# Help educate me about springer forks



## drglinski

Hey guys, I'm toying with the idea of putting a springer fork on my (26") Typhoon.  I'd like to learn more about them before looking to make a purchase. How do I know I'm getting an authentic, not a re-pop (although if the re pops are good I'd still consider it) what is there to look for?  Anything identifiable that sticks out when buying, etc?

Thanks!


----------



## REC

PM sent - Now edited with photos.


----------



## Jeff54

REC said:


> PM sent - Now edited with photos.



Bicycle spring fork mechanism
US 2160034 A: https://www.google.com/patents/US2160034

How about sharing REC. I've been pondering the same thing. I know, back in 60's which must have been Japanize reproductions, there was something besides good chrome and embossed bolts but can't remember what.

And recently I noticed that the 95+ chrome ones 'New style'  don't just have crappy chrome, but the pivot  area on fork was pressed un-centered. Just one off center tells me that the whole quality of manufacture is going to have more misfit pieces. And that is, no doubt, going to be true with the repoped 'Old style'

*"New Style"*




 


*"Old Style"*


----------



## REC

jeff54: PM edited and posted:

The easiest key for recognition is the spring yoke. I posted a response to a similar inquiry on the Schwinbikeforum in the middleweight section. There are photos of the forks on both a Typhoon and an American. The Typhoon has a later offering from Schwinn, and the American has the original earlier model fork.

The early middleweight model steering tube has a bottom on it that looks just like the ones seen on original Krates, Sting-Rays and such. The later offering still has the nicely shaped spring yoke, but the bottom of the steering tube is a "pipe" looking affair, not like the other, and harder to distinguish from the aftermarket forks of late. There again it comes to familiarity. Note that the yoke is consistent with all of them.

Orig early style 26" middleweight springer




orig early (Krate, Sting-Ray style) - Photo is from ad from Billy Curtis' on eBay from which I bought that fork




Later Schwinn OE "Tube" type:




As this was an inquiry on the middleweight specifically, I did not include prior forks that were used on ballooners. Those are in another poster's response in the drawings posted as "OLD STYLE SPRING FORK" and "May 30, 1939 Patent drawing" - However. there again the consistency on the spring yoke was present.
Hope this helps!
REC

PS: There is now someone in China making a rather convincing copy of the "OLD STYLE SPRING FORK" as shown in the catalog page posted above. I have not seen a similar middleweight one copied as of yet.


----------



## Jeff54

REC said:


> jeff54: PM edited and posted:
> 
> The easiest key for recognition is the spring yoke.
> REC.




Ah I see it now but not exactly due to your explanation but because you caused me to look, and look and look again. I have 2 55's a Phantom and deluxe hornet, and both types of the 95 repop 'new and old' cited in photo docs above. . The 55's are Schwinn's "New style forks, perhaps though using 'old style' yoke

So, I guess that's why Schwinn made the repops citing 1954 models then, that's the cut off date for new vs old. Yet those are the only springers I have.

But what I finally noticed is the smoothness of the front of yoke. and maybe it's jogging me old brain's memory, yet it's awfully dark in there. Albeit it seems to me, that, it was probably  the smooth yoke we changed out the new styles into.  The top area's ovulated yoke front is smooth on the 55's "new style" where as the same area on repop has a very slight, for lack of better word, _indentation_, on each side of the front top area of yoke.

Yet, realizing this difference and regarding the Schwinn doc photos I'd posted above,  in the same area you can see that, the old style appears to be a photograph of it with smooth surface  while new is graphic drawing . That graphic shows two lines on each side of top of yoke which is similar to the 95+ repop differences noted.  "Similar" but certainly not on the money as 'new style' on my 95's is smooth too without those lines but slightly different and 'similar'. while the 55's yoke is very smooth and much like "old style"

So and but you also brought an photo of another thing which I was commenting about. The red bike, just like the new style 95+ repop; the pressed flat area for the pivot bolt on  fork  is freaking off center. Recently I browsed several 50-60's springers and none of them had this off center _defect_. That spot is what I recently noticed and why I was searching the net to discover if it's a tell tail of the repops.

So in the krate photo you got, notice how well centered the pivot bolt, that flat pressed spot is centered, it's on the money. Certainly illustrating that, they could misfire on that flat area but, and, as long as the hole was put correctly it doesn't matter much except appearance, balance or  aesthetic appeal. .

