mrstevo42004

I have spent a GREAT DEAL of time researching this bike, and keep coming up empty handed! I have yet to see another one just like it! Can somebody PLEASE help me identify this bike?! I know very little about these styles of bikes, so please pardon my ignorance. I'll post some pics, but here's a brief description......Green in color, Dual Suicide Shifter, Benelux Cyclo Gears (Cyclo - Made in England 3/32, on gear housing by kickstand), Shimano on Rear Hub, fairly certain seat is not original, Serial # is 183550A. ANY info that I can obtain (Model, Year, Value, etc.) would be GREATLY APPRECIATED! Thanks much!

Gravity Aided

Looks like you need a new fork .

clubman 

Dunelts were usually mainstream offerings although some were built with 531 tubes. You'll find a date code on the inside of the Williams crank to reference here...https://www.classicrendezvous.com/Bri...iams_nmbrs.htm

It's a fairly entry level road bike, maybe late 50's or 60's, interesting but not really valuable, especially missing the rear gear and the very bent fork. It the frame is bent, I'd just harvest the components.

The wheels might be interesting...32/40 Dunlop rim sets with high flange hubs are always desirable and they might even be stainless. Look closely at the details.

edit...and stop YELLING AT US

edit...I think your front wheel is not original...appears to have 36 holes.

Velognome 

early/mid 60's . Same Lightweight decal appears on my son's '61 Hercules, but his is a 5spd running on Huret gears with a Raleigh crandk and rings. And yes, the fork is boffed...you'll need to search out a new one. Should be fairly easy as the frame appears to be rather common Dunelt 3spd Sports frame.

cudak888 

Mainstream, not made by Raleigh, bent fork, mostly worthless except for shifters and crankset.

-Kurt

clubman 

I hear what you're saying but I don't think that's a Raleigh frame. The fork crown cap and the mudguard attachments look a little earlier n addition to the use of a Williams crank. Raleigh was pretty consistent about that... once they absorbed a marque, it got 26 tpi and typical Raleigh "accoutrements". Mind you the badge doesn't say Birmingham or Smethwick so who knows?



...what Kurt said.

mrstevo42004

Thanks for the link and the info. I checked it out, and the stamp inside the crank reads "ZB" (1961 according to the chart). Not "yelling" at you, lol....just can't believe how little i've been able to dig up about this bike. Thanks again!

Mos6502

It's pre-Raleigh. I think they took on Dunelt around 1963 or so. It's nothing too exciting. It would be pretty cool if it had the original rear derailleur though.

mrstevo42004

Oh, and about the fork....I of course noticed instantly how bent it was, but I couldn't see any evidence indicating that it happened from stress. The metal isn't creased or rippled at the bend, there's no stress fractures, and the paint looks fine. So it got me wondering if it was just the way they designed that specific model? I know it might seem like a stupid question to you guys, but like I said, I don't know much about these bikes. I thought it might be a possibility seeing as how this style of bike was still a fairly new concept back then. Thanks for the info everybody, much appreciated!

mrstevo42004

I am looking to sell this though. Any ideas on what would be a fair price to ask?...

Mos6502

As is? Somewhere around $25-$35. The incorrect parts and bent fork really kill the value this bike would have.

mrstevo42004

Ok...since I now have an age of the bike, I've been doin some more diggin. And every 1961 Dunelt that I've seen has bent forks. They are not damaged, just designed that way. What's got me puzzled now, is that all the others I'm seeing are either Black or Blue, and all 3 Speeds. I still can't find another 10 Speed in Green. I'd really like to be able to see a catalog pic or something, so I'd have something to compare it to. And know exactly what components were on it when it was new. Any ideas?...

norskagent

I'm sorry but that fork has been whacked any way you slice it

lostarchitect 

Sorry man, I know you want that to be true, but that fork is bent. PLEASE don't sell it without disclosing that. Now that you have been informed, you will be legally liable if something bad happens to someone riding that bike because of the fork damage.

mrstevo42004

Sorry, I beg to differ....but you are wrong. If you Google search Dunelts from this era, you will see for yourself.

mrstevo42004

I know it's weird, but I just can't see that every Dunelt I've seen from this time frame, ended up with bent forks! Seriously....go to OldRoads.com and look.

x136 

I have two Dunelts from the early sixties. Same decals, headbadge, and style of lugs. They're three-speeds, but have similar if not identical forks to that one. They're most certainly not bent like that.

