Tour de France Coverage Retrogrouch Style: 1985

With the 2015 Tour de France entering its second week, and me still not really paying much attention to it, I thought now would be a good time for some Retrogrouch TdF coverage: 1985.

Hiring LeMond onto La Vie Claire was probably a better
move for Hinault than for the young American.

When the 1985 Tour began, Bernard Hinault was the clear favorite. Laurent Fignon, the winner of the '83 and '84 editions of the Tour, was out for 1985 due to problems with his Achilles tendon which required surgery. Hinault looked to be poised for victory. He had won the Tour four times, and finished 2nd in '84. Earlier that year, he had won the Giro d'Italia and approached this edition of the TdF in top form. Not only that, but he had hired perhaps the next biggest rival to his winning ambitions away from the Renault team - Greg LeMond. LeMond had finished 3rd overall the previous year riding for Fignon. Now that he was on Hinault's La Vie Claire squad, it seemed a powerful threat may have been neutralized.

From the opening prologue time trial, Hinault put a stamp of authority on the race. Though he lost the yellow jersey in the first few stages when the sprinters tend to rule the field, Hinault managed to keep the time difference more than manageable. This was helped by a stage 3 win for La Vie Claire in the team time trial, so that by stage 8, Hinault could take the yellow jersey with a powerful win in the individual time trial -- finishing more than 2 minutes ahead of second place finisher Stephen Roche.

As the race approached the Alps, Hinault had the overall race lead, but his teammate Greg LeMond was just two and a half minutes behind in 2nd place. Another La Vie Claire teammate, Canada's Steve Bauer, was in 4th overall, a little more than three minutes behind.

Stage 11 was the first day with serious Alpine climbs. Early in the stage, Hinault went after the Columbian rider, Luis Herrera, who was after the King of the Mountains prize. While Herrera took most of the climbers' points and the stage victory, Hinault put time into all his general classification rivals. LeMond, who couldn't really chase his team leader, eventually finished the stage in a respectable 5th place, but now was about 4 minutes behind Hinault overall. The next day in the Alps didn't change the overall standings much.

The individual time trial of Stage 13 had Hinault showing his first signs of weakness. Perhaps due to his efforts in the Alps, he didn't win the stage, though he did still add to his time advantage over 2nd place LeMond, who by this time trailed the leader by more than 5 minutes. LeMond had suffered a mechanical problem during the stage, just as he had during the prologue time trial, probably earning himself some kind of record for the worst luck, mechanically, of any TdF time trialist.

Stage 14 was a major turning point in the race. With a single 1st Category climb on the road to St. Etienne, Luis Herrera once again took off early to pick up KOM points, but this time it was LeMond who gave chase. Hinault hung back in the peloton to keep an eye on 3rd place GC rider, Stephen Roche. Herrera went on to win another stage, with LeMond just 47 seconds behind. What nobody expected was the massive pileup in Hinault's group, about 2 minutes later, as they approached the finish line. Hinault went down hard, breaking his nose, and eventually crossing the line with his face covered in blood. The images of the man riding while he could barely see through the blood solidified his reputation as one of the toughest men in the sport.

Because the crash happened inside the final kilometer, Hinault was granted the same finishing time as the rest of the riders in the group he was with, but his overall lead had fallen back to about 3 and a half minutes over LeMond. The next couple of stages saw little change in the overall standings, but Hinault was having trouble breathing through his freshly broken nose. He was also continuing to show signs of fatigue.

With his eyes still blackened from his
broken nose, Hinault struggled up
the mountains in Stage 17.

Stage 17 to Luz Ardiden in the Pyrenees was a brutal day of 209 km and 3 major climbs: the Col d'Aspin, the Col du Tourmalet, and Luz Ardiden. Those second two are classified as hors category climbs. As LeMond, who seemed to be strengthening as the Tour went on, powered up the Tourmalet with Stephen Roche and Pedro Delgado, Hinault fell back and back. On the final climb to Luz Ardiden, Delgado took off, and LeMond went on the chase with Roche.

It was at this point that things got pretty controversial. LeMond had gained enough time on the road to become the new race leader. On the lower slopes of Luz Ardiden, a La Vie Claire team car pulled up next to LeMond with the team's assistant director, who was on the radio with director Paul Koechli. The exchange between LeMond and the assistant director got tense, with LeMond visibly agitated. The exact substance of what was said gets disputed depending on who tells the story, but what seems to be generally accepted is that LeMond was told to wait for Hinault who was only about 40 seconds back. In reality, he was several minutes behind. LeMond waited and waited as groups of riders passed him, and there was still no Hinault.

