# War Time CWC Lightweight



## Oilit (Aug 20, 2020)

I picked this up last weekend. Looking at Phil Marshall's chart, 1942? And what is the 42 V on the U.S. Chain Tread tires?


----------



## Oilit (Aug 20, 2020)

@99 bikes, I was comparing the fork on this to the one on your Hawthorne. The ads in the CWC book describe all the pre-war lightweights as having some type of tubular fork, where this one is a solid forged piece. I haven't seen many post-war CWC catalogs, but if the post-war lightweights used the same fork as this one, then your bike is pre-war. If someone knows different, feel free to contribute.








						Hawthorne Lite Wate | Vintage Lightweight Bicycles
					

Hello. Just excited to share a really interesting and original Wards "Lite Wate" bike I recently acquired. This is a CWC made bike.  Overall the bike is in amazing original condition, though I think it originally had a 2sp ND rear hub, different grips, and the saddle is just there until I find a...




					thecabe.com


----------



## SirMike1983 (Aug 29, 2020)

I did not notice this post earlier in the week. The condition is outstanding. The pin stripes help set the condition apart on this one - usually they're either gone or barely visible. They have that aged look and that "hand painted" type appearance. Really nice.

Many of these old bikes were sold off or discarded later on. 

Whereas the ballooners from the pre-war period were a luxury item, the war era lightweights were rather utilitarian transport and many of the people who had them were ready to move on to an automobile after the war. 

Many American adults were just not "bike people" (some were, but not a large portion) in the 1940s when the alternative was a decent automobile. So it's uncommon and really nice to see a lightweight in this condition and completeness turn up.


----------



## slowride (Aug 29, 2020)

Beautiful condition. Cant wait to see it washed and waxed. Interesting how drive side crank arm jogs out while non drive doesn’t. Fork blades elegant in how thin and crown/blades one piece


----------



## juvela (Aug 29, 2020)

slowride said:


> Beautiful condition. Cant wait to see it washed and waxed. Interesting how drive side crank arm jogs out while non drive doesn’t. Fork blades elegant in how thin and crown/blades one piece




-----

Was thinking anent this topic as well.

Reckon it has to do with placement of the drive pin.  As it is not necessary to do for chainstay clearance.

Does it yield an uneven Q factor where the drive side pedal is further out from the centreline than the non-driveside pedal?

Look forward to reading the words of the experts...    

-----


----------



## Oilit (Aug 31, 2020)

juvela said:


> -----
> 
> Was thinking anent this topic as well.
> 
> ...



The pre-war lightweights are always shown with a chain guard, where this has no signs of one. My grandma had a war-time ration book when I was a kid, (I wish I knew where _that_ went), but it just shows that things were pretty tight during the war years, so it would make sense if there never was a chain guard. But since the crank was originally plated (not sure if it was chrome or nickel) it may be a pre-war part, but that's just a guess. I look forward to hearing from the experts as well!


----------



## HUFFMANBILL (Aug 31, 2020)

This bike appears to be a 1942 '' Victory '' bicycle most likely manufactured between April and September of that year.  The War Production Board (WPB) placed a freeze on the sale, but not the manufacture of all bicycles ( due to war shortages ) between April and June 1942 so that Bicycle manufacturers could gear up for war time bicycle manufacture and rationing.  The restrictions and other wartime bicycle manufacture, sales and transport regulations were spelled out in the WPB Limitation Order #52 (L-52 ), which was amended to as the war and material needs changed.  Sales, by rationing of bicycles started in July, 1942.  At this time all bikes manufactured had to weigh no more then 31 lbs. exclusive of tires and tubes. The only chromed parts allowed were seat-posts, handle-bar stems, cranks and any fasteners  that required chrome as a safety measure as a corrosion preventative. Hence, the blacked-out ''Victory'' lightweight bicycle was born. These bicycles came with no chain-guard or stand, which also saved precious war needed metal.  At this time ( between April - September 1942 ) however, bicycle manufacturers could still place head badges on their bikes.  This changed in Sept., 1942 when L-52 was amended and head badges were no longer allowed.  Also at this time of the 12 major Bicycle manufacture companies extent only 2 Westfield ( Columbia ) and Huffman were allowed to continue with producing bikes for the Military and Civilians.  These 2 companies were allowed to stamp the serial numbers on their bikes with a ''W'' prefix for Westfield and ''H'' prefix for Huffman.  They were evidently also allowed to continue using painted over head badges on their Military produced bikes.  The remaining 10 bike manufacturers, which had their bicycle production frozen, were upon special application granted permission to produce specific numbers of bikes as the need arose and materials used in bike production became available.

Since the CWC lightweight in question still appears to have it's original head badge along with all black-out parts ( Other then pre-April 1942 existing stocks of nickel plated parts for bikes this metal was also restricted ) it should fall within the April - Sept., 1942 production period.  It is interesting to note with these ''Victory'' bikes in regards to head badges that after head badges were no longer used, frames were still showing up on these bikes with the badge screw or rivet holes still drilled in the frame head.  Most likely due to frames that had already been drilled when that particular restriction went into effect in Sept., 1942.  When these remaining frames were used up the holes disappeared on subsequent bikes.

In Oct., 1944 L-52 was again amended and the weight of bikes was increased to 42 lbs. so some fat- tire bikes were again produced ( without tanks ) chrome use was increased and rationing of civilian bikes was discontinued.

The question came up about the V on the original US Chain Tread 42 lightweight tires.  These were wartime tires many of which were stamped with the "V'' for Victory and/or War Tire logo.

I trust that this information is helpful.

