# Ugliest Balloon Bicycle Ever...



## Classicriders (Feb 11, 2009)

My vote is the Shelby 52A.  To me, it is the ugliest balloon bike design ever.


----------



## Flat Tire (Feb 11, 2009)

Well its funny you shoud mention that, I had a chance to buy one of those a few years ago, missing the tank. When I went to look at it I thought the same thing, not that the whole bike is ugly but I told the guy I couldnt stand those ugly springers, he looked at me like I was nuts:eek: Oh well, to each his own........


----------



## militarymonark (Feb 11, 2009)

I love those so if you have one I'll take it


----------



## HIGGINSFOREVER (Feb 11, 2009)

You want a pretty $100.00 bill for it.Then you will have something pretty to look at.


----------



## Adamtinkerer (Feb 17, 2009)

The only ugly balloon tire bike is the one somebody won't sell you because it has "sentimental value", but that doesn't stop them from leaving it out in the weather to rust to oblivion! ~Adam


----------



## Parker (Feb 18, 2009)

It's not ugly, it's eccentric.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Feb 18, 2009)

for me it has to be a ladies Colson Clipper! looks like the titanic sinking


----------



## Monark52 (Feb 18, 2009)

*X-53...woof*

I`d have to say the western flyer x53 is probably the worst.


----------



## old hotrod (Feb 18, 2009)

I vote for the Elgin "Victory" bikes. Not the bikes as much as the paint jobs. Some of the color schemes were god-awful like purple and tan. Painted emblems, etc..and don't slam me because I know there was a war going on but...


----------



## partsguy (Feb 18, 2009)

How about some pics of these "ugly ducklings"? hmm?

I however have yet to see an ugly classic car, truck, or bicycle for that matter.  I think those new Magnas and Mongooses and Nexts are ugly, even though they aren't balloon tire bikes.


----------



## Strings-n-Spokes (Feb 19, 2009)

*U-g-l-y*

and you ain't got no alibi !
you're ugly
you're ugly
uuuuuug-ly !!

While I disagree with Dave on the Victory Bikes,  I am partial to the painted Emblems and the fact that they must have had the girls ie. Rosie the Riveter and Penny the Painter come up with those color schemes.  Its like a hot girl with too much makeup, she's still pretty hot!  I mean really dude did you even bother to check out her ass?:eek:  

Scott however was right on the money.   I think any Clipper is pretty hard on the eyes.

There was another bike that I can't think of right now that is pretty bad,  I'll have to write it down when I remember.  I hope I don't get in trouble for typing "ass"  Please don't kick me off the CABE!!


----------



## 37fleetwood (Feb 19, 2009)

Strings-n-Spokes said:


> I hope I don't get in trouble for typing "ass"



especially since you did it twice!:eek:
here's a photo of a boys Clipper from the galleries on the CABE. the boys isn't as bad as the girls because the girls frame makes the boat look like it's sinking.


----------



## hudman (Feb 20, 2009)

*ugly bikes?*

Im not a collector, or am I ?  but if its different than its great...there are far more UGLY (in character) people in this world than there are Ugly bikes...


----------



## 37fleetwood (Feb 20, 2009)

hudman said:


> Im not a collector, or am I ?  but if its different than its great...there are far more UGLY (in character) people in this world than there are Ugly bikes...



agreed!!! I've dated most of them!:eek:


----------



## cyclingday (Feb 21, 2009)

For me, The ugliest balloon tire bike has got to be the Shelby Airflow.
 Check out ebay #160316685489 I mean that bike is hideous! The design team must of had a real good laugh over that one.


----------



## bricycle (Apr 26, 2011)

...I thought about this long and hard, and come up with any bike that has a "Half a Tank" (slim tank). I mean, it should have a full size tank or not at all!
Just some one's idea of saving money, skimping on a full tank!!! It's like making an ice cream carton smaller.... why in the h-e double hocky stick would someone want a smaller carton? The object is to pig out on ice cream not scrimp on it!!!!!  Duh...


----------



## PCHiggin (Apr 27, 2011)

The Shelby Airflow hands down. It was was way way overdone,I'd rather ride a Donold Duck bike.


Pat


----------



## 4WHLDRFTN (Apr 27, 2011)

Monark52 said:


> I`d have to say the western flyer x53 is probably the worst.




here's a pic of an X-53, OBVIOUSLY YOU GOT MIXED UP WITH SOMETHING ELSE........