FastJake

+1 That fork is bent way back. The frame might be ok though. There are lots of pictures of bikes with bent forks. It's a common occurrence when they're crashed. Even a mild front end collision can ruin a fork.

Check out this similar era but different model Dunelt: https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7QKdVtAglW...0/IMG_4222.JPG

mrstevo42004

I actually did see that bike on Google, and it's the closest I've seen to mine. But, the only difference that I see between my fork and that one, is that mine is solid green. The curvature looks the same to me. I'm really having a hard time agreeing with all of this "Bent Fork" business. Because, doesn't it stand to reason, that if it had been bent by stress or pressure...that there would be some evidence upon up-close inspection, of the steel being slightly creased, or bulging (even slightly) at the sides of the curve? I would at least expect that the paint would show spiderwebbing, chips, cracks, discoloring, or something at the curvature point....but it doesn't. At this point, I kinda wish that everybody could see and feel the fork for themselves up-close and personal. It is absolutely smooth, and uniform. Oh, well. Thanks to those who were able and willing to donate info. Good luck, & Happy Riding! :0D

Trakhak

I believe that mrstevo thinks the bend in the fork everyone is referring to is the intentionally curved section in the bottom 6 inches of the fork. Yes, the curve in the bottom section of the fork on your bike is the same as the curve in the bottom section of the forks of the other Dunelts that you're referencing. That's not the bend in question, though.

The straight upper section of your fork should be directly in line with the head tube. It's not. If you hold a yardstick along the center of the straight portion of the fork, you'll see that the center line of the fork is at a much steeper angle than the center line of the head tube. If the fork were straight, the fork's center line would be in line with the head tube's center line.

That kind of fork bend from a front-end collision is one of the most commonly seen forms of damage to older bikes. If the impact was severe enough, the paint might show damage, but it usuallly doesn't. The bend often occurs at the portion of the fork that is inserted into the head tube, since that's the point where the leverage would be greatest, and thus would leave the visible portion of the fork unmarred.

A bike frame builder could make the call on whether or not the fork would be safe to repair, and the cost for the repair of the fork shouldn't be much more than $50 or so.

Mos6502

'59 Dunelt by crosscolin, on Flickr


Dunelt by ladelman, on Flickr


1963 Dunelt 3 Speed is For Sale by jp weigle, on Flickr


#1 by anybikewilldo, on Flickr


Dunelt Fleur-de-lis by bikamper, on Flickr


Donated Dunelt by Bikerescue, on Flickr

You can see that none of these Dunelts have a fork that has been bent backwards like the one you have.
Your bicycle has very obviously been involved in a collision of some sort. The front wheel was replaced because it was probably smashed, the forks are bent backwards so far that the bicycle doesn't even sit level. They're ruined forks. It's not even debatable.

You don't see any creasing or bulging on the forks themselves because the fork is bent where the crown and head tube are joined. It's completely obvious too.

Attempting to pass this off to somebody as simply a "weird fork they only made in 1961" would be unethical and dishonest. Because it's not. Period.

wrk101

+1,328,769.25 Fork is bent, badly bent. Bent at the crown/headtube joint. With that bad of a bent fork, I would not be surprised to find damage to the main frame too.

Replacement front wheel = crash was bad enough to damage/ruin front wheel.

lostarchitect 

Ah, I see what you're saying. See the post below, you're not looking in the right place for the bend. Here is an illustration for you.



See the red line? That line is drawn straight down through the headtube, and the top part of the fork should follow that line until it bends towards the front of the bike. On your bike, the top part of the fork is bent BACK towards the rear of the bike. This is the result of a front end crash and makes the bike unsafe to ride.

If the front wheel has been replaced, it is probably because of the same accident. Look on the toptube and downtube near the head tube to see if they are slightly bent as well. There is a strong possibility that they are.

mrstevo42004

LMAO! This is too funny! I told you guys within my first couple of posts, that I know VERY little about these. I'm sure it's quite plain how all this could've been easily misunderstood by a "Rookie". Before I got this bike, I'd never noticed forks that curve like this. But now that I know EXACTLY what you are reffering to....I had noticed that the angle was off, but due to the age of the bike, I thought it might just be part of the design. Never seen one this old before, so... Anyways, thanks everybody! Sorry bout the misunderstanding! Lol, I'm so awsome that I amaze myself sometimes....LMAO! Sorry guys. D

lostarchitect 

No worries! Glad we were able to finally communicate. It is still a cool bike. If the main frame is not damaged, you may be able to get a replacement fork.