Assistant Director Maurice Le Guilloux tells LeMond so slow down to wait for Hinault. LeMond wants to race on and presses him for more information about how far back Hinault is. He is told 40 seconds. In fact, it was several minutes.

So Pedro Delgado won the stage, probably completely unaware of the chaos going on behind him. After waiting minutes for Hinault, LeMond still finished the stage more than a minute ahead of his team leader. They were still 1st and 2nd overall, but the time difference between them was now just 2 minutes and 25 seconds.

After the stage, with the realization that he'd been lied to and denied the chance to win the stage, and very likely the whole race, LeMond was shaken and angry. Hinault then made a famous promise that because LeMond had basically sacrificed himself so that Hinault could win his 5th Tour de France, Hinault would help LeMond in '86 to win his first.

Over the next stages, LeMond took small increments of time out of Hinault's lead, eventually narrowing the gap to 1min 42sec when the race ended in Paris. In addition, LeMond had won the time trial in Stage 21, which was his first TdF stage win. Stephen Roche finished 3rd overall, 4 and a half minutes back. Sean Kelly got the green jersey and 4th place overall.

People sometimes debate what might have happened had LeMond been told the truth that day on Luz Ardiden, or if he'd been given permission to fly. It's also worth asking how things might have been different had LeMond stayed with the Renault team, given that Fignon was out of the picture that year. In any case, I for one think LeMond would certainly have won his first Tour a year earlier than it actually happened.

Hinault won his 5th Tour that year, matching the records of Jacques Anquetil and Eddy Merckx and cementing his name among the greats of the sport. His win also set up a dramatic "sibling rivalry" that would test many loyalties in the following year. And by the way, no Frenchman has won the Tour de France since.

And to think, it all happened 30 years ago.

To Build A Wheel

I sat down this week to build a set of wheels. Building wheels is one of those jobs that any serious home mechanic should try some time. It's a rite of passage. Saint Sheldon Brown says of wheel building: "Learning to build wheels is an important milestone in the education of an apprentice mechanic. A 'mechanic' who has not mastered this basic skill cannot be considered to be a fully-qualified professional, and will always feel inferior to those who can list wheel building among their skills."

With the proliferation of special pre-built "boutique" wheels on quality bikes today, with their low spoke counts and carbon fiber rims, hand-building wheels may be something of a dying art. But it's a job I enjoy doing every now and then. I built my first pair when I was about 18 years old, with super lightweight tubular rims and classic Campagnolo Record hubs. That first pair didn't hold up well, and needed frequent re-truing. My second pair proved to be bomb-proof. Through college, I'd build wheels for my friends in the bike club, and almost all of my bikes today have hand-built wheels. It's been a few years since the last time I built a pair, though.

This set of wheels will be used on my 1980 Mercian Strada Speciale. The wheels that came with that bike (Campagnolo Tipo hubs and Rigida 1320 rims) were pretty badly out of true when I got it and had a flat spot or two. Somebody probably nailed some pretty bad potholes. On close examination I also noticed some deeply nicked spokes on the drive side of the rear wheel that indicated that somebody must have thrown the chain into the spokes, too. That could lead to spoke breakage at some point. I did my best to bring them back into shape, but after a few rides, they'd need more truing hygiene, and then again, and again. As I recall, those old Rigida rims were lovely and very light (for clinchers) but never very durable. With this set, I plan to go with a sturdier touring rim to gain some extra durability.

Getting Ready:

Getting ready to begin: Rims, hubs, spokes and nipples, a couple of spoke wrenches, and of course, Jobst Brandt's book The Bicycle Wheel. I never build a wheel without reviewing it. I always keep my spokes separated in bags, or bundled and labeled while I'm working so I don't mix them up. I have three different lengths. The longest ones are for the front wheel. There are two lengths for the rear wheel, with the shortest ones being for the drive side to help with the "dish." 

I always felt that Sun rims were a little under-appreciated, maybe because they are comparatively inexpensive. But they are traditional-looking, seem well-made, and are pretty durable. They also still have eyelets at the spoke holes, which is something I appreciate. The CR18 is a fairly wide (22.5 mm) touring model that should hold up very well. They are a bit heavy, though. That's a normal trade-off, isn't it?