----------



## TheSaint (Apr 27, 2011)

Hi,
I never saw this thread but would like to say most people have a rather subjective opinion of what makes our bicycles look great or not. 
I am amazed how people in our hobby give such little thought in "actually" defining what they like or not like in a bicycle.
It's like for example, when you learn about Picasso, you learn about different art styles, genres, history before you can really make an objective and educated opinion of his work. Most of the time, people are not looking at a larger perspective of design, history and objectivity when looking at our Classic American Bicycles. 

I would welcome everyone to stop to think about some of these bicycles we feel so strongly about IN TERMS of design aesthetics, ergonomics, color, styling, and more. 
Then try to focus on how an industrial designer from back in the day would be influenced and motivated by the "THEN" current examples of technology, art, trends and other industrial designs, such as cars, aircraft, and other products. 

What we have is an incredible period of our own, "American Classic Bicycles" , that transcended and incorporated many elements of our country's rich historical perspective of automobile, machine age, streamline, art deco, modernist design periods.

What I am saying is, please open your eyes to the numerous attributes of what makes some of our amazing examples of Prewar and Postwar bicycles work so nicely visually, and not just a "subjective" gut feeling of "I like that or I don"t."

It takes effort and time to "LEARN TO SEE" objectively, then we might have a worthwhile conversation of what makes our bicycles so special.

regards,
theSaint


----------



## scrubbinrims (Apr 27, 2011)

Well said and I agree to the above, even if I had to read it a few times to sink in .

Personally, I don't think any bikes are ugly, just that some are somewhat dull in comparion, having less inspiration or utilitarian purpose.

I have about a couple dozen bicycles, but only one that I spent the money on to have professionally restored, and that is my Shelby 52A...so no, I disagree that the airflows of this period are ugly, but to each their own.
In fact, I love the springer which reminds me of a bee stinger, not so much of Jimmy Durante's nose.

Chris


----------



## carlalotta (Apr 27, 2011)

I think the Colson Clipper is perhaps one of the ugliest/strangest looking bicycles that I have seen. The design and styling are just bizarre. That being said, I own one and I love it for that very reason. I know that its not for everyone but it is for me haha I also like Airflows (they have been mentioned as an "ugliest" in this thread as well) and drive a '59 Cadillac so perhaps my taste is questionable and I just enjoy over-the-top and flamboyant styling? lol In the end, to each his own.....


----------



## militarymonark (Apr 27, 2011)

I dont like the schwinn phantom I think its hideous


----------



## Talewinds (Apr 27, 2011)

To each their own right? I don't think I that I can come up with a single ballooner that I couldn't love.

 Now BMX bikes and "muscle bikes" or whatever they're called, on the other hand, I could make some of those fans really happy if I had a barn full of'em because I'd sell them all.

 The Bowden Spacelander maybe? True, it was an incredible design study, but it was a bike that should have never been.


----------



## OldRider (Apr 27, 2011)

I borrowed these pictures from RRB.........I think this qualifies as a mutt, but still lovable as all vintage bikes are. I think the fellow that designed this Sirius Cycle was smoking something funny, but at least it stands out in the crowd and its unique!


----------



## militarymonark (Apr 27, 2011)

look at that springer lol


----------



## elginkid (Apr 28, 2011)

I dislike most postwar bicycles, the earlier bicycles had more pleasing streamlining.  After the war, they were toys, rather than works of art.  My list of postwar exceptions Schwinn B6's, WF X-53, Columbia Firebolt, and the late Roadmaster Luxury Liners. (1957ish).


----------



## bairdco (Apr 28, 2011)

TheSaint said:


> Hi,
> I never saw this thread but would like to say most people have a rather subjective opinion of what makes our bicycles look great or not.
> I am amazed how people in our hobby give such little thought in "actually" defining what they like or not like in a bicycle.
> It's like for example, when you learn about Picasso, you learn about different art styles, genres, history before you can really make an objective and educated opinion of his work. Most of the time, people are not looking at a larger perspective of design, history and objectivity when looking at our Classic American Bicycles.
> ...




i completely disagree with everything you typed about "learning to see" something before judging it. nobody needs an education in art, technique, design, mechanics, or anything else to be able to look at something and think, "i don't like that."

i can look at a Picasso, even after studying the man's life and his art, and still think, "wow, that looks like crap. i can't believe people pay millions of dollars for pictures of chicks with their eyeballs in the wrong place..."

i believe beauty, and ugliness, should always be a gut reaction.

 if something jumps out at you the minute you see it, you should stick with those feelings, not repress them while you analyze all the details of it. seems to me, even if you study every detail and learn to appreciate something your gut tells you is ugly, you're still gonna think it's ugly, no matter how you justify it's merits.

i'm not trying to argue with you, just offering an opposing point of view.

and to get back on topic, i think the Schwinn Cantilever Frame and all of it's thousands of copys is the ugliest bike design ever.