Yet, noting my 95 'New style' has the misfire press, then ya gotta wonder, is that red bike's fork also a repop? Or, perhaps as, when me was young, dumber and stupid, (not to imply I got any smarter, but perhaps just wiser, [maybe] ) we kids knew that Schwinn's quality changed quite a bit during late 60's into 70's which was why we were changing out the new parts on our 60's sting rays to older parts  that were unique, better metal and chrome, that springer on red bike if it is actually 60's it is illustrating this, and them dar repops screwed the pooch too?

I should add, when the krates came out we, (neighbor kids) were not impressed, 1. was because we'd already, save the 5 speed shifter, freaking  built em,  but even more importantly, believe it or not, the quality was crap in comparison to what we were used-to. .


----------



## REC

Jeff54 said:


> Ah I see it now but not exactly due to your explanation but because you caused me to look, and look and look again. I have 2 55's a Phantom and deluxe hornet, and both types of the 95 repop 'new and old' cited in photo docs above. . The 55's are Schwinn's "New style forks, perhaps though using 'old style' yoke
> 
> So, I guess that's why Schwinn made the repops citing 1954 models then, that's the cut off date for new vs old. Yet those are the only springers I have.
> 
> But what I finally noticed is the smoothness of the front of yoke. and maybe it's jogging me old brain's memory, yet it's awfully dark in there. Albeit it seems to me, that, it was probably  the smooth yoke we changed out the new styles into.  The top area's ovulated yoke front is smooth on the 55's "new style" where as the same area on repop has a very slight, for lack of better word, _indentation_, on each side of the front top area of yoke.
> 
> Yet, realizing this difference and regarding the Schwinn doc photos I'd posted above,  in the same area you can see that, the old style appears to be a photograph of it with smooth surface  while new is graphic drawing . That graphic shows two lines on each side of top of yoke which is similar to the 95+ repop differences noted.  "Similar" but certainly not on the money as 'new style' on my 95's is smooth too without those lines but slightly different and 'similar'. while the 55's yoke is very smooth and much like "old style"
> 
> So and but you also brought an photo of another thing which I was commenting about. The red bike, just like the new style 95+ repop; the pressed flat area for the pivot bolt on  fork  is freaking off center. Recently I browsed several 50-60's springers and none of them had this off center _defect_. That spot is what I recently noticed and why I was searching the net to discover if it's a tell tail of the repops.
> 
> So in the krate photo you got, notice how well centered the pivot bolt, that flat pressed spot is centered, it's on the money. Certainly illustrating that, they could misfire on that flat area but, and, as long as the hole was put correctly it doesn't matter much except appearance, balance or  aesthetic appeal. .
> 
> Yet, noting my 95 'New style' has the misfire press, then ya gotta wonder, is that red bike's fork also a repop? Or, perhaps as, when me was young, dumber and stupid, (not to imply I got any smarter, but perhaps just wiser, [maybe] ) we kids knew that Schwinn's quality changed quite a bit during late 60's into 70's which was why we were changing out the new parts on our 60's sting rays to older parts  that were unique, better metal and chrome, that springer on red bike if it is actually 60's it is illustrating this, and them dar repops screwed the pooch too?




To clarify - The photos of all three forks I posted are NOT reproduction parts. The 65 American came with the fork, The Krate fork is also original, though it now lives on a different bike, and the "tube" type was a later OEM fork purchased still in the box about 12 years ago.

Thank you.
REC


----------



## Jeff54

REC said:


> To clarify - The photos of all three forks I posted are NOT reproduction parts. The 65 American came with the fork, The Krate fork is also original, though it now lives on a different bike, and the "tube" type was a later OEM fork purchased still in the box about 12 years ago.
> 
> Thank you.
> REC



Yeah, I'm not seeing your point yet. And surely no get this "Tube type" as they're all tube types. When I get some time, I'll make photos of my 95's and 55, that oughta do it.


----------



## REC

What is your point? I was answering a question asked about a middleweight spring fork.
REC


----------



## Jeff54

REC said:


> What is your point? I was answering a question asked about a middleweight spring fork.
> REC





I think the OP made that clear as, while the Schwinn docs illustrate certin differences we've yet to establish what difference there are between Schwinn's 95+ repops.

And therein with what I've said about, some, misaligned fork press for pivot, ya gotta wonder about the red one you posted for the same: 'Did Schwinn actually screw that one up prior to making the repops, or is that actually a repop?'

So, while what's been established helps discern difference between actual Schwinn parts, it doesn't set the record strait on Schwinn's repop deal.

Haven't the time yet, but I will post photos of 55 and 95 springers. maybe they enlighten and we can kick em around and establish something relevant as an aide..

