I'm trying to find out what exactly a 'road/path' machine in the 1940s and 1950s was to cyclists of that time. (I know a path machine was what they called track machines.)

Looking on the internet the most common 'present age' definition of the term is 'a bicycle with rear-facing track ends, eyelets and clearances for mudguards and fork crown, and sometimes rear stay bridge, drilled for mounting brakes.

Every photo of a 'road/path' machine I can find shows a frame with rear-facing track ends, too. However, the road/path frames offered by Hetchins in their catalogues back then had forward facing rear ends.


Can anyone here cast any light on this?


This is described by Hetchins as a 'Short distance time trial machine' - I just finished building it last Wednesday. Actually, it's not quite finished yet.

I always thought they were 3 speed road bikes...

Maybe that's based on the ability to lighten and go fixed for a race, just by a wheel swap?

Wowsers - Thats a beauty!

Thanks. I think so too. I'd like to know how you got the photo to appear full size like that...

^I clicked on your thumbnail photo - and copied and pasted it. ^

Is it ever!

I think blue cotton bar tape would be more appropriate than the fake cork or gel tape, though.

From the 1922 Raleigh catalog:



Neal

'Em are some herkin gears for a single speed...

Nice ad, Neal!

"with flush joints, no lugs"!

see 1917 BSA catalogue for difference...



Pathracer above





Road Racer (road/path) above

my interpretation, anyway.

You are right, of course, but with my wrists I need the cushioning modern tape provides. Unfortunate but true. Someone did suggest getting gel gloves...

Since my initial post I have become aware of what might be another interpretation of 'Path'. I had assumed that it was the same as 'Track', meaning in a stadium on a wooden or metaled track. However, I have subsequently seen a catalogue that lists availability of a track frame as separate from a path frame (just looked and can't find it again). So does 'path' maybe refer to a dirt surface in an enclosed space, such as a stadium? Or perhaps on grass? Or are path and track interchangeable?

Path and track are generally interchangable, not all tracks back then were wood or indoors. Many times path racing was a term for grass track, and path racers we're also useful as time trial bikes. A 25 mile TT was sometimes indictive of a need for fenders.

Plus slacker angles and lower bottom bracket.

Most had rear-facing dropouts, making them eligible for racing on a dedicated track, but apparently not all.

+1

Many tracks at the time were relatively shallow-banked, which meant a somewhat lower bottom bracket and less steep angles would not lead to disaster. Interesting that someone would make both a "track" and "path frame," as these essentially mean the same thing, but perhaps someone squeezed out a distinction for marketing purposes. I'd be interested in seeing that catalog or knowing who the maker was.

I shall rack my brains.

Later, after a night's sleep... I can't for the life of me remember where I saw this. It may be that I was struck by the use of both terms in the same advertising copy and it just gave me the impression they were talking about different machines whereas they were, perhaps, just using the terms interchangeably.

Looking through a 1955 Hetchins catalogue yesterday I noticed that they describe their Path Model No. 16 as being available "With or without guard clearance.". This casts doubt on the common definition of a Road/path machines as having just that with rear-facing rear ends and brake holes. Although the last isn't mentioned in the catalogue I can't imagine anyone needing mudguards without needing brakes so presumably if guards were fitted, so were brakes, bearing in mind that people back then didn't ride on roads without brakes. Or did racers use mudguards on outdoor tracks?

Also, in support of path and track being interchangeable, in the same catalogue they say, in relation to their Path Model No. 10, "... we fully realise style of rider and type of track can influence the rider's choice of design." Perhaps the convention was that 'Path' was used to describe models, while 'track' for where they were expected to be used?

Back to my primary interest in bringing this subject here; what constitutes a 'Road/path. As such machines offered by Hetchins had forward-facing rear ends (as opposed to drop-outs (?) or rear-facing, 'track' ends) perhaps that is exactly what defines a 'Road/path' frame. Or was that just Hetchins?

I've found the catalogue that made me think that path and track were different. It was Macleans Featherweight Cycles catalogue on Classic Lightweights. Or perhaps they mean the terms are interchangeable?