# Columbia Archbar lightweight?



## bon (Feb 2, 2021)

A friend recently scored this frame, and it seems a little odd, as i've never seen one with the arch in it. Serial no M362003 located in the left drop out. Looks the same as the wartime lightweights except for the arch. Rear facing drop outs were probably used just after the war as i also see them with some balloners. Fork probably added later. Anyone has any info on it?


----------



## pedal4416 (Feb 3, 2021)

It’s a prewar frame, made late teens up until the 30’s. Not a lightweight should be 28” wheels. That frame looks to be a later one judging by the stamped dropouts and badge style. That’ll make a great project. Use the search feature in this website and search Columbia arch, tons of great info on here! Here is my 1921 project bike.


----------



## bon (Feb 4, 2021)

pedal4416 said:


> It’s a prewar frame, made late teens up until the 30’s. Not a lightweight should be 28” wheels. That frame looks to be a later one judging by the stamped dropouts and badge style. That’ll make a great project. Use the search feature in this website and search Columbia arch, tons of great info on here! Here is my 1921 project bike.
> 
> View attachment 1350652



Cool bike you have there! That one is a true prewar Archbar. I have one restored and two more to follow.



But the frame i'm asking about i'm pretty sure is the same as the wartime lightweights, as the seat stays are welded on the side of the seat tube, not into-the-seat-tube like your Archbar. And the badge is same era as the sport tourists and Compax.


----------



## pedal4416 (Feb 4, 2021)

@bon I see what you are saying about the seat stays. Hopefully someone with a lightweight can compare measurements. I didn't think they made this as a lightweight because it was always labeled as more of a heavy-duty frame from Columbia but I also don't know everything and I am always learning. I'll be following this post. Your black arch looks great and looks like a perfect rider!


----------



## SirMike1983 (Feb 4, 2021)

I have not seen an arch bar version either of the lightweight frame. There were a few versions of the frames made though - some had fatter seat stays joined to the seat tube below the seat bolt, while others had the "pencil" stays that attached directly to the seat bolt. The women's frames also had the additional variation of some being straight bar and some being a curved English-style top tube. As far as I know, these all had the old-style rear forks. The badge you have is correct for the lightweight and folder series from the 1940s. Frame dimensions look about right for a 21-22 inch lightweight frame. Fork is different, but probably just a replacement someone put on there later. We know Schwinn made a "welterweight" variation of their lightweight frame, but this is the first I've seen of a Westfield version. How do the joints around the arch bar look compared to the rest of the frame - are they consistent in style and cleanliness?


----------



## pedal4416 (Feb 4, 2021)

Ive been searching for info the past hour and can't find anything on a lightweight. I just found a post from @MrColumbia saying "This style produced from 1917 to 1932 by Westfield/Columbia. They later made a Ballooner with a different style frame they called an Arch Bar but this is the style we are all talking about here." Its on the arch bar page https://thecabe.com/forum/threads/arch-truss-bar-bicycles-a-catalog-of-information.86643/
Im not saying that bike isn't a lightweight, Im just digging up info. Im just as curious as you!


----------



## SirMike1983 (Feb 4, 2021)

Another measurement that might be helpful is the gap at the point where the rear fender would attach. An old-style "antique" frame would need to accommodate larger fenders, whereas the lightweight had the slender "gothic" style. And then the lightweight frame would be a 26 inch wheel and the old-style probably a 28.


----------



## bon (Feb 5, 2021)




----------



## bon (Feb 5, 2021)

here are additional pics, looks like the welds are factory.


----------



## SirMike1983 (Feb 5, 2021)

You have quite a mystery. This is an unusual looking frame. There is no provision for set screws in the rear forks? All of the lightweight Columbias from the '40s I've seen have set screws. And the ends of the seat stays look different from the "pinched end" style you see on the Sports Roadsters and Tourists. That serial number on the rear drop would indicate 1949, but that seems very late for an Arch Bar frame with old-style rear forks. And the early lightweights I've seen had the serial on the bottom bracket. Is it possible that the frame is another brand and someone added that badge later on?


----------



## pedal4416 (Feb 5, 2021)

@bon I noticed your profile mentioned Philippines, Is this bike there or the states? Maybe there was an export of Archbar lightweights at some point? Or as SirMike suggested possibly a rebranded bike? I feel like the headset and dropout shape are Westfield, but again could be wrong.


----------



## bon (Feb 5, 2021)

SirMike1983 said:


> You have quite a mystery. This is an unusual looking frame. There is no provision for set screws in the rear forks? All of the lightweight Columbias from the '40s I've seen have set screws. And the ends of the seat stays look different from the "pinched end" style you see on the Sports Roadsters and Tourists. That serial number on the rear drop would indicate 1949, but that seems very late for an Arch Bar frame with old-style rear forks. And the early lightweights I've seen had the serial on the bottom bracket. Is it possible that the frame is another brand and someone added that badge later on?



Badge looks to be original and never added. Yes its quite a mystery indeed, I'm thinking the front triangle is a surplus from the prewar Archbars they have laying around after the war and probably just added the rear triangle from a Tourist/Roadster? Those rear drop outs without the screws were used by Columbia after the war. I have a '48 just like those, and have seen many just like it.View attachment 1352551


----------



## bon (Feb 5, 2021)

pedal4416 said:


> @bon I noticed your profile mentioned Philippines, Is this bike there or the states? Maybe there was an export of Archbar lightweights at some point? Or as SirMike suggested possibly a rebranded bike? I feel like the headset and dropout shape are Westfield, but again could be wrong.



Yes I'm from Philippines and the frame is from there too. I'm not sure about the export thing because it is the first one i've seen. I have a couple of the prewar Archbars/Roadsters and i'm thinking of adding this frame to the mix.


----------



## Archie Sturmer (Mar 13, 2021)

Might be a Westfield 1934-M; perhaps you might report to the moderators to move the thread to the antique or general sections? 
The fork looks in remarkable shape compared to the pitted frame; so perhaps it was replaced at some time?


----------



## dnc1 (Mar 15, 2021)

pedal4416 said:


> @bon I noticed your profile mentioned Philippines, Is this bike there or the states? Maybe there was an export of Archbar lightweights at some point? Or as SirMike suggested possibly a rebranded bike? I feel like the headset and dropout shape are Westfield, but again could be wrong.






bon said:


> Yes I'm from Philippines and the frame is from there too. I'm not sure about the export thing because it is the first one i've seen. I have a couple of the prewar Archbars/Roadsters and i'm thinking of adding this frame to the mix.



The late Phil Scott (@shoe3, RIP) posted a photo in the previously mentioned thread.....









						Arch & Truss Bar Bicycles, A Catalog Of Information | Antique Bicycles Pre-1933
					

I know Arch/Truss bars were also made after 1933, but the majority were earlier. >Drop bar (Camel back)~ drops near saddle for ease of mounting. (not what I wish here) >Arch (basically double arch)~ dual curved/bent top tubes >Truss bar~ a straight or dropped upper top tube connected in some...




					thecabe.com
				




.....of another example seen in the Philippines, post #72

Perhaps it was an export market for US and possibly French manufacturers. I say French, as the example in his post has a very 'Labor' like fork crown.


----------