Regards,
Bill


----------



## Oilit (Aug 31, 2020)

HUFFMANBILL said:


> This bike appears to be a 1942 '' Victory '' bicycle most likely manufactured between April and September of that year.  The War Production Board (WPB) placed a freeze on the sale, but not the manufacture of all bicycles ( due to war shortages ) between April and June 1942 so that Bicycle manufacturers could gear up for war time bicycle manufacture and rationing.  The restrictions and other wartime bicycle manufacture, sales and transport regulations were spelled out in the WPB Limitation Order #52 (L-52 ), which was amended to as the war and material needs changed.  Sales, by rationing of bicycles started in July, 1942.  At this time all bikes manufactured had to weigh no more then 31 lbs. exclusive of tires and tubes. The only chromed parts allowed were seat-posts, handle-bar stems and any fasteners  that required chrome as a safety measure as a corrosion preventative. Hence, the blacked-out ''Victory'' lightweight bicycle was born. These bicycles came with no chain-guard or stand, which also saved precious war needed metal.  At this time ( between April - September 1942 ) however, bicycle manufacturers could still place head badges on their bikes.  This changed in Sept., 1942 when L-52 was amended and head badges were no longer allowed.  Also at this time of the 12 major Bicycle manufacture companies extent only 2 Westfield ( Columbia ) and Huffman were allowed to continue with producing bikes for the Military and Civilians.  These 2 companies were allowed to stamp the serial numbers on their bikes with a ''W'' prefix for Westfield and ''H'' prefix for Huffman.  They were evidently also allowed to continue using painted over head badges on their Military produced bikes.  The remaining 10 bike manufacturers, which had their bicycle production frozen, were upon special application granted permission to produce specific numbers of bikes as the need arose and materials used in bike production became available.
> 
> Since the CWC lightweight in question still appears to have it's original head badge along with all black-out parts ( I do not believe that nickel plating was restricted as I remember ) it should fall within the April - Sept., 1942 production period.  It is interesting to note with these ''Victory'' bikes in regards to head badges that after head badges were no longer used, frames were still showing up on these bikes with the badge screw or rivet holes still drilled in the frame head.  Most likely due to frames that had already been drilled when that particular restriction went into effect in Sept., 1942.  When these remaining frames were used up the holes disappeared on subsequent bikes.
> 
> ...



Thanks Bill! I've read some of your other posts and was hoping you would weigh in. I saw on another thread the the "V" on the Lobdell seat was for "Victory", but I hadn't heard of it being used on tires. And I wasn't sure about the head badges either. You've filled in the blanks as far as I'm concerned!


----------



## Oilit (Aug 31, 2020)

HUFFMANBILL said:


> This bike appears to be a 1942 '' Victory '' bicycle most likely manufactured between April and September of that year.  The War Production Board (WPB) placed a freeze on the sale, but not the manufacture of all bicycles ( due to war shortages ) between April and June 1942 so that Bicycle manufacturers could gear up for war time bicycle manufacture and rationing.  The restrictions and other wartime bicycle manufacture, sales and transport regulations were spelled out in the WPB Limitation Order #52 (L-52 ), which was amended to as the war and material needs changed.  Sales, by rationing of bicycles started in July, 1942.  At this time all bikes manufactured had to weigh no more then 31 lbs. exclusive of tires and tubes. The only chromed parts allowed were seat-posts, handle-bar stems and any fasteners  that required chrome as a safety measure as a corrosion preventative. Hence, the blacked-out ''Victory'' lightweight bicycle was born. These bicycles came with no chain-guard or stand, which also saved precious war needed metal.  At this time ( between April - September 1942 ) however, bicycle manufacturers could still place head badges on their bikes.  This changed in Sept., 1942 when L-52 was amended and head badges were no longer allowed.  Also at this time of the 12 major Bicycle manufacture companies extent only 2 Westfield ( Columbia ) and Huffman were allowed to continue with producing bikes for the Military and Civilians.  These 2 companies were allowed to stamp the serial numbers on their bikes with a ''W'' prefix for Westfield and ''H'' prefix for Huffman.  They were evidently also allowed to continue using painted over head badges on their Military produced bikes.  The remaining 10 bike manufacturers, which had their bicycle production frozen, were upon special application granted permission to produce specific numbers of bikes as the need arose and materials used in bike production became available.
> 
> Since the CWC lightweight in question still appears to have it's original head badge along with all black-out parts ( I do not believe that nickel plating was restricted as I remember ) it should fall within the April - Sept., 1942 production period.  It is interesting to note with these ''Victory'' bikes in regards to head badges that after head badges were no longer used, frames were still showing up on these bikes with the badge screw or rivet holes still drilled in the frame head.  Most likely due to frames that had already been drilled when that particular restriction went into effect in Sept., 1942.  When these remaining frames were used up the holes disappeared on subsequent bikes.
> 
> ...



And if I'm reading this right, chrome was restricted but nickel may not have been? I hadn't considered that!


----------



## HUFFMANBILL (Aug 31, 2020)

Oilit, 
Thanks for your last post as it  pointed out an error in my post regarding nickel plating, which I have corrected in my post.  Nickel plating was restricted in bikes during the war. It was prohibited along with Chromium plating on handlebars, tire rims, mud-guards, etc. At this time in 1942 nickel plated parts that showed up on bicycles were limited to stocks already on hand that were produced prior to April of that year. Sorry, being a senior I guess my old brain had a senior moment.  Thanks again.

Regards,
Bill


----------



## Oilit (Aug 31, 2020)

Bill, I appreciate the information. A few errors are to be expected, that's why we have to double-check sometimes. Joel (Oilit)


----------

