Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic and Vintage Bicycles: Whats it Worth? Appraisals.
Reload this Page >

Evaluation of 1970 Peugeot PX-50 randonneur

Notices
Classic and Vintage Bicycles: Whats it Worth? Appraisals. Use this subforum for all requests as to "How much is this vintage bike worth?"Do NOT try to sell it in here, use the Marketplaces.

Evaluation of 1970 Peugeot PX-50 randonneur

Old 02-19-16, 09:13 AM
  #1  
errantlinguist
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
errantlinguist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 55

Bikes: 1983 Raleigh Royal

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
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.

Last edited by errantlinguist; 02-19-16 at 09:16 AM. Reason: Removed "mm" from size description because they're not actually in millimeters
errantlinguist is offline  
Old 02-19-16, 09:53 AM
  #2  
errantlinguist
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
errantlinguist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 55

Bikes: 1983 Raleigh Royal

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by wrk101 View Post
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.
Definitely a good observation, but (seeing as I am quite inexperienced when it comes to buying bikes on eBay) is there no way to sort reviews based on the transaction amount?-- it seems he gets quite a lot of good reviews, but they do all seem to probably be for selling individual parts rather than whole bikes. I'll definitely be more careful in the future thanks to your advice, but I don't know the exact story behind the negative reviews (perhaps I'm just naive).
errantlinguist is offline  
Old 02-19-16, 10:14 AM
  #3  
T-Mar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 20,901
Mentioned: 562 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3771 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,184 Times in 880 Posts
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.

Last edited by T-Mar; 02-19-16 at 10:32 AM.
T-Mar is offline  
Old 02-19-16, 10:19 AM
  #4  
SloButWide 
Heck on Wheels
 
SloButWide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: USA Midwest
Posts: 1,100

Bikes: In Signature

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 206 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
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.
__________________
"I had a great ride this morning, except for that part about winding up at work."

Bikes so far: 2011 Felt Z85, 80's Raleigh Sovereign (USA), 91 Bianchi Peregrine, 91 Austro-Daimler Pathfinder, 90's Trek 730 Multitrack, STOLEN: 80 Schwinn Voyageur (Japan)

SloButWide is offline  
Old 02-19-16, 10:29 AM
  #5  
lostarchitect 
incazzare.
 
lostarchitect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Catskills/Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 6,956

Bikes: See sig

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked 29 Times in 20 Posts
If that bike is from 1970 I'll eat my hat.

I agree with T-Mar totally.
__________________
1964 JRJ (Bob Jackson), 1973 Wes Mason, 1974 Raleigh Gran Sport, 1986 Schwinn High Sierra, 2000ish Colian (Colin Laing), 2011 Dick Chafe, 2013 Velo Orange Pass Hunter
lostarchitect is online now  
Old 02-19-16, 11:36 AM
  #6  
FastJake
Constant tinkerer
 
FastJake's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 7,859
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked 52 Times in 43 Posts
Originally Posted by T-Mar View Post
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.
Cantilever studs are present in the rear too. Based on that, it's a pretty cool frame IMO. But the missing front canti studs, super high price, and questionable seller make this an obvious PASS.
FastJake is offline  
Old 02-19-16, 06:40 PM
  #7  
jj1091
Mike J
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Jacksonville Florida
Posts: 1,609

Bikes: 1975 Peugeot PX-50L, 1971 Peugeot PX-10, 1974 Peugeot PX-8

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
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.



I'd pass on this one, too many things that don't fit.

Last edited by jj1091; 02-19-16 at 06:58 PM.
jj1091 is offline  
Old 02-22-16, 03:34 PM
  #8  
errantlinguist
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
errantlinguist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 55

Bikes: 1983 Raleigh Royal

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks to everyone for the advice.
errantlinguist is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jeirvine
Classic and Vintage Sales
17
12-08-18 10:44 PM
dfischer
Road Cycling
24
08-02-18 01:21 PM
largefarva
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
47
03-01-16 08:58 AM
digaz
Road Cycling
18
11-11-14 09:50 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.