And but, there would be no difference between Schwinn's middleweights and balloon except the width of fork crown, yoke and length of pivot bolt. Regardless, their shape/style or design  will be the same too.

And yet, I remain confused as to why you refer, as some type of difference in that black bike's springer as 'Tube type' yet, as if the red and yellow are different, not 'tube types'? .

Of course, perhaps you wonder 'What does it matter" even if the repops are identical there is a huge difference between older Schwinn and repop: the crappy-est chrome that's ever had a Schwinn label . Hence anybody could flip crap chrome on an old bike and say it's original, until it begins, and it no doubt will if left for a short time in the elements, pealing off. Plus, the metal its self is inferior to  60's, 70's and maybe 80's. .


----------



## REC

Wow.

Good luck  with furthering your "relevance" on this.
I was not trying to establish anything, I was responding to a post about does this fork fit/work on a specific bike, and have done so.
I see no relevance to "55" and "95 Repops" when we were looking at original stuff made in the 60s through the early 80's. Other than the fact the design of the 60's fork is the same as the switch from the "behind the legs" to the "through the legs" pivot, there isn't a lot of difference. The "Tube Type" is a reference to the cross support for the pivot. The Red American and the Yellow Krate both have "cast metal pivot" centerpieces, while the black on has one that is made of "WELDED TUBES" - that is pretty simple to see. The actual yoke is pretty much the same from the inception of the forks through the reproductions. I didn't design them, I had nothing to do with their manufacture, and find little difference in them from the late 30s one in a box here to the one on the black Typhoon. Machining quality varies with everything, so yes, there could be a difference. As far as the metallurgy involved, I'm not a metallurgist and don't proclaim any knowledge in that area, though I do weld and have a basic understanding of the materials involved. Thanks for taking this all to task, and all the best to ya - carry on!

Oh, and I RESTATE the following - All three of the forks in my photos posted ARE ORIGINAL PARTS - The one on the black Typhoon was made later, but was still (and IS still) an original Schwinn fork. No Reproductions there. Yes I do have some of the repro forks, but "these three ain't them."

REC 
Good evening


----------



## Jeff54

REC said:


> Wow.
> 
> Good luck  with furthering your "relevance" on this.
> I




And a big wow right back to ya, you getting panties in a wad, why?

You being evasive with you black bike's fork, it's not that anybody questioned whether it's Schwinn or not. So it came in a Schwinn box, what's your point? I get the sense that you're being evasive as you really do not know whether it's a Taiwan made and or, 95+ Schwinn repop or not.

Yet, so, it's caused me to keep searching whereas, checking in 1980 the last period that Schwinn is believed to have actually made them, in the USA, then you black bike's crown, the cross 'tube' has thin welding, just likey the 95+ Schwinn repop (reproduction, Taiwan) . .

Ya can see it on this original 1980 Schwinn Deluxe cruiser: (Photo's cropped from internet)  




And yet this bike also has a clue to my question about the Pressed flat area for the pivot bolt. It's misaligned on the left side. As seen in above photo, Pivot bolt is high in the rectangle,  and practically opposite on the right. It's just slightly off center, leaning on the down side verses the left (above) on the up side:





And yet once more here's another 1980 Deluxe cruiser, (black)  Last believed made in USA springer. And this particular bike was once owned by A Schwinn corporate officer, in which I swiped the photo and statement of provenance  from an ebay auction some time ago..

and MY POINT IS! [grin] See that fat A. and appearing beveled  weld on the crown?? It's thick, unlikey the repop-ers, [wink] .







Another notable item regarding these 1980's springers is the yoke. These two are or have smoother, on the upper side, curvature yokes.

Comparatively you black bike does not appear, in your photo, to have this same smooth curve yet, moreover, more likey the repop-ers too.
re
Me tinks once again, this defensive tactic is for fear of being discovered. Perhaps you really ain't sure if it's a Schwinn Taiwan or USA and fear discovery? [grin]

That's what the revalence in the 55's are all about.. As now, I don't even feel the need to photograph my 55's B/C, these 80 springer Yokes are just likey em. And I'm thinking you've saved me the effort of shooting my 95+ repop as your black bike appears to have the slightly different yoke I have on me 95 repop. [wink, wink]

Yet, one more think. As I spied my 95+ I realized the flaw I see in your red bike, mal-aligned flat pressed spot for pivot bolt, it's like the 80 springer on blue, also has it high on one side and slightly off on another which is also true on my 95 Taiwan Schwinn springer both sides are misaligned one higher than the other too.  . .

