Velocivixen

Very interesting. Thanks for that info. When you said, "The 4-speed in this configuration is rather rare", did you mean the 4 cross is rare? Because it's not a 4 speed. So perhaps, in keeping with the vintage-ness of this 60 year old bike, it would be nice to keep it laced like it is? I'm not trying to make this bike something it's not. The rear rim has areas of missing chrome & deep rust on the braking surface, so it is the one that really needed to be replaced. I figured that for a first build, and for riding in the rain a front wheel would be a good place to start.

So, would you keep the lacing the same, for the sake of keeping an old English look?

As an aside, I weighed the steel, old front rim alone and it weighed 885 grams - just over 1.9 lbs!!! Not to mention that the hub on the axle felt like a solid paperweight!

jyl

I'm impressed at your methodical and fearless approach to new things. The bike looks sweet.

Just a little touch - I think some long leather mudflaps would be nice, and useful. Oregon Leather on 2nd downtown has big bins of scrap leather, all weights and colors.

Velocivixen

@jyl - Thanks! I've got to keep my mind stimulated! Nice tip about Oregon Leather. I'll have to look up how they hook on. Oh....maybe Velo Orange could show me ideas.

Later today I'm actually going to ride the bike. It's been in the stand for about a week!

markk900

I'm sure the experts will chime in, but I only ever tried to do the marking on the first hub I took apart and got frustrated when it clearly wanted to go together on the "opposite" thread during reassembly. I know Sheldon and more importantly SA recommend this process, but I cannot for the life of me figure out why. At original assembly, if it was important there would be marks for the factory workers to line up....so its not important on new hubs. This means it can only become important as wear sets in. But what can wear enough on the shell or the ball ring to make a difference. At worst, in my reading of the situation, you can either be a hair tighter or looser when the ball ring is done up (which should have little influence on anything after you adjust the cones correctly), or the ball ring/hub shell become slightly misaligned along the axle, which I can't see happening.

Also, in my limited experience I have substituted entire insides and/or a variety of parts from donor hubs (including changing ball rings) without any noticeable issue, so I am interested you actually experienced a noticeable change by getting the ball ring onto the "wrong" thread. And I can say for certain I have never retrued a wheel because of the disassembly of a hub. Of course I may be a bit of a barbarian!


One of the issues I was worried about for the Humber - if I did that I would need to lose the patina and repaint! All is safe for now - just cleaned up the original rims.....

pastorbobnlnh 

I believe @Salubrious was saying is his rear Sturmey Archer IGH/Dynohub is the FG, a variant of the FW 4 speed hub. The FW is the four speed cousin of the SW. The FG is the 4 speed cousin of the 3 speed AG. Hopefully that all made sense.

photogravity

I'm not entirely sure you really need a 4-cross on these wheels, but it is most certainly the traditional way to build them. I have built a couple crows foot pattern wheels, which was a cool exercise.

Re the 4-speed FG dynohub, I have at least two of them hanging around and another three or four FW hubs/wheels. Recently I acquired another FW dated 53 4 with an alloy shell that will be used with on my newest project.

photogravity

FIFY. The SW was the short-lived hub from that was made from 1954-1960. Many accounts indicate it was not very reliable and was replaced by its predecessor the AW.

noglider 

I don't believe @Salubrious is correct about why Raleigh chose the spoke patterns they did. I suspect it had more to do with economical reasons. More spokes do make a wheel stronger, but 4x is not proven to be stronger than 3x, and Brandt discusses this in his book. When choosing between 4x and 3x, use whatever is more practical, such as whichever lengths are on hand.

4x is not at all more troublesome to lace than 3x. I happen to like the way it looks better, and that's as good a reason as any for me to prefer it, and I don't delude myself into thinking it makes a more durable wheel.

So you might want to replicate the spoke pattern that is original, for sentimentality's sake. I don't expect it to be any trouble. And you might find that both sides use the same length! If so, that might be the reason Raleigh did it that way.

This has been one of the most fun threads on BF for a long time. I hope you know why. I think you should consider editing all of your posts and making a single blog post of it or maybe even see if you can get it published in a magazine.