My hubs are some very smooth-spinning Suzue hubs from the '80s. They were originally made for 126 mm spacing, but I shortened the rear axle slightly for the Mercian's 120 mm width and 5-speed freewheel. I picked these up lightly used and very cheap. The bearings and races are perfect, and the bodies cleaned up nicely with a little effort and some aluminum polish.

My truing stand is an Artisan Tool & Die stand from the 1970s: made in Cleveland. It looks a lot like the classic Park model seen in many bike shops today. I've seen these advertised in old issues of Bicycling magazine (the ad on the right is from 1978). I've heard the company is still in business, but I'm certain they don't make bicycle tools anymore. I got this one from Al's Bike Shop in Cleveland when they went out of business some time in the '90s. Al sold me a bunch of his old shop tools when he closed up. The dishing tool is Campagnolo - also from Al's.

With all my materials and tools ready, I turned on the Tour on T.V. and started lacing spokes. I followed the steps for lacing and truing as they are set out in Jobst Brandt's book. Jobst lays it out clearly and concisely - and I think it's hard to go wrong following his advice. Some people refer to Sheldon Brown's site for their wheel building steps, and while Sheldon explains some things a little differently, I think his steps basically agree with Jobst's. Either way, I think a person will end up with a properly built wheel.

Finished Results:

There are certain things I've learned to look for in a well-built set of bicycle wheels. Some of them are functional or practical, some are structural, and some are just aesthetic attention to detail.

A well-built wheel has the rim oriented so that the label is readable from the drive side of the bike. This is also a good place to point out that many rims are drilled so that the spoke holes are staggered as opposed to being right down the centerline of the rim. It's important to get the wheel laced so that the spokes on the right side of the hub go to the holes closer to the right side of the rim, while those on the left side of the hub go to the left side of the rim. It seems obvious, but it's easy to mess it up.

At the valve hole, one wants to have the spokes more or less parallel - to leave more room for a pump head and to simplify tire inflation.

Sheldon Brown's site describes spokes as either "trailing" or "leading" spokes. When considering the rotation direction of the wheel (the blue arrow), the "trailing" spokes leave the hub at an angle pointing away from the rotation, while the "leading" spokes angle into the rotation. Another way to think of it is that the "trailing" spokes appear to be pulled through the rotation, while the "leading" spokes appear to be pushed. In any case the rear wheel should be built so that the "trailing" spokes are on the inside of the hub flanges, while the "leading" spokes are on the outside of the flanges.  Sheldon explains that on a derailleur-equipped bike, it is important to do it this way as it slightly increases the clearance between the derailleur and the drive-side spokes. Nevertheless, I've seen a number of professional or even machine-built wheels that were the opposite. I suppose on a single-speed wheel, it wouldn't make any difference. Whether one follows Sheldon's build steps or Jobst's, the wheel should turn out this way.

This is called "attention to detail." It doesn't make any difference functionally, but I've often heard that the best wheel builders always have the hub oriented in the rim so that its logo can be read when looking through the rim's valve hole. Nailed it.

Once I got the wheels to where I was pretty satisfied with them, I took them to my local bike shop for a final check. One tool you might have noticed that I don't have in my arsenal is a spoke tension gauge, or tensiometer. Yes, I really should get one. But I don't mind letting the pro give them a final tension check to make sure they'll hold up well. As it turned out, my spoke tension was still a bit on the "loose" side, so Rich at Century Cycles brought the tension up a little.

All that's left to do now is apply some rim tape, mount some tires, and get them on the bike. Hope you enjoyed this little look at hand-built wheels.

Throwback Thursday: 1970s Mercian Catalog

In an earlier post I had some scans of an old Mercian catalog from my collection - one from the 1960s. I have several others, including this one from the 1970s, a time that Mercian was probably at a high point, at least here in the U.S. At that time, and into the early 80s, the company's presence in the U.S. was pretty broad, as their frames were available from a number of bike shops, and even some of the big mail-order shops like Bikecology. To the best of my knowledge, this was the first full-color catalog Mercian offered. One of the things I like about it is seeing some of the classic color schemes pictured on its pages.

I have below some nice scans of the full catalog. Take a look!

The first page of the catalog says the company has been in business for 30 years (since 1946) so the catalog probably came out in the mid-to-late '70s. The text also explains that the company took its name from the ancient Kingdom of Mercia which once had its capitol near the town of Derby, where the company was located.

