# Roadmaster Reproduction



## PCHiggin (May 11, 2010)

I read  that the Luxery Liner of 1998 or '99 was made from the original tooling right here in America. Where is/was the factory? Did they use any have foreign sourced parts? What do you guys think of the quality? They seem a bargain compared to the original price.

Pat


----------



## PCHiggin (May 12, 2010)

Bump,Anybody know anything about these? C'mon guys,a little help, please.

Pat


----------



## DonChristie (May 12, 2010)

I dont know anything about them, but have seen one. It wreaks of a repro!


----------



## Adamtinkerer (May 12, 2010)

I haven't seen one in person, but I've heard they're a pretty accurate repop of the original. I think the chain guard decal may be a little different, and the headbadge isn't brass.


----------



## Flat Tire (May 12, 2010)

I had one a few years ago and theyre pretty well built. Had the heavy duty spokes too. I saw a restored original at a swap meet once and thought it was one of the reproductions....needless to say the guy wasnt happy....but I sure didnt see much difference between the two.


----------



## 53Phantom (May 12, 2010)

They were built in Olney, Illinois right after Roadmaster was sold by AMF to Brunswick. In 1999, they ended US production and sold the name to Pacific Cycle and moved production overseas. These are the Roadmaster bikes that you find at Walmart and Toys-R-Us. Some of the parts used on the Reproduction Luxury Liner were made in Asia but the frame and sheetmetal were made in the US using the original tooling. I think I read thast the tooling was destroyed after the 1998 production. Roadmaster claimed to have built 5000 of them but, there are some in existence with serial numbers near 6000.
       I have one and it is very well built and rides like a dream. The only issue that I had with mine was the fit of the seat post which was too loose to tighten up. I machined another one from solid aluminum that works perfectly. The paint, chrome, fit and finish  of everything else is flawless.


----------



## RMS37 (May 12, 2010)

My affection for things CWC leads me to some strange places and all the recent talk about the “Reproduction” Roadmaster Luxury Liners put me to task to see what I could find to clarify the background of this model. I’ve also added some of my observations (or opinions) about the Roadmaster replica and replicas in general. 

First of all here is a basic time-line for Roadmaster bicycles put together from several sources:

*1910* - Cleveland Welding Founded
*1936 *- Cleveland Welding introduces the Roadmaster Line of bicycles   
*1951* - AMF purchases Cleveland Welding
*1956* - AMF moves all wheel good manufacturing operation to Little Rock Arkansas
*1962 *- AMF wheel good headquarters moves to Olney Illinois
*1987* - AMF spins off Roadmaster Industries as a subsidiary
*1996* - Roadmaster Industries is purchased by Brunswick
*1999 *- Brunswick sells the Roadmaster brand to Pacific Cycle  
*2004 *- Pacific Cycle is acquired by Dorel Industries

This timeline is enough for me to find the heritage chain between the original of 1947-8 and the replica of 1998 arguably less than continuous. 

Even more relevant is the following, essentially from the horses mouth, which I found posted on the Old Roads site:

_“The Roadmaster Luxury Liner was made in a run of 6200 pieces. They claim only 5000 were made but the actual production was 6200.

I sold Roadmaster an original mint 1948 Luxury Liner that they used to retool off of for this bike.

The wheels and pedals and a few of the parts were stamped in Taiwan but the frames and painting miscellaneous parts and assembly was done in the USA by Brunswick in Illinois and Wisconsin.”_

There are plenty of lines to read between but to me it sounds like the frames were built in the US and that painting and assembly was done here but the original tooling for the sheet metal parts did not still exist and was replicated and retooled from an original to produce the parts for the project. I assume that if the sheet metal had been stamped here from original dies that would have been specifically stated.

The poster went on to differentiate the Roadmaster repops as being much better made than the contemporary Columbia and Schwinn repops but I believe he may have been too closely linked to the project to be considered completely unbiased.

*Opinions *(mine, of course)

It’s funny to see how fast time gobbles up what is new and turns it into the past. While there is still plenty of opportunity to buy these bikes N.I.B. it is fun to see a number of these bikes appearing for sale that were ridden hard (as they were _*not*_ meant to be, It’s a limited edition collectible, take care of it and it will take care of you!) and put away wet.

I have never had any strong feelings for or against these bikes and I have always felt that on the whole these factory produced replicas don’t have any major effect on the hobby either good or bad.  If need be, I’m sure that the reproductions can be differentiated from the originals and, on the other hand, they are similar enough that if you are missing a headlight from your original bike, a repop will fill the void till the real one comes along.