----------



## TheSaint (Apr 28, 2011)

Mr. Bairdco,

I'll bite and welcome the rhetorical reply....

Yes, a lot of people will never and don't wish to understand Picasso and go with their gut reaction and be fine with it. 

However some will welcome the challenge of understanding and learning more and the increased enjoyment of Picasso and our bicycles. 

Its is totally acceptable to go with your first instinct when looking at what you don't like or like. Your first impression or "feeling" can be the make or break moment in liking something. It is a simple, understandable with pure instant gratification and
can be our strongest sense. 

However it is using, educating and developing your sense of "seeing" by discerning
what makes a bike, a product or a Picasso work. 
I am sure you have a aesthetic opinion and developed "seeing" skills by knowing what, say, a 67' Camaro looks like for most of your life and then now seeing a new RetroModern Camaro, you probably have reasons more than just the gut feeling whether you like the new one or not. 

It isn't for everyone to try to understand our bikes from a design and aesthetic 
perspective.

For some, if you wish to create or appreciate a new car design, a new artwork, or a something beautiful in life, at a deeper level, it can help to understand what you see.

What I was hoping for, is that we can all see our bicycles in another light and enjoy them even more by defining what we see and enjoy about our bicycles.

"we see in the light of accumulated experiences,
stored information, private interests and entrenched beliefs."
George Nelson 1908-1986

regards,
theSaint


----------



## cyclonecoaster.com (Apr 28, 2011)

*WOW -- a very "wordy" ugly bicycle discussion -- LOL*

*My problem is I like all bicycles for many different reasons *-- Some I have & some I want - others not so much -- I like some because they were the first of their kind & revolutionary & a part of history & progress - but I don't think I would ever buy one -- others for design elements but may ride like crap in my opinion & some for the pure uniqueness or even functionality of them -- there is really no rhyme or reason - some bicycles just look great - while other might ride great but look bad -- my personal taste is always growing it seems - as an example I went to a local Mountain Bike shop here in SoCal yesterday to help a buddy set up a 26 BMX rider with a nice set of spokes & looking around the shop I realized WOW I have a problem -- there are some KILLER new bicycles around & that some of the new technology was crazy & expensive 29er MTB with carbon fiber - even the rims - super light - bladed spokes - a 9K price tag -- WOW -- very cool stuff -- may not my bag & not for me right now -- but I might get on one when I have a chance  - stranger things have happened -- As I get deeper in the hobby I look at everything differently from bicycles to what I see around me -- My mind is always open & what I like - someone else might not & I don't care since it is my own opinion -- end of the day I am still happy to be riding whatever I am riding that day -- but that is what makes everyone & everything unique right -- thanks for reading my 2 cents -- ride vintage --* for the local CA crowd I will enjoying the CYCLONE COASTER Sunday ride this Sunday May 1st with 100+ other locals on their favorite machines -- come on out ALL RIDERS WELCOME -- we'll see you there*


----------



## RMS37 (Apr 28, 2011)

I thought I’d take a short break from telling people what is “correct” and what it is “worth” to weigh in here. After all, our hobby is really just a front for us to get to know each other well enough to argue about the future outcomes of eBay auctions and the broader Meaning of Life. 

In the spirit of the heading for this thread, “The Ugliest Balloon Bicycle Ever.” I have to note that declaring anything ugly is never anything more than a subjective opinion, whether the pronouncement is an immediate visceral declaration or the result of a lengthy period of comparison and contemplation.

I also have to disagree with Mr. Templar if he is suggesting that using his description of “learning to see” will or can produce an objective opinion. An opinion is by nature subjective and while we can objectify our reasons for our opinions, an opinion is where we arrive, if and when we get off of the objective fence and take a personal subjective stand on an issue. 

Further, while a gut-level and off-the-cuff estimation of a design (or potentially a work of art) may seem on the outset to have less analysis, and to some, less validity behind it than a reasoned critique, both are ultimately just one person’s opinion based on reactions caused by the object in comparison with everything known and experienced by that viewer. One makes for a longer plea for our attention but I don’t see either one as carrying more objective weight than the other.

So much for my opinion on opinions….