And that would mean, if, and I repeat "IF!" your red bike is original springer  then Schwinn was screwing the pooch even in the 60's.

I noted that, in the late 60's Schwinn's quality went down, then on that thought, your red bike is an 65?

For metallurgy? no need, as while the repops chrome peal, you can see the difference in color and texture of the rust. It's lighter in color and quite 'powdery' too. Yet, so true in 1980, that blue bike above,  the repops, when they get rusted like it is, they'll peal while the 1980 chrome is not as good as 50's, it, and potentially metal made on it, is stronger. .. and if an older Schwinn, even in 1980 chrome peals, the rust color is darker and not so much 'powdery' appearance' . [wink] I believe it's a difference in the amount of, or lack of, carbon or another element causing hardness. Soft cheap metal verses harder. Notably, china cheap metal, 'soft crap', is of the political, current  topics regarding china imports. Which, incidentally, but not to change the subject, The 95 Schwinn black phantom, its metal, when scratched through paint,  rust is mo-powdery than old too. Even though the 95 phantoms are said to be M.i. USA  It seems to be an indication of crap verses better. Adding to that thought, I've also a cruiser 6 which ended about 1998-9 but marked "Made in Taiwan"  and where scratched through paint? Guess:  [smile]

I.E. Perhaps, again I say, "Perhaps", there is a way, other than cheap A chrome to define the difference in Tiawain Schwinn and 60's-80 USA, which, again "PERHAPS!" (so u don't get panties wadded, again.  ) it's the shape of yoke and size of weld bead on the crown's pivot 'tube'. And "perhaps' the reason china crap chrome is rusting and pealing so fast, is that crap metal base. "Perhaps"

Yeah I got the "Tube" part now, (I think) albeit your instance was too weak to grasp. But, the Schwinn doc seems to illustrate it as a solid crown verses later; the pivot cross tube being  welded on. See how I did that; 'solid verses welded' crown pivot tube? [grin] Yet I not know fer sure as I don't have one, just gazing at photos and so, if early is welded too, I see no point in your 'tube' reference  again and once again too. . {wait} I forgot, I got one on my 55 hornet deluxe, they are solid! and or ground down smooth which hides the rough weld of the pivot 'tube' seen later.. see how I did that? 'Solid in appearance verses welded', [grin].

So, why all this presumed; by U, _nonsense_ regarding these? Because it's of the OP's questions and yet, coincidently just what I been wondering. Because: If I'm to put an springer on one of my 60's bikes and or 50's, or anybody else too. If I buy or salvage one for them, I want to be sure it's the right one for the right era.

Now we're cookin:

55- sometime in 60's? Fork crown pivot tube appears solid. Also the pressed area for pivot bolt, where the hole is drilled on each fork half, is aligned . (alignment can be verified in multiple photos of post 1955 bikes with springer. An obvious 'quality control' difference into the 60's. )

Up to the early 80's the crown has thick manual or hand weld joining the pivot tube to the crown which may or not be sloppy to fine and beveled.  And potentially mal-alignments in pressed area for pivot bolt from 60's  .

Schwinn's Taiwan repop fork crown, possibly: (subject to further conformation)  thin electro weld thingy attaching the pivot bolt tube, which is cleaner in appearance verses mid years: those, having been hand welded. And almost no different in the pressed area where for pivot bolt (rectangle)  on the forks that  may be off skew, but certainly low quality chrome which peals easily.   .

55-80 yoke is very slightly smoother, on top area's curvature and edging, verses 95+ Schwinn Taiwan's. (presumably 95+ as I have no info past 1980 into 90's when likely Taiwan made, if produced after 1980 and before 95. ) ) .

I.E. while most or some info is subject to correction, we're, including you: 'wit wadded panties', are establishing relevance in time line and most importantly:: ??  differences  of Schwinn's post 1955; "New Style" (as noted in Schwinn docs)  springer forks [wink]

As for the 'look-alike' copies being produced from Mexico to Japan (1960's when I were young) and now, china that are NOT Schwinn, me tinks; for this discussion, is answered and obvious.  And the reference that there are China copies that are difficult to tell, I've seen plants in China make copies using the same equipment; original patented or design protected all over the place. ell I bought ( for 'example' purpose)  fake fricken, exact copies of junk violating copyright, patent and design  in Taiwan, who had been and may still be doing it, all the way back in mid 70's when I was there. Not to leave out; fricken China companies, even today  stealing new released and prerelease multi million dollar hit movies and selling down loads for a fricken dime.


----------

