Vince Canepa

I forgot to mention this fellow, who was very close to the Taylor brothers. In fact, Jack recently sold him his personal tandem. Lots of non-bike photos in his photostream, but tons of Jack Taylors. There are also photos of the brothers at work "back in the day". He still corresponds with Jack and Ken - Norm died in 2008. I think it is very good reference material for paint, workmanship, accessories, etc. Here's the link, starting with a beautiful Taylor tandem on page 7:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/meauxtown/page7/

rhm

On the subject of serial numbers, is there any serial number on the fork? Does anyone know if one should expect one on a Jack Taylor?

My 'Fothergill' is supposed to have matching serial numbers on frame and fork; but it doesn't (none on fork). And a Holdsworth I had in my hands some months ago was supposed to have matching serial numbers on frame and fork; but it didn't (both present, but different). So my experience with serial numbers on forks has not been encouraging. Still, you might want to have a little look-see.

On the subject of dropouts, fork ends, and the like, I like Norris' suggestion of "possibly Chater Lea." I don't know what Chater Lea track ends look(ed) like, but I do know their dropouts are cut steel and stamped "CHATER LEA" on one side. The stamping is very faint, there's no way you'd see it through paint.

I sent Norris photos of my Fothergill in hopes of confirming that it is or isn't a Fothergill, because as a frame builder he's interested in other makers' work, and he also has a late 40's Fothergill in his possession, of which he was going to send me photos, particularly of the graphics. A propos mine, he said if it was a Fothergill then it was the earliest one he'd ever seen, judging by the lugs. But he also mentioned that he had a set of the same lugs, new in the box, he was looking forward to using one day. When asked what brand / maker they were, he didn't reply. I mention this for no clear reason... just making conversation, I guess.

Vince Canepa

On a Jack Taylor, relative to the fork, the serial number is stamped into the steerer tube.

-holiday76

cool, i'm going to take the fork out later tonight. we'll see what i find.

are we sure the same rules apply to the early ones? 49s specifically?

-holiday76

well, I think this clears up what the serial number of this frame and fork is:



the reason that doesnt help determining if it's actually a JT, is because there is already a JT in the registry with that number:

https://www.blackbirdsf.org/taylor/serials_1978.html

of course the one on the registry site might be wrong since there isnt much info there aside from the claim that it's 7462

Vince Canepa

On the tandem list as #7462 it needs to be recognized that it would be easy for the owner to determine that serial number accurately. Both racks would have the serial number also, so there would be four locations to verify the serial number.

-holiday76

true, but it's worth checking into. I sent a note to the owner of the registry site to try to find out.

is the serial on the steerer tube a taylor thing or do many other builders do that?

Vince Canepa

Many builders use the steerer tube. It is the best place on a fork.

I did some digging and found photos of the serial numbers on my #7338. The numerals are 1/8" on the steerer tube and 5/32" on the rear dropout. Note the location and orientation where they stamped the fork. Note that the font is different - the 7 has a straight leg on #7338. Since #7338 and #7462 would have been built within a few months of each other it could be logical that the fonts would be the same (in other words they logically would have used the same stamp set).

Our Tourist #5935 has the same font as #7338 on the rear dropout and the same 1/8" font on the rear rack as on the steerer tube of #7338; I can't find a photo of the steerer tube and the bike is built up, so I can't confirm that font.

dbakl

I know little of Jack Taylors, except I've always wanted a curved tube model...

-holiday76

Joel from the Taylor registry site linked a few times in this thread was nice enough to give me his thoughts on the situation:

"hmm. well, im not one to cast aspersions on norris, certainly, but he
might be wrong on this one.

your bike definitely has serial # 7462 - but the build book lists 7462 as
a 22x20 tandem (no more specific model listed - the build book is quite
spare) built 12 aug 1978 by norman.

your frame hints to me at not being a taylor, for reasons cited in your
bikeforums thread - atypical rear track ends (they preferred a different
style, but were not averse to using whatever was on hand or requested),
frame serial # in the wrong place (they were inconsistent about some
things, but that wasnt one of them), fork crown atypical (again, see note
on the track ends). cant really see the brazing work, but if its anything
but flawless, thatll inject some doubt - even on my 1949 taylor, when
norman had merely been building a little over a decade, the fillets are
impeccable). the frame and fork def. have a earlier-than-late-70s look
about them, but that wasnt atypical for the taylors either - they knew
what they liked, and liked a lot of older stuff because it worked just
fine - no reason to change!

it does look a nice frame, but id tend to say someone repainted it and put
taylor transfers on it before norris got to it - and frankly, that may
have been the taylors themselves! they used to have "refinished by jack
taylor cycles" transfers for such things, but ran out at some point, and i
have def. seen at least one frame that the owner said had been
repainted/repaired by them and then ended up with taylor transfers!
"

tugrul

I'm somewhat surprised the seller didn't do this background check, as he seems to have a reputation to uphold.