Apparently 6200 repops were produced so in real numbers that is about two weeks of CWC production from the day. Still the number made was larger than the market for the bikes turned out to be and neither the ad-speak of limited production collectability or massive price slashing could get them out the door in a timely fashion.

It may be that as these bikes age the story they tell will ultimately be embraced by seasoned collectors but currently it seems to me that the market for the originals is just a different market than the one for the repops; each appealing to a different group of people for a different set of reasons.

The appeal of the original bikes has a lot to do with the fact that they are true artifacts of an earlier time and were not built to be collectible or as a tribute to anything but were examples of standard goods from their time. As such they are perfect little time machines that can be placed in your living room for contemplative journeys.

I suppose that the biggest problem with the repops is that for many the time dial is set to the wrong decade short-circuiting the trip to a place most of us aren’t ready to return to. 

Oddly though, I find the replica bikes can, in a stretch, be seen and enjoyed in the same light as the originals because in there own way, they are a real part of the zeitgeist of their time. They represent a very specific part of the history of the American bicycle at a time when the industry was making a last ditch attempt to grab the attention of American consumers and to find a possibly sustainable niche market to regroup from.    

By this time the market had changed so much and for so many reasons that the replica bikes were conceived more to ride on the prevailing ambiance of nostalgia for the good old days than to satisfy anyone’s transportation needs. As an added marketing ploy, so redolent of the late 80’s and 90’s they were initially marketed as a boutique item at boutique prices. At $3000.00 dollars a pop there was probably a healthy profit margin visualized on their production but after the “Few” drug one home at that price the overproduced bikes pricing structure free fell to a level likely below the cost of production.

So, to a contemplative collector the primary interest in the bikes may be in that they represent a halo product from the last bunker days of the American Bicycle Industry.  (And of course they did add to the availability of those finned headlights that were all originally consumed by battery acid.) To an active (as in one who rides rather than gazes) collector, the interest is likely more along the lines of something that is presentable and rideable out of the box and will garner the same public thumbs up as the more expensive and conditionally fragile original.

Lastly, while I am fine with the bikes themselves, I sort of balk at the terms “reproduction” and “continuation” that have become part of the standard lexicon used to describe these bikes and other products generally embued with a tenuous hereditary link to the original.  Repop is slang and works well but perhaps “replica” is the best word to use to describe them. To my mind there is no implication of author-heritage in the word replica whereas there is in both the “re” of  re-production which conveys a sense of someone doing something over and the concept of continuation which also seems inappropriate if the continuation is by a different company, in a different factory, in a different state, by a completely different workforce 50 years after the original was discontinued and put to rest.

After this post I would love to get an original and a repop together to document the differences but I don’t have either within easy reach…still I’ll put the project on my bucket list.


----------



## Freqman1 (May 13, 2010)

Wow Phil,
    That's a great little essay on the subject. I have an original '53 Luxury Liner which, of course, is actually an AMF bike although, curiously, they still put a CWC decal on the seat tube. Phantom 53 and I traded views on original vice "replica". I personally would have a hard time buying a replica of anything unless it was dirt cheap. I do see Phantom 53's point that some people want a shiny new bike that looks old and the cost of restoring an original is, in most cases, cost prohibitive. If I happen to run a cross a replica I will road test it and do a comparison. My '53 is one of my best riding bikes and I get it out fairly often. v/r Shawn


----------



## PCHiggin (May 13, 2010)

*Thanks  for all of the info.*

I really don't expect them to be exact replicas of the o/g bikes,I just want to make sure they aren't total junk. I'm mainly a Schwinn guy and to me, they are the strongest bikes from any maker any decade  of the post war era,so I don't expect the Lux. Liner to feel as strong under my 240 lbs,just not rickety. I think the Lux. Liner is the coolest and cleanest looking bike of that era and I've wanted one since I sold off my Phantom and Color flow. I guess I'll start looking. I'm kind of a specification/history junkie and this turned out to an informative thread after all. Thanks again.

Pat


----------



## 53Phantom (May 13, 2010)

Pat, I wiegh 210 and mine feels very rigid and , a little more solid than my original 53 Phantom. I wouldnt worry about the strength of the bike. Mine is for sale for $595.00 but, I am in Texas and I dont want to mess with shipping. I am only selling mine becasue I need the money.
        I have read threads posted by people that were involved in the R&D of the 1998 LL and they stated that the original tooling and fixtures were used. I have no reason to doubt them about that.


