The Maker Who Taught the Makers

[Cyclofiend Jim]

This popped up on the CL in the SF North Bay.  I'm glad it is too small for me, as I would be trying to figure out how to rationalize another bike. I don't think it's a screamingly great deal, but it is fairly priced.  It's an Eisentraut "Limited" model:

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/bik/3288189788.html

For folks who haven't heard of Albert Eisentraut, the most common phrase which comes up with him on a search is "godfather of american framebuilders"  I would not normally put a non-RBW model listing here, but this one, from this builder, is worth a look - if nothing else to see work from someone who begat those who begat those who currently craft quality frames here in the States.

http://www.classicrendezvous.com/USA/Eisentraut_main.htm

- Jim  "know your roots..."

[pb]

The treatment of the stay ends and fork ends is in the later style of Bruce Gordon, making me wonder whether he might have built this particualr example.

 

Cheers,

 

Peter 

[Matthew J]

Too small for me as well, but very nice. 

 

BG did in fact work with Eisentraut.  Not sure when he went off on his own.

[lungimsam]

That thing is screaming for a touring double and a 225mm Technomic stem.

[Dave]

This was nice to see.  I had a Ltd.  It was my first "real" serious bike.  I bought the frame new for something like $275.  It was maroon, which I later had repainted tangerine orange with royal blue Albert Eisentraut signature decals on the downtube; it was a beauty.  I built it up using Campy, Sun Tour, and Cinelli components; Phil hubs on gold tubular rims.  Unfortunately, back then, we didn't race but we all built our bikes to that standard.  It wasn't comfortable and I stupidly sold the frame and bought a "cutting edge" Cannondale aluminum frame (which I still have!).  If I knew then what I know now, I'd still be riding that frame.

Fortunately, my Ram has far surpassed the Ltd.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/Qwp97duraHQJ.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2677 / Virus Database: 2591/5817 - Release Date: 10/08/12

[pb]

On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 11:24:21 AM UTC-7, lungimsam wrote:

That thing is screaming for a touring double and a 225mm Technomic stem.

 

Hmmmn.  My response is rather different -- that it is quietly asking for the respect it deserves.

 

I'll admit that I would prefer to see Campy NR cranks.  

 

 

[Peter Morgano]

While the frame is beautiful I just could not see using 35 year old components just to keep it "original."  I have owned many racing frames from that time period and even the high end campy stuff is not as reliable as the entry level stuff you can find in any LBS today. This is just IMO, I have done a few resto-mods on these older bikes and was always happier with newer components than the outdated stuff the bikes came with. I once had a 70s Olmo that was all top end campy, and while beautiful did not perform nearly as well as the Shimano 105 components that replaced it. I recently sold off a lot of older campy parts so I know there is a market out there but just not my cup of tea.

 

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/S8EjWDk8aVEJ.

[Joe Bernard]

I'm kinda purist about vintage lightweights. I think they should be kept in period shape, and owned by the folks into that sort of thing. I'm not one of those folks.

 

Joe Bernard

Vallejo, CA.

[Aaron Thomas]

I love the Romulus-esque blue.

On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 10:32:51 AM UTC-7, Cyclofiend Jim wrote:

[Ryan]

It is a beauty. I would make it a rider. Better braking and shifting with more modern components. Cranks look like they're either  Victory or Triomphe. I bet they have a 130mm bcd which means the gearing may be kind of high for mere mortals especially in hilly terrain. I don't think it's heretical to put more modern components on a vintage frame if you're going to  actually ride it.. If you're a collector, of course, that is a different deal..

On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 12:32:51 PM UTC-5, Cyclofiend Jim wrote:

[Matthew J]

> While the frame is beautiful I just could not see using 35 year old components just to keep it "original."  I have owned many

> racing frames from that time period and even the high end campy stuff is not as reliable as the entry level stuff you can find in

> any LBS today. This is just IMO, I have done a few resto-mods on these older bikes and was always happier with newer

> components than the outdated stuff the bikes came with.

 

I guess I wonder what you mean by performance.  With the exception of the brakes, I built up my 30 year anniversary Spectrum with mainly period parts (Peter Wiegle modified Stronglight Cranks and Campy Hubs!).  I am no racer, but the bike is wonderful for the sunny weekend 60 to 75 milers I like to do.

 

The Campy SR derailleurs, brake levers and cables have never given me any problems.  Simplex Retrofriction shift like a charm.  I greased the Suntour freewheel twice since I built the bike.  I have a FW grease adapter that makes it simple.  Otherwise I am not even sure I had to.

 

As I am between touring bikes at the moment, I recently took it on a 4 day mini-tour, LaCrosse to Chicago with a large Caradice Saddle Bag.  Worked like a charm.  (one benefit if you will of the drought here in the Midwest is being able to tour without fenders).

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/57976152@N07/5462707215/in/photostream

[Peter Morgano]

Ah, well to each thier own. I had never had an issue with 105 when I started "for reals" riding in the late 80s so I usually just upgraded to that whenever I got a bike with Campy stuff. Thank you for reminding me that I am also no racer and did not and do not ride for "performance" but more just to ride, and often found older components lacking.  Also since I am usually on a pretty tight budget I could most of the time flip the campy components for the cost of the entire bike to keep the ball rolling, as it were.