I do agree that “learning to see” could be a mantra to get up with each morning. There are a lot of things (Schwinns, yes; Vegetables, still no) that I didn’t like for a range of reasons earlier in my life that I have come to enjoy over time as my experiences have broadened.

Classic Bicycles carry a lot of history with them for us to divine. As works of industrial art, it has to be assumed that the designers (or at least the company managers and corporate accountants) hoped that their individual designs would be eye-catching in the good way and translate to high sales. I always find it interesting to read a well-written critique that explores the qualities of a specific design and offers a broadened historic perspective of how the writer perceives the nascence of it. Still, all the conjecture in the world will never get us inside the mind of another person to truly allow us know what they were thinking when they designed that awful Brain-Blister Chainguard for the Shelby 52A. 

But as they say, it’s so bad it’s good.


----------



## Aeropsycho (Apr 28, 2011)

Hear Hear Phil You Rock!

It is amazing that every time I sneak on here for a few minutes there is always someone fighting on here Geeee what a happy hobby this is.....?


----------



## bairdco (Apr 28, 2011)

i understand that you can get a better understanding by looking deeper into something that you may find ugly at first sight, even though i hate the schwinn cantilever design, i do like the way they (used to) weld the frames, and i know it's a quality product (still don't understand why, besides nostalgic reasons, that older schwinns sell for so much, i mean, they only made 50 billion of them. it's not like panther's are rare or anything) but i just don't like them.

i can look at a bike and know withing seconds if i like it or not, and within minutes know if it's well built or not. but knowing it's well built with quality parts doesn't make me change my mind about it's appearance.

as far as studying a bicycle and the sum of it's parts, i could go deep and say i don't like the kinked-angle of the middle bar on Monarks, or the way the seat stays connect near the seat tube on an old Columbia, and that goofy downtube on an Elgin. the forks on an old Spaceliner are awesome, while a beehive springer just looks, i dunno, weird.

and the Evans-Colsons, with all their squared off angles are just atrocious. 

but that's just my opinion, and the only purpose a thread like this serves is entertainment. and picasso was a good painter. but i think Salvador Dali could whoop his a$$...

(edit) i ain't fighting, just having an opposing point of view. we all can't agree on everything. then there would be no ugliness or beauty. it'd all be the same.


----------



## kcrowe (Apr 28, 2011)

*beauty is in the eye of the beholder....*

Kind of a fun thread....actually I haven't seen too many classic bikes I thought were ugly.  Just some I like better than others.  Despite the growing unpopular vote, I LOVE the X-53.  But I hate the PT cruiser and I'm sure some of you on here drive one.  My wife and I were once discussing which is better, new mustang or new camaro?  Her response, camaro is better because there's not one on every corner like the mustang.  That may be the reason I prefer the X-53 over a similar year Schwinn.

Now you people better quit calling my bike ugly!


----------



## TheSaint (Apr 28, 2011)

No fighting here, just trying to challenge people in the way we "see" our bikes.

It is tricky to make a simple analogy. 

If you are a GOOD car painter, you see imperfections and cars in a whole different light than that of an average person, if you are Sam Maloof the famous woodworker, you would see wood and sculptural shapes like most people would not, if you are a car designer, you would see the melding of different forms and shapes as you create and make your clay model, if you are Phil Marshall designing posters for the LeMay Bicycle Concours, you would be trying different compositions before achieving the final result, if you are Ansel Adams the landscaper photographer you will be discerning in your methodology,

the common thread here is these people have to "think to see" and have become skilled in seeing...

Like any of those skills those people I just mentioned, they did not do this overnight, it was derived from experience.

I believe liking the bikes for JUST what they are is valid, however if you want to become an outstanding photographer, car painter,
woodworker, car designer, graphic artist you cannot just expect great results from the get go. 

Challenge yourself in thinking and perceptions of what make our bikes so interesting

regards,
Simon Templar


----------



## bricycle (Apr 28, 2011)

bairdco said:


> i completely disagree with everything you typed about "learning to see" something before judging it. nobody needs an education in art, technique, design, mechanics, or anything else to be able to look at something and think, "i don't like that."
> 
> i can look at a Picasso, even after studying the man's life and his art, and still think, "wow, that looks like crap. i can't believe people pay millions of dollars for pictures of chicks with their eyeballs in the wrong place..."
> 
> ...




If I may Quote bairdco:  "pictures of chicks with their eyeballs in the wrong place..."

*Man bairdco...you made me laugh harder and longer than I have in a LONG time. You rock!* bri.


