Vintage Jack Taylor tandem rear dropout spacing

Hello all!

I have a 1965 Jack Taylor Sports Tandem that I recently aquired. Upon
tearing down the frame and taking some measurements, it appears that
the rear dropout spacing is 126mm! I'm assuming this would have been
more or less normal for the time, as the typical single/road dropout
spacing would have been 120mm.

My hope is to rebuild this frame with somewhat more modern components.
How much of a spread can I attempt? I'm pretty sure that 140 or 145
would be pushing it, and 160 would be impossible without some major
frame surgery. I have the original hubs that came with the frame,(BH
"Solite") and they are spoked 32 front and 40 rear. Assuming a team
consisting of my wife and I, our combined weight would be approaching
350 lbs. If it's only advisable to go to 130, I was thinking of
building some wheels using Phil Wood 48 hole touring hubs with Mavic
T520 rims. The loss of a drum brake threading would be a less-than
minor concern, as we are in Chicago where the terrain is pretty much
flatter than flat.

Does this seem feasible?

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 17:37:09 +0000, David Ray wrote:

My hope is to rebuild this frame with somewhat more modern components.
How much of a spread can I attempt? I'm pretty sure that 140 or 145
would be pushing it, and 160 would be impossible without some major frame
surgery. I have the original hubs that came with the frame,(BH "Solite")
and they are spoked 32 front and 40 rear. Assuming a team consisting of
my wife and I, our combined weight would be approaching 350 lbs. If it's
only advisable to go to 130, I was thinking of building some wheels using
Phil Wood 48 hole touring hubs with Mavic T520 rims.

I have the same dilemma, and have yet to solve it. The frame I found is a
1992 (or so) Schwinn Duo-Sport. I still am looking for the rest of the
parts, but the dropout on mine is 130mm. I would stick with 130 if I
could find a deal on a high-spoke-count rear hub (prefereably cassette),
but standard road hubs seem to be 36 spokes or fewer. For light riding
that might be OK, but I really would prefer 48.

Is the Phil Wood available in 130mm? Cassette? I do hate to spend that
much (maybe twice what I spent on the frame) for a rear hub, but that may
be the best option. For you, you could probably put a 130mm hub in there
without even having it cold set. I am not sure 140 would be enough
stronger to be worth it, and 145 is a lot of stretch.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | The trouble with the rat race is that even if you win you're
_`\(,_ | still a rat. --Lilly Tomlin
(_)/ (_) |

36 spokes is enough if you use a strong rim and a large tire. To spread the
rim flex over more spokes choose one that is very stiff vertically. Deep
dish rims do that and can thus use lower spoke counts but they are too
narrow. But some wider rims are semi-aero = styled so they are deeper
vertically and would give you a reliable wheel.

-Bruce


"David L. Johnson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 17:37:09 +0000, David Ray wrote:

My hope is to rebuild this frame with somewhat more modern components.
How much of a spread can I attempt? I'm pretty sure that 140 or 145
would be pushing it, and 160 would be impossible without some major
frame
surgery. I have the original hubs that came with the frame,(BH "Solite")
and they are spoked 32 front and 40 rear. Assuming a team consisting of
my wife and I, our combined weight would be approaching 350 lbs. If
it's
only advisable to go to 130, I was thinking of building some wheels
using
Phil Wood 48 hole touring hubs with Mavic T520 rims.

I have the same dilemma, and have yet to solve it. The frame I found is a
1992 (or so) Schwinn Duo-Sport. I still am looking for the rest of the
parts, but the dropout on mine is 130mm. I would stick with 130 if I
could find a deal on a high-spoke-count rear hub (prefereably cassette),
but standard road hubs seem to be 36 spokes or fewer. For light riding
that might be OK, but I really would prefer 48.

Is the Phil Wood available in 130mm? Cassette? I do hate to spend that
much (maybe twice what I spent on the frame) for a rear hub, but that may
be the best option. For you, you could probably put a 130mm hub in there
without even having it cold set. I am not sure 140 would be enough
stronger to be worth it, and 145 is a lot of stretch.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | The trouble with the rat race is that even if you win you're
_`\(,_ | still a rat. --Lilly Tomlin
(_)/ (_) |

Phil has the cassette 130mm touring hub in 36, 40 or 48 holes for (ONLY!) $359.00.

Pretty steep, but that might be the least kludgy option.

http://www.philwood.com/webcatolog/page3.htm

"David L. Johnson" wrote in message ...


