| hello all.i am trying to put a date on my hercules.it has rod brakes,21"frame, synchro switch L-N-H shifter,rear hub says Btype2 Hercules Cycle & Motor Company,down tube says Safety Model,large but not full chain gard says Hercules[small]in the center Hercules seat ,square H reflector.number at seat post PF 14752,any info.a great help|
| I have a Raleigh Special X - Model 27X. I need to replace one of the cranks; the threads are stripped for the pedal. The ones on the bike may be newer replacements. They are about 7-3/4 in. long. Any suggestions? |
| There's a repair kit that threads the crank arm to 5/8" and allows you to install a shim which reduces the 5/8" back down to 9/16". I used one on my Hercules a couple of years ago and it worked like a charm.|
I just saw one on EBay last week. Not sure what the final bid was, but it was at about $10 when I saw it. If you get the complete kit, you can do either side. The one I got came with both taps and a dozen shims for each side.
| Never would I do such a thing to a rare crank like that - even a damaged one.|
Keep your eye on eBay, and keep a bucketfull of $100 bills nearby. You don't see them often, but they've been offered before.
| I just picked up a pretty rough *54 Rigby 4 speed. Looks similar to a Raleigh Sports of the period, but I haven*t heard of Rigby before and I*ve been into the bike thing for about a decade. I bought it pretty much just for the alloy 4 speed hub. Is the Rigby line of interest to anyone, or is it just another also-ran languishing in the shadow of the Raleigh empire? Cheers, Geoff |
| NMA, etc... and I'm propinquitous enough that this is VERRRRY tempting!!!|
Larry "Boneman" Bone
| Omigod can you imagine trying to stop that puppy in the rain. Rod braked tandem with steel rims?|
| Actually... unless it's a dynohub... methinks the rear brake is drum. Not that that would be a lot of help... but it would be some!|
I'm diggin' that machine.... gad.... :-S
Larry "Boneman" Bone
| I think you're right about the Dyno but the thing still won't stop! |
| Aw.. c'mon... of course it will! What with FOUR feet to drag on the ground and all! ;-)|
Larry "Boneman" Bon
| A strange one, this. The wheels aren't strong enough, not enough spokes and the rear seat tube looks damaged in two of the photos. The paintjob and handlebars make it look like Phillips of India (TI) but I guess it is pre WW2 and from here at home. Not a model to be ridden anywhere hilly or in the wet! Anchors a-weigh!|
Matthew - unstoppable.
| It's a pity that the photos are not all that great. |
If I may make an obsevation though, from what I can see, it looks like it might be a post-1960 Raleigh-manufactured DL-1 tandem.
The rounded-off fenders certainly appear very similar to the Raleigh-type used in the late '60s and 1970s, and you would expect a genuine Phillips of the good old days to have thick rod-type stays, not flimsy wire stays.
Only thing I can spot differently is the rear rod brake linkage at the headtube. Then again, the rear rod linkage operates a drum brake (note where the linkage runs and the lack of a stirrup brake in the rear).
Also note the plastic pulley wheel. These came out in 1961 or '62, and would date the bike after the Raleigh takeover. True, the pulley wheel might have been replaced, but the older metal wheels were pretty sturdy, and I'd be quite surprised if one were to break.
P.S.: It's quite something that a seller who asks nearly $500 for a bike not be able to check it for a prospective buyer. I wish him luck trying to sell it for over $150.
| The seat tube is bent. Looks like the frame is already in failure mode. |
| Thanks Mark, I thought it was my eyes (I have non-stereo scopic vision) but that bay looks like its taken a heavy left hand fall. The rear handbars may not be original and their mount may also not be 'as built'. I think a short stoker has needed the bars nearer to them and the added tube has allowed for this whereas a mount on the captains seat tube is the more usual practice for stoker's HB. Sorry to disagree with Kurt (with all due respect of his opinion) My 1939 Norwich Rival, a Phillips bitsa built in the Fine City of Norwich, has exactly this pattern of mudguards carrying the original transfer on the rear. Most post war English Roadsters in the UK have 'Raleigh pattern' mudguards, not the more eye pleasing round type.|
This is all just conjecture, but $479? The seller is trading on nostalgia.
Matthew - off to tea, mmmmmm.
| I was familiar with the fact that know that the Raleigh rounded-pattern 28" mudguards were common to most all English 28" machines. |
I found it worth noting though, for if the machine was, in fact, built by Raleigh, the fenders would date it to be at the earliest, late '60s, as the earlier models featured the box-type fenders.
The only thing I see working against my theory is the length of the rear fender, which appears to be both quite longer at the tail then the Raleigh fenders, and extends slightly lower then the stays at the chainstay bridge mounting.
Yet, I find the plastic chainwheel odd...
And yes, I did notice the frame is bent at the rear seat tube. In fact, the whole frame design appears less then sufficient for two riders. If it weren't for the matching paint with Phillips decals over it, I might have been persuaded to say that someone took a Phillips-badged DL-1 and stretched it!
The design could definitely benifit from a third bolt-on set of stays between the seat and chainstays, IMHO.
| P.S.: I'll take one of these instead:|