose word "brainstorming" over "speculating' which implies less science.
As always, need more evidence, maybe pic of Wileyone's '85 Quick numbers will help.
Doug
Yes, not really sure that general engineering/jobbing shop practices would carry over well into something as specific as frame building. Plus as you say the shop might what some better control over such a key bit of information as frame numbers.
Similar threads