----------



## PCHiggin (May 13, 2010)

53Phantom said:


> Pat, I wiegh 210 and mine feels very rigid and , a little more solid than my original 53 Phantom. I wouldnt worry about the strength of the bike. Mine is for sale for $595.00 but, I am in Texas and I dont want to mess with shipping. I am only selling mine becasue I need the money.
> I have read threads posted by people that were involved in the R&D of the 1998 LL and they stated that the original tooling and fixtures were used. I have no reason to doubt them about that.




I'd like to read those threads/posts. I can't find anything about it. I'm assuming the o/g tools were steel and they were either refurbished or remade. I doubt they  would have made new steel tools for 6200 parts,they probably used kirksite if new tools were needed.

Pat


----------



## Freqman1 (May 13, 2010)

I only go about a buck 70 and I can tell you hands down my Roadmaster is the best riding of all my bikes. I collect what I call fancy balloners i.e. springer, tank, lights and have four Phantoms, a Monark, a Hawthorne, and some Columbia Five Stars in addition to some non-springer bikes e.g. Shelby, Dayton, Elgins---and I ride'm all!   v/r Shawn







53Phantom said:


> Pat, I wiegh 210 and mine feels very rigid and , a little more solid than my original 53 Phantom. I wouldnt worry about the strength of the bike. Mine is for sale for $595.00 but, I am in Texas and I dont want to mess with shipping. I am only selling mine becasue I need the money.
> I have read threads posted by people that were involved in the R&D of the 1998 LL and they stated that the original tooling and fixtures were used. I have no reason to doubt them about that.


----------



## kingsilver (May 13, 2010)

hey you guys - don't ask to ride my silverkings - you might pull the inserts out of their sockets !!!


----------



## GTs58 (Jul 19, 2015)

Does anyone here know what the current market value is on one of these that's NIB and never opened? 

Thanks for any help!


----------



## spoker (Jul 19, 2015)

the term reproduction is overused,inaccurate and antiquated,the term was valid for judging somthing that was remade years ago when the things being made usually werent that good,a tribute would be a more acurate term,both bikes have there own place an sereve well in that arena,not everyone has the depth of conviction to the hobby to warrant the arge investment to an og piece,a tribute bike is an excellent value and i dont see many ppl triyin to pass them off as riginals


----------



## HENRY FLYNRC@PEOPLEPC.COM (Jul 20, 2016)

I MAY BE A LITTLE LATE TO COMMENT BUT HERE GOES....I'M HENRSCHMI FROM WARM HENDERSON NEVADA...I HAVE 34 REFURBISHED BIKES PACKED IN MY GARAGE, FROM A 38 COLUMBIA TO A NEW THIS OR THAT  ROADIE.. IF THE BIKE WAS GOOD WHEN YOU FINISHED REPAIR AND RESURECTION THEN IT IS FINE WITH ME TO SEE OR KNOW IT IS BEING RIDDEN....I HAVE SCHWINN CLASSICS AND COLUMBIAS AS WELL AS LATER MURRAY SPACELINER BIKES...THEY HAVE THEIR QUIRKS, FROM YEARS GONE BY....MY 2002 COLUMBIA REPRO BIKES ARE SPECIAL TO ME..MY CHINESE LATE MODEL TANK SCHWINNS ARE FUN TO CREAT DISCUSSION....THE 1952 BLACK PHANTOM IN IN MY DEN IS STILL LOOKING BRAND NEW....SO WHAT IS THE REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A BICYCLE AND AN OTHER BICYCLE....HAVE YOU EVER HEARD THAT BEAUTY IS IN FACT IN THE EYES AND WALLET OF THE COLLECTOR AND HIS  COLLECTION....SIGNED....HENRSCHMI


----------



## Freqman1 (Jul 20, 2016)

NO I HADN'T HEARD THAT. THE ORIGINAL QUESTION CONCERNED THE QUALITY AND WHERE THE BIKES WERE MADE. SIGNED SHAWN oh poop I left the caps lock on!


----------



## bicycle larry (Jul 20, 2016)

yes i have had 3 of thees repos and all3 were reel nice riding bikes ,thee current owners all ride them still!!!!! my self i still like riding thee org. ones and the best riding bike in my correl is the jc jet flow which i heard were not a good rider!!! i guse i got lucky ,i love it .so if you want a nice riding bike that looks good go for it ,  from bicycle larry


----------



## CrazyDave (Jul 20, 2016)

GTs58 said:


> Does anyone here know what the current market value is on one of these that's NIB and never opened?
> 
> Thanks for any help!



even less than a schwinn typhoon. .lolololol...


----------



## BLWNMNY (Jul 21, 2016)

I have one, rides great.


----------



## the2finger (Jul 21, 2016)

The repop headlamp is great


----------