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Matthew J <matth...@gmail.com> wrote:

> While the frame is beautiful I just could not see using 35 year old components just to keep it "original."  I have owned many

> racing frames from that time period and even the high end campy stuff is not as reliable as the entry level stuff you can find in

> any LBS today. This is just IMO, I have done a few resto-mods on these older bikes and was always happier with newer

> components than the outdated stuff the bikes came with.

 

I guess I wonder what you mean by performance.  With the exception of the brakes, I built up my 30 year anniversary Spectrum with mainly period parts (Peter Wiegle modified Stronglight Cranks and Campy Hubs!).  I am no racer, but the bike is wonderful for the sunny weekend 60 to 75 milers I like to do.

 

The Campy SR derailleurs, brake levers and cables have never given me any problems.  Simplex Retrofriction shift like a charm.  I greased the Suntour freewheel twice since I built the bike.  I have a FW grease adapter that makes it simple.  Otherwise I am not even sure I had to.

 

As I am between touring bikes at the moment, I recently took it on a 4 day mini-tour, LaCrosse to Chicago with a large Caradice Saddle Bag.  Worked like a charm.  (one benefit if you will of the drought here in the Midwest is being able to tour without fenders).

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/57976152@N07/5462707215/in/photostream

On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 5:02:24 PM UTC-5, Peter M wrote:

While the frame is beautiful I just could not see using 35 year old components just to keep it "original."  I have owned many racing frames from that time period and even the high end campy stuff is not as reliable as the entry level stuff you can find in any LBS today. This is just IMO, I have done a few resto-mods on these older bikes and was always happier with newer components than the outdated stuff the bikes came with. I once had a 70s Olmo that was all top end campy, and while beautiful did not perform nearly as well as the Shimano 105 components that replaced it. I recently sold off a lot of older campy parts so I know there is a market out there but just not my cup of tea.

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:48 PM, pb <pbrid...@aol.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 11:24:21 AM UTC-7, lungimsam wrote:

That thing is screaming for a touring double and a 225mm Technomic stem.

 

Hmmmn.  My response is rather different -- that it is quietly asking for the respect it deserves.

 

I'll admit that I would prefer to see Campy NR cranks.  

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/S8EjWDk8aVEJ.

To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/xilAr_Q_TxsJ.

[Matthew J]

>Ah, well to each thier own. I had never had an issue with 105 when I started "for reals" riding in the late 80s so I usually just

> upgraded to that whenever I got a bike with Campy stuff. Thank you for reminding me that I am also no racer and did not and do not

> ride for "performance" but more just to ride, and often found older components lacking.  Also since I am usually on a pretty tight

> budget I could most of the time flip the campy components for the cost of the entire bike to keep the ball rolling, as it were.

 

Am not and never have been a racer.  In fact, I eschew even group and charity rides.  Just not my thing.

 

Vintage Campy SR just looks good on bikes such as the Eisnetraut and my Kellogg.  It has a jewelry like finish that enhances the more plain lugs the Italians and Eisentraut of that era preferred.

 

Shimano 105 works as well, to be sure.

[islaysteve]

Peter, Just chiming in to say that I'm with ya on the 105.  My experience is similar to yours, and I moved my 105 STI 8-speed parts over to the Bleriot when I built it up.  It does depend on why your bought/how you want to use your vintage frame.  I can see the issues.  At least putting modern components on a vintage frame is not as ..... (pick your word) as chopping up an original Model A to hot-rod it.  Cheers, Steve 

[Matthew J]

> My experience is similar to yours, and I moved my 105 STI 8-speed parts over to the Bleriot when I built it up.  

 

To be clear, Campy SR on the Kellogg is friction only.  That stuff came much later.  Except for the couple of rides I have never used it.

[Joe Bernard]

"To each his own" includes my opinion about how vintage lightweights should be approached. It's a personal preference on my part, not an edict. The topic as concerns this frame is muddy anyway: "Period" in this case includes some pretty "modern"-operation Shimano and Suntour bits. Just sayin.

 

Joe "just sayin" Bernard

Vallejo, CA.

[Mitchell Gass]

At 11:05 AM 10/9/2012, Matthew J wrote:

Too small for me as well, but very nice. 
 
BG did in fact work with Eisentraut.  Not sure when he went off on his own.

According to http://velospace.org/node/25288 :

"The Limited was conceived as a lower-cost, more complete alternative to the Eisentraut No. 1. Production began in 1975 in the hands of Bruce Gordon, who opened shop on his own a year or so later."

On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 12:32:51 PM UTC-5, Cyclofiend Jim wrote:

This popped up on the CL in the SF North Bay.  I'm glad it is too small for me, as I would be trying to figure out how to rationalize another bike. I don't think it's a screamingly great deal, but it is fairly priced.  It's an Eisentraut "Limited" model:

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/bik/3288189788.html

For folks who haven't heard of Albert Eisentraut, the most common phrase which comes up with him on a search is "godfather of american framebuilders"  I would not normally put a non-RBW model listing here, but this one, from this builder, is worth a look - if nothing else to see work from someone who begat those who begat those who currently craft quality frames here in the States.

http://www.classicrendezvous.com/USA/Eisentraut_main.htm

- Jim  "know your roots..."

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/HAPWoimEFxYJ.