# 1880's child's  high wheel photo comparison



## redline1968 (Feb 15, 2017)

Awhile ago I bought a child's high wheel and I wasn't sure about it if it was a made up bike or junk. Just recently I found a photograph of a child next to a high wheel that bears a extreamly strong resemblance to mine other than the size looks like a smaller version.  Sorry about the pics n mine it's packed in the back.  Thought I'd post and and see if I can get some feed back on it.


----------



## Brian R. (Feb 15, 2017)

Your bike looks real to me. It has an open head tube and spokes that do not cross over each other, both of which are characteristics of the early type of Ordinary. However, it is not the same make as the one in the old photo. If you study the forks, you will see that the ones in the photo taper gradually towards the hub, while yours are not tapered but straight all the way down. By the way, the fork on your bike looks bent near the top.


----------



## pelletman (Feb 15, 2017)

Brian R. said:


> Your bike looks real to me. It has an open head tube and spokes that do not cross over each other, both of which are characteristics of the early type of Ordinary. However, it is not the same make as the one in the old photo. If you study the forks, you will see that the ones in the photo taper gradually towards the hub, while yours are not tapered but straight all the way down. By the way, the fork on your bike looks bent near the top.




Tangent spokes were available as early as 1880.  Radial does not make a bike early, and tangent does not make it late.  Open heads were available at least as late as 1888 in Columbia's case.  I'd like to see better pictures of the bike in question, but it looks like it is mostly original parts to me, with the exception of the top of the neck and the handlebars, and the cranks and pedals, which look at least late 1890's to me


----------



## Brian R. (Feb 15, 2017)

I wasn't trying to put a date to the bike, but rather was trying to say is it has features that existed in the 1880s. If someone were to make a reproduction (like the Boneshaker brand) they would probably use more modern features like an enclosed head tube and tangential spokes. It would be easier to use an existing modern hub when faking an old bike than machine a copy of an early 1880s hub. But to add to what you were saying about inconsistency in bicycle evolution, when it comes to kids bikes especially you could see all kinds of things. It would be logical to use outdated inventory on kids bikes to keep the cost down and save the most recent innovations for the high end adult bikes.


----------



## redline1968 (Feb 15, 2017)

Thanks.. your right it's not exact but the representation of the bike is close to my example.  yes it is bent and some parts like the pedals and the extra brackets are welded on later for a larger person to ride it. Some one tried to save it many years ago and It's a good candidate for a resto down the line.. as far as dating it would be a good guess as I'm not sure. Could they have been made for photos only or is it a production bike?  At least I found some picture close to help in a date/Id. I'll post better pics.


----------



## Craig Allen (Feb 15, 2017)

The bike is a low grade model which means it was intentionally heavily built for rough and tumble kids. Parts that were used on kids bikes like this are not necessarily outdated inventory but rather designed as such. I would date the bike about 1884-1886. Could be a Western Wheel Works or a St. Nicholas. The cranks and pedals are late 1890's replacements.


----------



## redline1968 (Feb 15, 2017)

Wow thank you for your input. Makes a lot of sense built for abuse for kids. Earlier than I thought. Still I'll post some more pics


----------



## redline1968 (Feb 15, 2017)

That would explane the abuse this one got....   :0


----------



## pelletman (Feb 16, 2017)

I'd say the back half was made up.  Obviously something happened to the top of the forks / head too.


----------



## redline1968 (Feb 16, 2017)

Yea..the front needs work but I doubt very much the rear is made up.. reason is why would some one forge a complete rear piece on this when it takes so much time to do it not to mention the added costs and not repair the front. It doesn't make sense...you can see it's a toy and not a "professional adult bike" made to use and abuse by children. The photo also shows a cheap toy bike for kids not adults.  I don't get it.


----------



## pelletman (Feb 16, 2017)

Something professionally built and sold wouldn't be that crude, and for a blacksmith that wouldn't be that big a deal to make.  Nothing left factories looking that rough.


----------



## redline1968 (Feb 16, 2017)

Well here I go again...I went through the same thing with the Miami bikes. Ok...It's looks like it's replaced because of the pics shadows. But it's not.  There is dents on the fork but no sighs of replacement.  The smooth transition of the frame mounted into the fork is seamless..oh  the frame is solid steel or extreamly thick tubing. Yes I get it.....Your implying that a blacksmith made this bike up totally and crudely from front to back and by this is a mockup bike and not a real 1880's child's high wheel. No one would sell it.  Therefore it's not real or a bad imitation.   I have to laugh at that.  I don't know if there was a  Wallmart back then but I'm sure there was a places that sold lesser quality items. As there are today.  It's rare and not many examples exist for comparisons I can see your assumption... I think this was just a bicycle for kids and should be expected to be beaten up.   As for quality look at the photo of the bike  close up Noticed the rear fork?  By what you implying that should not have a unusual bump in the jointed area of the frame and fork. But a smooth seamless joint. That high wheel looks cheap to me poorly built and shouldn't last long by that thin front fork.


----------



## pelletman (Feb 20, 2017)

No, I am not implying that.  I am saying that parts of it are original, and parts have been modified and replaced.  I am SURE the rear wheel is newer, and the rear fork is not of the era,  I am  not sure about the rest of the backbone, but I suspect it is something that was made up.  I am sure the front forks are modified and welded and the cranks and pedals are later than the wheel and front fork.  The saddle is made up from God knows what.  Bikes, even the kids bikes, were made in factories and were nicely finished products.  You are free to believe what you want, I grew up around highwheels, rode my first at 12, ridden dozens, maybe more, and have seen and touched thousands in my life.  That being said, I am not perfect, I am just telling you what I see


----------



## pelletman (Feb 20, 2017)

and sometimes it is difficult to communicate why you know something is wrong, but you know it is wrong..


----------



## redline1968 (Feb 20, 2017)

No problems it's all good I value your input and knowledge.. I'm new on these and I do see that quality difference. I'll work with it and refine it when I restore it.  Thanks mark


----------

