Evaluation of 1970 Peugeot PX-50 randonneur
In my quest to replace a lost loved one, I came across what looks like to be a 1970 Peugeot PX-50 in pristine condition on eBay, but was wondering if it is really as good as it seems to be: It is listed as being a 57cm frame but it has "650" wheels.
I don't have much experience with wheel sizes but do know that, apparently, 650-ish wheels are a venerable tradition in (French) touring, so it is possible that these wheels are indeed a "good" match for the bike. However, the wheels look a bit questionable because, if I understand it correctly, the PX-50 was a flagship touring model, but these wheels look similar to low-end steel wheels. Additionally, the spacing between the wheels themselves and the fenders looks a bit odd to me: There is a huge amount of space between them despite that the tires are quite "normal" in thickness. Is it possible that the wheels were cannibalized from some other bike, then? However, regardless of how "correct" the wheels are for the bike, is this a good deal?-- I mean, wheels would likely be the foremost thing I replace on the bike, and I'd definitely replace them if they indeed are steel. |
Originally Posted by wrk101
(Post 18548789)
Who sells a bike with just ONE picture???
I am NOT touching anything from that seller, given this poor rating: "[COLOR=#000000]BAD PACKER DENTS, PART LOSS FLMSY BOX RUBBING REDUCED VALUE,NEEDED TO ClaimEBAY" Its one thing when you get this kind of feedback from a new buyer, but from a buyer with almost 300 feedbacks, it pays to LISTEN. |
This bicycle looks circa 1977-1978, not 1970. It is far from pristine. The fork appears to have had cantilever studs that were pried out of the bosses and caliper brakes installed. I'm pretty sure the PX50 of this era didn't have the studs and someone has converted a PX40 or some other model . The 650B wheels are correct but it's still only a hi-tensile frame with steel cottered cranks and steel rims. IMO, absurd price! Add in the poor feedback and I wouldn't touch this with a three metre pole.
Edit: A lot of those frames were built to accommodate multiple wheel sizes. Despite the huge clearance, if you look at the distance from the centre of the cantilever stud hole to the centre of the brake pad stud, it does appear to be about 25mm/1" which is the correct distance for a MAFAC cantilever. So that fork does appear to have been designed for those wheels. Those MAFAC Raid calipers had a huge pad range, with the maximum being 80mm from the crown mounting hole and these appear to be at the limit. |
While @wrk101's advice is good, it's also good to drill down. Click on the seller's name on the right under Seller Information.
His profile shows 42 positive feedback, 0 neutral, and 2 negative. He gets 5 stars for "Item as Described" and "Communication", and 4 1/2 stars for "Shipping Time" and "Shipping Charges". BTW, he's in France. If you click on the 2 Negative, you see the negative feedback, 1 in the last twelve months, 1 in the last 6 months, including the one wrk101 quoted. I'd be careful buying from him, but I personally wouldn't categorically rule him out. - Just my thoughts, I'm not "dean27200", nor have I purchased from him. |
If that bike is from 1970 I'll eat my hat.
I agree with T-Mar totally. |
Originally Posted by T-Mar
(Post 18548933)
This bicycle looks circa 1977-1978, not 1970. It is far from pristine. The fork appears to have had cantilever studs that were pried out of the bosses and caliper brakes installed. I'm pretty sure the PX50 of this era didn't have the studs and someone has converted a PX40 or some other model . The 650B wheels are correct but it's still only a hi-tensile frame with steel cottered cranks and steel rims. IMO, absurd price! Add in the poor feedback and I wouldn't touch this with a three metre pole.
Edit: A lot of those frames were built to accommodate multiple wheel sizes. Despite the huge clearance, if you look at the distance from the centre of the cantilever stud hole to the centre of the brake pad stud, it does appear to be about 25mm/1" which is the correct distance for a MAFAC cantilever. So that fork does appear to have been designed for those wheels. Those MAFAC Raid calipers had a huge pad range, with the maximum being 80mm from the crown mounting hole and these appear to be at the limit. |
The bike is a 77-78, based on the decals. I've never seen a PX-50 from the 70's without chrome socks on the forks, there were models in the 50's and 60's that were without them, but this one is clearly 77-78 vintage. You'll see numerous bikes in on-line searches identifying themselves as PX-50, but many are not what's claimed. If it doesn't have chrome socks, and isn't 50's-60's, it's not a PX-50. Possibly a PX-40, as T-mar noted. As for the excessive clearance on the front fender, it's a "who-knows" problem. I'm sure it's a replacement fork, since the 77-78 model would have had center-pull brakes, not canti's.
As for the wheels, my 75 PX-50 has the same wheels this model shows, and they're excellent steel wheels, not a speck of rust, high-quality stainless spokes, look almost new. They're heavy, sure, but so is the whole bike. I ride mine with modern fenders, headlight, and seat-bag at 34 lbs, and it's a dream of a cruiser. http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=505502 I'd pass on this one, too many things that don't fit. |
Thanks to everyone for the advice.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:48 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.