I have the same dilemma, and have yet to solve it. The frame I found is a
1992 (or so) Schwinn Duo-Sport. I still am looking for the rest of the
parts, but the dropout on mine is 130mm. I would stick with 130 if I
could find a deal on a high-spoke-count rear hub (prefereably cassette),
but standard road hubs seem to be 36 spokes or fewer. For light riding
that might be OK, but I really would prefer 48.

Is the Phil Wood available in 130mm? Cassette? I do hate to spend that
much (maybe twice what I spent on the frame) for a rear hub, but that may
be the best option. For you, you could probably put a 130mm hub in there
without even having it cold set. I am not sure 140 would be enough
stronger to be worth it, and 145 is a lot of stretch.

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 22:29:41 -0400, "David L. Johnson"
wrote:

I have the same dilemma, and have yet to solve it. The frame I found is a
1992 (or so) Schwinn Duo-Sport. I still am looking for the rest of the
parts, but the dropout on mine is 130mm. I would stick with 130 if I
could find a deal on a high-spoke-count rear hub (prefereably cassette),
but standard road hubs seem to be 36 spokes or fewer. For light riding
that might be OK, but I really would prefer 48.

Cannondales came with 135 spacing for years. Mine is a true 138.
Shimano made a HF-07 in 141 that could be spaced down to fit my frame
with an Arai. I also have an XT 732 wheelset that is 40 holes and
spaced 135.

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 17:37:09 +0000, David Ray wrote:

My hope is to rebuild this frame with somewhat more modern components.
How much of a spread can I attempt? I'm pretty sure that 140 or 145
would be pushing it, and 160 would be impossible without some major
frame
surgery. I have the original hubs that came with the frame,(BH "Solite")
and they are spoked 32 front and 40 rear. Assuming a team consisting of
my wife and I, our combined weight would be approaching 350 lbs. If
it's
only advisable to go to 130, I was thinking of building some wheels
using
Phil Wood 48 hole touring hubs with Mavic T520 rims.


"David L. Johnson" wrote in message
...
I have the same dilemma, and have yet to solve it. The frame I found is a
1992 (or so) Schwinn Duo-Sport. I still am looking for the rest of the
parts, but the dropout on mine is 130mm. I would stick with 130 if I
could find a deal on a high-spoke-count rear hub (prefereably cassette),
but standard road hubs seem to be 36 spokes or fewer. For light riding
that might be OK, but I really would prefer 48.

Is the Phil Wood available in 130mm? Cassette? I do hate to spend that
much (maybe twice what I spent on the frame) for a rear hub, but that may
be the best option. For you, you could probably put a 130mm hub in there
without even having it cold set. I am not sure 140 would be enough
stronger to be worth it, and 145 is a lot of stretch.

Phil certainly does do just about anything you wish, including a 48h 130mm
in either freewheel or cassette. You have to consider spoke tension over
gear format. If it stays six speed, you can keep a narrow hub easily.
Going to a modern nine over 130mm has quite a bit of spoke tension
differential (as we've discussed before here). That's why tourists prefer
135mm lately and that seems sensible to me. Combining 135mm with an
offset-drilled rim is a really nice setup for big riders or heavy loads.

Regarding the Taylor, a local frame shop would be the place to ask about
retracking the frame to a wider format. Probably yes but with reservations.

I have occasiuonally unbrazed one side of the bridges and rebrazed the
bridges preemptively so as not to risk a crack when widening excessively (
140 to 160 in a recent case)
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 07:22:35 +0000, Bruce wrote:

36 spokes is enough if you use a strong rim and a large tire. To spread
the rim flex over more spokes choose one that is very stiff vertically.
Deep dish rims do that and can thus use lower spoke counts but they are
too narrow. But some wider rims are semi-aero = styled so they are deeper
vertically and would give you a reliable wheel.

That was basically my plan. I*happen to have a Sun Rhino Lite rim that I
may use. It is not aero at all, but is wide. Any recommendations for
particular rims.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored
_`\(,_ | by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. --Ralph Waldo
(_)/ (_) | Emerson

Jack Taylor tandem?

You lucky *******! Me = jealous.


"David L. Johnson" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 06:46:14 +0000, David Ray wrote:

Phil has the cassette 130mm touring hub in 36, 40 or 48 holes for
(ONLY!)
$359.00.

Oh, well, if they are _that_ cheap there is no problem...

--

David L. Johnson

__o | And what if you track down these men and kill them, what if you
_`\(,_ | killed all of us? From every corner of Europe, hundreds,
(_)/ (_) | thousands would rise up to take our places. Even Nazis can't
kill that fast. -- Paul Henreid (Casablanca).