Brandt is still alive, last I heard, though he is severely disabled. It's sad to me. He did have a short temper and sometimes insulted those who doubted him. He was kind to me, though I confess I spoke with him very carefully. He was a mechanical engineer, though of course, he had to have a lot of physics background. His book The Bicycle Wheel was the first to debunk a lot of myths that pervaded bike folklore, and we owe him gratitude for that. He was the first, as far as I know, to measure what is actually going on in a wheel. The laws of physics that apply have been known for centuries, of course, but which ones apply was not known. For example people had been saying that longer spokes make a wheel that rides with more flexibility. This is not true, because we don't load the spoke laterally in the way we stand on a diving board.

Salubrious

^^ Did Raleigh's designs predate Brant? I bet they did.

I agree that it is not necessary to do a 4-cross; but I'm pretty sure that strength and smoothness of ride are why Raleigh did it, even though neither result was the outcome as history and Brant have shown. But the bikes were fashioned in a very conservative manner!

When I have built wheels for my Rolhoff hubs, the manual is very careful to state that radial patterns will invalidate the warranty. I would imagine the the Sturmey Archer engineers may have had similar concerns way back in the 1930s or earlier...

This has been for me one of the more interesting threads in a while as well. Its really heartening to see someone jump in with both feet and tackle some of the more arcane and advanced procedures you can deal with in a bike. Kudos!

Velocivixen

@markk900 - yeah, I'm not 100% convinced that turning the ball ring on at 180 degree difference would have made such a difference. I've noted the spoke tensions on the rear wheel are sort of varied (by feel), so perhaps the moving around of the wheel, hub, etc. loosened some of the spokes and caused the wheel to become "off". I will say that, last night, after reinstalling the ball ring back to its original orientation, my rear wheel was out of true again. Later I will check the tensions on the rear wheel and get a feel for where things are at.
@PastorBobinnh - Oh, OK, I understand what @Salubrious was saying. Thank you for the clarification.
@noglider & @Salubrious - thank you for the compliments on the posts and on this thread, but the "strength of a thread (forum thread) is only as good as its weakest link" And in this situation I am the weakest link. You all have been extremely helpful, supportive, funny, educational, and overall a great group of people to help.

Referring to what @noglider said, I don't blog and not sure what magazine would want anything I've written on here. I do hope that when someone finds an old bike and has the inclination or the curiosity to fix it up, and when they do an online search, this thread will show up and answer some of their questions.

My my next project for the bike will be to re-do using JB Weld to attach a piece of brass tubing on the end of the shift wire so that I can reinstall the original "barrel adjuster" sleeve. I did it, waited 24 hours for it to cure, only to find it was 3/4" too short! I will build a rear wheel and am fairly sure I will keep the spoke pattern original. Don't want to make so many changes as to loose the charm of this old beauty.

The lever on the original Phillips labeled bell broke so I want to fix that - I believe the innards are riveted. Let me guess....learning to rivet is in my near future? Also the chrome rim between the front lens and the light body does in fact have a dent, which causes the lens to sit awkwardly in the lamp. I've been thinking about how to tap out the dent without making it worse. Please offer ideas. The chrome piece is curved in two planes, thinking of a short piece of hard hose to lay in the chrome piece, then gently tap on the hose. Thoughts?

noglider 

Don't be silly. You're far from the weakest link. Your perseverance are impressive. You didn't know everything, and that is your triumph, because you're putting it all together. Look, I've been a mechanic of one sort or another for 40 years, and you're doing some things I've never done, such as using JB Weld. I've also done most of the jobs that you're doing on this bike but never all on one bike.

Remember how you were doubtful as to whether you should even buy this bike? Look how far you've come!

Salubrious

^^This

Velocivixen

@noglider & @Salubrious - I mean that the reason this is an interesting thread is because of ALL of us - everyone who contributed. It's a group effort. OK, I'm going on a shake out ride.

noglider 

Fair enough. Let us know how it goes!

JohnDThompson 

The SW was a good idea that didn't quite translate into a good product. It has a slightly wider range than the AW and theoretically better load handling. Fewer parts and no pawl springs make it easy to overhaul. But those springless pawls didn't catch reliably, and the colder the temperature, the less reliable they became. I rode one for a while but had to switch back to an AW when the temperature got below about 40°F.

photogravity

Yes, I remember the bicycle you had at Lake Pepin a couple years back had a SW hub installed. I did not realize you had went back to an AW hub. Good information to have.

dweenk

Remember how you were doubtful as to whether you should even buy this bike? Look how far you've come!