The Professional Model - introduced in 1968. The catalog touts the stiffness of the frame due to the long spearpoint tangs on the bottom bracket shell. 

I dig all those multi-colored bands around the seat tube on this Vincitore.

The Superlight model is listed as a "time triallist's dream" as the lugs are cut down to the bare minimum (yet still somewhat ornate) to save weight. I have one from the early '70s that has pencil-thin seat stays. A great model - sadly, no longer in the Mercian lineup.

The Strada Speciale was a fairly recent addition to the lineup when this catalog came out. Mercian calls it a frame for the "discerning rider" who "prefers some individuality." It features clover-leaf cutouts in all the lugs, and also has the same "fastback" seat stay attachment (Mercian calls it "shot-in") that the Superlight has.

"Distinctive Mercian features" - like the ornate lugs of the Vincitore, or the minimalist lugs of the Superlight, the spearpoint bottom bracket of the Professional, and the fastback seat stays of the Superlight and Strada Speciale. Notice that the King of Mercia was available with Nervex Professional lugs as an option. I almost never see Mercians with Nervex lugs, but I sure would like to find one.

The King of Mercia was (maybe still is?) a fairly common model. It typically came with standard Prugnat lugs with a vaguely heart-shaped cutout in them, but had plenty of custom options. There's something kind of patriotic about that color scheme.

The Super Vigorelli track model.

Miss Mercian "ladies" model. I've also seen the Miss Mercian offered in a mixte configuration.

The Olympic was the closest thing to a "standard" production model. Mercian says it is for "general use and occasional racing." Buyers didn't have many custom options or get to specify geometry and the like, but they did get to choose colors. Later on, this would be re-named the "Classic."

The Campionissimo was more of a budget-oriented bike, but like the Olympic, one could still specify colors (provided they ordered direct from Mercian, I suppose). It was also sold as a complete bicycle.

Hope you enjoyed this little look back at the past. I assume one doesn't have to be a Mercian fan to enjoy a look at so many gorgeous classic steel frames.

10 or 11? Does it Really Matter?

Remember when "10-speed" really just meant "10-speeds," as in, total? 2 chainrings x 5 cogs? Yeah - those days are gone.

I just read this post from Performance Bicycle -- you know, the internet and mail order bike shop -- about 10 vs. 11-speed drivetrains. Our Take: 10-Speed vs. 11-Speed. All I can think is, who cares? Keep in mind, most of my bikes max out at 6 or 7, so I'm probably not the best person to comment -- though I do have bikes with 9 and 10 speed cassettes. Sorry Nigel Tufnel, but I have no plans to go to 11.

Needless to say, but the reviewer at Performance is a fan of 11. "I've been riding both 11-speed Campagnolo and 10-speed SRAM for several years now, and I switch between the two often enough to be able to tell you there are some definite differences between 10 and 11-speed drivetrains." He goes on to say, "Generally, adding an extra cog means you have more gear ratios to choose from which can make your riding more efficient."  Really?

Yes, adding one extra cog gives more gear ratios (two more, to be exact, assuming we're using a double-ring crank). But more efficient? Hmmm. . . I don't know if this person uses a gear ratio calculator or not, but chances are, there's a fair amount of gear ratio duplication -- that is, some of those chainring-to-cog combinations give actual gear ratios that are so close as to be indistinguishable from one another. One can get such ratio duplication with 5 and 6-speed drivetrains. How many duplicates are there in these 10 and 11-speed setups? In any case, the efficiency is debatable.

From that point, I'm reminded of this quote from Jobst Brandt -- and keep in mind, this was from the time that 9-speeds were the "state of the art":

"I use down tube shifters (seldom) and use a 6-speed freewheel because 5-speeds are dead. . . I'm not preoccupied with always being in the right gear or following some unwritten precepts on cadence and the like. I ride a gear that's about right and leave it at that. . . The range of gears hasn't changed much in the last 50 years, only the number of gears in that range. I don't believe they are useful, necessary, or any good for the design of the rear wheel. Five or six is plenty, nine is gratuitous hardware and multiple redundancy."

The article goes on to answer other questions people have about the pros and cons of "upgrading" to 11 speeds, such as durability, shifting performance, and compatibility.