Or is the build book not as authoritative as it sounds.

-holiday76

Not sure about the book, but im believing its not a taylor because basically nothing past the transfers seem to indicate it is.

-holiday76

so, if this thing turns out not to be a Taylor, would you guys keep it badged one or not? I'm not sure, and the paint isnt that bad that I'd feel like repainting it, just wondered what you folks thought.

I suppose it would make it an interesting conversation piece for the few people who'd see it and question what it was...

fender1

Keep it as is IMHO. The visual is what drew you in in the first place.

illwafer

cool thread. sounds like you'll be getting a little discount

edit: on would you keep it badged? why not? it's your bike. if it bothers you, do whatever you need to do.

rhm

If I thought it wasn't a Taylor, or even if I knew it wasn't, but didn't know what it was, I wouldn't change it.

If I knew exactly what it was, then maybe.

But first I would build it and ride it enough to decide if it's worth the effort of researching and refinishing.

If it turned out to be a glorious ride and I knew exactly what the original graphics were then yes, I'd refinish it as appropriate. Big "if", though!

tugrul

I'd get a little 22x20 tandem decal and stick it on the head tube

JunkYardBike

If this turns out to be the case (or if you can't prove this didn't happen), why change the decals? It's part of the frame's history.

-holiday76

i agree mostly about the decals. Unless I find out it's definitely something else I doubt I'll be doing anything about them.

as for the discount, I won't be pursuing that either way. I figure, I bid on the frame and won it based on the fact that was what I was willing to pay, and the amount I was willing to pay really had nothing to do with it being a Taylor. IN short I basically got what I bid on and I'm happy with it, as much as I can be having never ridden it. We'll see how that goes when I get a 27" SA AW wheel to throw in there!

mkeller234

This thread is not quite what I was expecting. It's been interesting and makes me wish I had taken a closer look at the only JT I have seen in person. The linked video was enjoyable... although at around 17:30 I noticed they had what looks like a nudie pic hanging in the background... so there is the whole dirty old men thing.

Velognome 

[QUOTEThis thread is not quite what I was expecting.][/QUOTE]

+1, I've been waiting for you to get frustrated with the whole thing, and offer the frame up for sale, at which time I'd offer to take it off your hands and you would thank me, refuse to accept payment, we'd hug and return home, Holiday76 being freed from his horrible torment and I with the said frame hung upon my shoulder.

It's not gonna happen is it?

Keep it, ride it , enjoy it. The repaint and decals are all part of it's history and now you get to put your mark on it.

fender1

Just get Bilenky to weld some disc brake tabs on the fork ends and call it a day.............

rhm

Re. this photo:

What is the diamond-shaped stamping visible on the steerer tube?


Re. this photo:

I find it hard to believe a custom build using Reynolds tubing in the late 70's would have been built up with a cottered crank.

Was it standard practice for a fillet-brazed frame to have a lugged BB shell?

vjp

I have the Summer 2009 Bicycle Quarterly that has an extensive article on Jack Taylor Cycles and there are numerous photos in the article of JT bikes in the 40's with the same fork crown as you have. Ignore the tandem serial #, that is a 1940's JT.

-holiday76

if I had to guess at this point I'd probably go with that this frame was serviced by the Taylor's at some point, and that the frame is actually from the 40s or 50s , from some unknown maker.

If we assume it's reynolds tubing, does the 26.4 seat post diameter mean anything to anyone? Are there any Taylors with that tubing inner diameter? BTW, I could be off by a millimeter or two on that, but it is in no way 27.2. A 26.4 seat post fits in there with no effort and not much if any extra space.

I'm still waiting for Norris to get back to me on any possible other history he can remember on it. I'll update this when and if that happens.