VelociVixen - what noglider said above. You have done an amazing job.

JohnDThompson 

Yeah, that's my "spare wheel" now. When I get a flat and don't feel like fixing it right away, I just stick that wheel on the bike -- provided the air temperature is warm enough.

desconhecido 

I've never talked to anyone who actually knows why old English three speed bikes had 32 hole front hubs laced 3X and 40 hole rears laced 4X, but I've long assumed that it had to do with spoke length and manufacturing/assembly management. Also, 4X doesn't work with 32 hole hubs.

A couple things happen with the old English configuration. It turns out that the length of spoke needed for 32 spoke wheels with small flange hubs and 3X is very close to the same length as 40 spoke wheels with medium to large flange hubs and 4X. The other thing is that with 40 spokes and moderate flange size and 4X, the spokes end up very close to tangential and differences in spoke circle diameter and flange width have only a minor affect on spoke length. Very minor. You can see this either by looking at the equations in the Brandt book or playing around with the spocalc spreadsheet (which appears to use Brandt's equations).

So, why 3X on the dyno side of the hub? Well, the dyno side is really honking big. According to the database in spocalc, the three speed side is 65mm diameter and the dyno side is 101 mm dia. You probably can't build that size flange in a 650A (578 mm erd) wheel 4X without going beyond tangent with the spoke line, which would be undesirable, and having spokes interfere with adjacent spoke heads.

So, the old English configuration meant that the wheel builders only had to deal with one spoke length for both front and rear wheels and moderate variations in rear hub dimensions didn't change the necessary spoke length. With the exception of the dynohubs, all the 650A wheels required the same spokes.

desconhecido 

Have you tried repositioning the fulcrum? Moving it around changes the effective cable length. I think if you were to move it about 3/4" rearward, it might make your cable 3/4" longer, as if by magic.

Velocivixen

Are you kidding me?! I didn't think of that. I tried moving the shifter closer to the stem but it didn't really help. So you're saying all I had to do is move the fulcrum clip? OMG I wish I would have been able to understand that. I ended up taking it all apart & installing a new shift cable, new heat shrink tubing, the whole set up. Oh well.

The ride quality was nice - cushy like a Cadillac. Reminded me of riding my1974 Motobecane Grand Jubile, only felt more "grounded" - maybe the weight. Still nimble though. Was able to remove my hands from the handlebars & pedal and the bike tracked well. The tires are inexpensive Kenda K40, so they're not the cause of the cushy ride. Maybe the curve of the fork helps absorb the road bumps. I adjusted the saddle a little, and loosened the shift cable a tiny bit. Other than that it rides nicely. The saddle is great but not the right shape for me. I do better with saddles shaped like a B17 vs the saddle which is wide & my upper hamstrings rub the saddle edge as I pedal - like it's too wide. I also really enjoy the 22T cog. Good advice on that. Here are a couple of photos of my 6 mile journey.

desconhecido 

It depends. If you move the fulcrum clip closer to the hub, you shorten the effective length of the end with the housing on it. Might not have had enough play in the housed end to do it -- might have been too tight and interfered with the steering.

I know you understand all this and I apologize if I'm taking too many words to explain the obvious. It's not my intention.

Salubrious

The relaxed geometry of the seat tube and fork/headset seems to contribute to that ride. You get really used to it fast

You might consider a Brooks B-66L or B-66S. The 'L' is no longer made- obviously the ladie's version; it is replaced by the S. I find the leather saddles to look classier (and of course arriving in style is a big deal) and usually more comfortable than the more pedestrian style on the bike right now. But before that, make sure you have exhausted all the seat positioning issues.

You can also move the pulley on the seat tube to get a little more cable length- or shorten it.

The bike looks really nice!

Velocivixen

Thanks! Too bad the paint is faded mostly. The parts which were really caked in dirt are not so faded. Oh well.

I'm expecting some new (for me) handlebars for it as well as an English frame pump. Very excited about those. The chrome on the new bars is nice too.

Salubrious

Don't worry about the fading! Just do your best to take care of it. They are only original once. My Humber Sports is pretty faded too, with scratches. I thought about repainting and new decals, but the decals on the bike are different from the re-pops. Which might mean its a more interesting example... so its staying original. In your case, the bike is certainly rare and from a nice period- the 50s- and before Phillips got bought out. That makes it interesting!