About shifting performance, the article says that shifting "isn't really affected by the addition of another cog." He continues, "If anything the 11-speed shifting feels smoother and crisper than 10-speed." I wonder how much of that is due to the cogs and spacing, and how much of it is due to different shift mechanisms (in his case, Campy vs. SRAM). Or if the difference is in the particular chain and cog designs.

However, the writer's next point is worth highlighting - especially to a retrogrouch. "My 11-speed bikes do need to be put into the stand a little more often (about once every two weeks) for some basic rear derailleur adjustments, especially after high mileage weeks." Every two weeks? Jeezus. My Rivendell has 9 speeds with indexing bar-end shifters, and I can't remember the last time I had to make an adjustment. With most of my bikes, which still use friction-only shifters, I never have to make adjustments for cable tension.

I found one point in the article that may be just flat out incorrect - though it could depend on the brand so I'm holding back a bit. On the question "Do you need new wheels" the answer is a definitive Yes. "Contrary to what you read on many bike message boards, you do need a new rear wheel." Now, I'm not certain about Shimano or SRAM, but I know absolutely that Campagnolo's hub and cassette body design is the same whether for 9, 10, or 11-speeds (see HERE). As far as the others go, I know they are still designed around the same 130 mm spacing that's used for 9 and 10-speeds, so I don't know why they'd be different.

Are 11-speed wheels less durable? Here, the answer is "Maybe" and "it depends on your riding style." Again, I'd question whether there's much difference between 9, or 10, or 11 in this regard, since they use basically the same axle width, and probably have the same amount of dish. But that amount of dish is not really good for a rear wheel anyhow.

Is it worth it? The article says "That all depends," but then the writer goes on to say how much he loves having that extra 11th gear. "I definitely do notice that it's not there when I switch back to a 10-speed bike. . . When I switch back to a 10-speed bike, I sometimes struggle to find the right gear."

Oh please. I switch back and forth between bikes with 9 or 10-speed cassettes, and bikes with 5 or 6-speed freewheels all the time, and the only difference I see is that I shift a lot more often on the more modern bikes.

The last question was a funny one to me. "Why upgrade? Won't they just go to 12-speeds soon?" The writer says, "11 cogs are about as many gears as they'll be able to cram into the standard 130 mm rear spacing. To fit any more gears without sacrificing wheel durability, I believe that road bikes would need to adopt the MTB standard 135 mm rear spacing, and I don't see that happening any time soon."

Why not? I wouldn't rule it out -- but I won't celebrate it either.

10-speed vs. 11-speed? Come on. Does it really matter?

While people are mulling that one over, excuse me while I go out and ride my 2 x 5 "10-speed."

How Aero Can You Go?

In the never-ending quest for more incremental gains in speed, Specialized has a new weapon with which performance addicts can max out their credit cards: the Specialized S-Works Venge ViAS aero road bike. The bike-blogosphere is all a-tingle over the $12,500 aerodynamic wünderbike.

Peter Sagan and Mark Cavendish will both be riding these things in this year's Tour de France.
Their teammates, however, will not.

"Explosive next-gen aero bike aces wind tunnel and McLaren data modeling tests" cries one blog. "Yes, the Venge ViAS is faster. Much faster." The big claim which keeps getting repeated by every cheerleading blog is that Specialized says that the bike will save a rider 120 seconds over 40 kilometers.

There is a pretty sketchy catch to that claim, though. Read on.

One of the secrets to the bike's aerodynamic slipperiness are these special faired-in brakes. I'm assuming they are unique to this particular bike, and they look like they'd be a nightmare to work on. 

Numerous details combine to lower the bike's drag coefficient -- from a special low-profile stem and handlebars to integrated brakes. Everything's proprietary, too, so there'll be no home-mechanic alterations or "upgrades" down the road. Deep-section aerodynamic wheels round out the package. The bike is the first to be fully developed in Specialized's wind tunnel, which they call the "Win Tunnel" (very cheeky), and the target for its efficiency was the company's own Shiv time-trial bike. The company brags that every tube profile has been scrutinized and "massaged" to make it more aerodynamically efficient.

So, what about that 120 seconds over 40 km claim?

The comparison is not between competing aero road bikes, but rather, between the Venge ViAS and the company's own Tarmac "normal" road bike. To make the claims more blurry, the tests consisted of the rider on the Venge wearing an aero skin suit and aerodynamic helmet, while the rider on the Tarmac was wearing more "standard" bike clothing and helmet. Even Specialized's own calculations say that about half of the time savings could be attributed to those differences.

