New member with a new project

[Jolyon]

Hi,

I was given this recently.

I wanted to put on something equally retro but nicer so went for the Mafac Racers

But they don't fit so have to do some thinking and research. I am completely new to this so have a lot to learn.

The frame looks like it's worth keeping from what I can gather.

Here's a picture of most of it.

the stem's nice

Loads to do and find out.

I'm 44 and the last time I rode a bicycle was when I was 19 having been seduced by the petrol engine after that.

Yours,

J.

 

[NickD]

Looks to be a nice 80's Raleigh - the brakes are made for a bike with space for bigger tyres and mudguards, that's why they don't fit. The stem is lovely, but quite a bit older than the bike, looks like a decent start to a project.

 

[Jolyon]

Hi,

I thought the stem was older but I'll be keeping it as it looks so nice. I imagine the bike will end up a blend of old and older and I'm afraid to admit I have already fitted a 3 ring crank sprocket to help me drag my wheezing body up all the hills in Bath !

I aim to get all the bits right and working as they should and then think about painting.

Yours,

Jolly

 

[Old Ned]

Hi,

3 ring crank sprocket
Yours,

Jolly

You mean 'a triple chainset'

No matter, you'll get used to the terminology quite soon!

Welcome to the forum, that frame looks to be a good 'un. Do you have the frame number? Generally under the bottom bracket shell (the round pipey thing that the 3 ring crank sprocket axle goes into ).

Sorry, couldn't resist it

 

[keithglos]

Jolyon, The MAFAC racer brakes should be OK, just point the brake blocks (old terminology) at the rims, by means of the adjusting nuts.

 

[Jolyon]

Hi,

Thanks for the steer. Important to get terminology right as it saves time !

I tried pointing the brake blocks up towards the rim but they'd have to be at nearly a 45 deg. angle so I'm not sure they'll work as well as they should.

I went to the Mud Dock bike jumble in Bristol on Sunday and my son spotted a pair dual pivot Shimano 105s for £12. Perhaps I should have exercised parental authority. Mind you, it's never worked before so there's no reason to think why it would have worked then !

J.

 

[Jonny69]

That's quite a nice old steed. I am quite jealous

 

[Jolyon]

Wheel trueing

I took my front wheel into a local bikeshop as they told me it could be trued for a Tenner or so. Anyway i was called later that day and told it was beyond repair as it was out axially by 1/4 inch and it wasn't clear whether the problem was with the wheel or the hub.

Didn't have the money for a new one so I thought I'd have a go at it myself. Twisting the spindle in my fingers I could feel tight and loose places so I took it apart and saw damage in the form of pitting on one of the cones. I put the cone in the lathe and turned away the worn part and then polished the surface to a mirror finish. The races in the wheel are fine. Reassembled; the deviation was down to 60 thou (from 250) according to the jig I set up

After 5 minutes of spoke nipple tweaking I got the deviation to 13 thou and the wheel spins quietly and freely.

Is 13 thou (0.3mm approx) good enough for a 30 year old wheel ?

Yours,

Jolly

 

[Jolyon]

Progress

Hi all,

Frame Number is WF9001228

other numbers
SN8
20F

Completely stripped down for powder coating.

What's the difference between Butted and Double Butted tubing?

Yours,

J

 

[playford]

1974 - 1980's

In 1974, an entirely different numbering system was introduced for the higher end (531 and subsequently 753) Raleighs. Serial numbers should begin with a "W", which stands for Worksop, the facility that produced theses frames. This is followed by another alphabet. This alphabet indicates the fortnight in which the frame was built (i.e. A = 1st fortnight, B = 2nd, etc.). The third character is always a numeral. It indicates the year of manufacture, the decade being assumed (i.e. "4" could be '74 or '84; it is up to the interpretor to know enough to tell if the frame is from the 70's or 80's). What then follows is a series of numbers. At this point, these appear to be some sort of sequence, but this has not been substantiated.


sheldon.