Here's a telling quote from one of the cheerleading sites:

"Before the launch was held, there was heated debate inside the company about whether inviting journalists to test in this way was a good idea. What if the results weren't impressive? Perhaps this is why we tested aero setup vs standard setup instead of just the bikes themselves with identical clothing and helmet. Nonetheless, even if the bike difference was half, it is still a huge difference."

Umm. . . no, it really isn't.

More than that, though, is the fact that much of the calculating comes from computer modeling and lab testing -- but every company that pushes some new technological breakthrough loves to point to lab tests that "prove" their new product will save X seconds over Y miles. How much of that holds up to "real world" riding or racing, though? Can a bike that's being raced in the middle of a peloton deliver on that promise of time saved? Or will the effect of riding in a pack (even at the front of that pack) negate most of the claims in the heat of competition?

Lastly, unless someone is a top-level professional racer, what does it even matter?

Only a skeptical and cynical retrogrouch would bother to ask those questions, though. The performance-addicts will happily put themselves into debt over those questionable 120 seconds.

Another Opinion on Bike Weight

The Retrogrouch is still working with limited internet access. But if you checked in here for something new to read, here's a little something to tide you over.

I've written about bike weight before - and how obsessing about it is a pointless thing. To my mind, things like comfort, convenience, durability, reliability, and beauty are all more important than weight. My bikes are all steel. My components are always aluminum or steel. My wheels have 32 or 36 spokes. I like fenders because if the roads are wet, their usefulness more than offsets whatever weight they add to my bike. I like racks and nice-quality (and attractive) saddlebags and/or panniers - again, because when I need to carry things, their utility is worth every ounce of weight. I'd much rather carry loads on my bike than on my back.

Some months back, I encountered this post from Hiawatha Cyclery in the Minneapolis area. In it, there is another viewpoint on weight (HERE). The writer, Jim, pretty much agrees with things I've said myself - but it's nice to read the way someone else might put it.

Here's an excerpt:

"I don't weigh my bikes. Every part or accessory on my bike was put there for a good reason, and usually that reason is much more of a priority than the 'weight penalty' of using that part or accessory. My bike gets me to work, allows me to have some offroad fun along the way, and haul a load of groceries on the way home. I've accepted that this level of versatility involves a compromise. To torture a car analogy, I'm opting for the versatility of the SUV, rather than the fun impracticality of the 2-seater sport coupe. Even though I don't really care what my bike weighs, when I'm looking at bikes and components, I often take note of what they weigh for reasons that aren't directly about weight. This is especially true of tires and, to a lesser extent, rims. Lightweight tires tend to be more supple and have a better ride quality, which is a priority for me. A lot of the negative associations people have about heavy bikes are the result of lousy-rolling tires. And the weight of a rim can indicate whether it was designed for big hit dirt jumping or for superlight road racing - I'd rather not mix up the two. Weights of handlebars and seatposts and derailleurs and such aren't on my radar."

Hiawatha Cyclery, by the way, was the kind of bike shop that catered more to commuters, tourists and "bicycle lifestyle" types of riders - as opposed to the racer wannabes that seem to dominate some shops.  Unfortunately, I just read that the shop is in the process of closing up even as I write this now. I'm sorry to hear that.

I expect to be back to more regular posts next week.

Saddlewax Vintage Saddle Archive

The Retrogrouch has limited internet access for the next few days - so blog updates will be likewise limited. But if you checked in for something new today, I don't want to leave you totally frustrated. So I have here a link to a website I recently found that turned out to be a pretty good resource for vintage bicycle enthusiasts. The Saddlewax Bicycle Saddle Archive has a lot of cool information on saddles from around the world - including pictures of different models, catalog scans, and other info. I found it useful when trying to find some information on older Brooks leather saddles, and also on older Cinelli Unicanitor saddles.

I'm not sure how long the site has been there, but it is still listed as "under construction." The page master is Amir, a bicycle collector whom I have encountered from time to time with the Classic Rendezvous group, and I believe we've bought or sold vintage bike components to/from each other once or twice in the past.

Amir is also interested in expanding the information on the site, so if you have anything to contribute -- from interesting older saddles, photos, catalogs, advertisements or more -- there is contact info on the site. Check it out if you get a chance.