----------



## OldRider (Apr 28, 2011)

We gotta remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder....just like with cars, I am a diehard fanatic about the 64-66 Baracudas, love that big rear (bubble) window, but to the majority of folks they were ugly.


----------



## Talewinds (Apr 28, 2011)

OldRider said:


> We gotta remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder....just like with cars, I am a diehard fanatic about the 64-66 Baracudas, love that big rear (bubble) window, but to the majority of folks they were ugly.




I think those 64-66 Barracudas are really cool. Most other folks don't care for them, and compared to the later Cuda's that's some tough competition. That big rear window is quirky but cool. A high school friend of mine had one, it was already very old (decades) by the time he got it. It had the push-buttons on the dashboard as the gear selector.


----------



## bairdco (Apr 28, 2011)

i knew a guy in school who had one of those. he also had a lot of enemies, 'cause he wasn't the nicest guy around. people used to break that rear window all the time 'cause they knew how expensive they were and how hard to find.

so if any of you barracuda guys are wondering why there's no more rear windows for these things, it's all that guy's fault.


----------



## slick (Apr 28, 2011)

bairdco said:


> i knew a guy in school who had one of those. he also had a lot of enemies, 'cause he wasn't the nicest guy around. people used to break that rear window all the time 'cause they knew how expensive they were and how hard to find.
> 
> so if any of you barracuda guys are wondering why there's no more rear windows for these things, it's all that guy's fault.




That right there is funny!!! I actually love those cuda's too. Had the chance to buy 1 recently and passed on it. I didn't want to get attached to it or it would have been another "keeper" and I have enough of those already!


----------



## 37fleetwood (Apr 28, 2011)

I've said it before but maybe pictures will say more than words...
there is no sophistry that can save this bike from it's own ugliness.


----------



## chitown (Apr 28, 2011)

*Aesthetics*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics

This thread got me thinking about aesthetics and beauty in general. Why are we attracted to beauty and repulsed by ugliness? What is ugly? What is beauty? Ahhh the wonders of man.

Any college students out there? I smell a thesis brewing.

Back to the specific topic: Not a big fan of curves for curves sake bars of the Airflows... too much flow I guess. But then again I have pictures of myself with a mullet that seemed like a good idea at the time... but you won't see me uploading those to facebook anytime soon. Times change as do aesthetics. So I'll be looking to get one of those airflows in another 20 years I figure.


Without creativity there would be no innovations and we would all look and talk the same. So now I like ugly even more than before!

Just don't get me started on those boneshakers... what was that guy thinking. Talk about ugly!!!


----------



## rustyspoke66 (Apr 28, 2011)

I just wanted to add that I don't think the Shelby airflow is all that out there for it's time. If you look up what was popular in science fiction in the 30's you would find shows like Flash Gordon, Buck Rogers and several others which had been great prime time radio shows and some very popular comic books. These shows had many listeners and it would be my guess that they were banking on what they thought the public would want. In this day and age my opinion is that the Shelby airflow is definitely one of the more creative bikes out there. Of course I just like old cool bikes and the history behind them. JT


----------



## PCHiggin (Apr 29, 2011)

I forgot about my own ugly duckling,a stripped '52 Hornet with red Grand Tycoons. My girlfriend loves it, my neighbors and kids think its ugly,I'm more with them but love riding it the same. It's together and on the road now,I don't have a current pic.

Pat


----------



## cyclonecoaster.com (Apr 29, 2011)

Why doesn't everyone bring their ugliest bicycle to the CYCLONE COASTER Sunday ride THIS Sunday May 1st -- ride vintage -- ALL RIDERS & UGLY BICYCLES WELCOME --


----------



## slick (Apr 29, 2011)

Can't do the ride this time guys. I promised my son i'd take him to the Pacific Coast Dream Machines show in Half Moon Bay. Classic cars, farm equipment, WW2 fighter planes flying over head, live music and beer, monster trucks and dirt bikes. O MY!! Ok maybe I like the show a little too!


----------



## ramito (Apr 29, 2011)

For me is beautiful,,, and that is its value,,,


----------



## cyclonecoaster.com (Apr 29, 2011)

*Well see you soon then slick*

Have fun at the show -- family first -- see you soon


----------



## RMS37 (Apr 29, 2011)

*Another Accident Waiting to Happen?*


----------



## Luckykat32 (Apr 29, 2011)

I like Scotts picture of the titanic & the clipper...I was literally laughing out loud...thats pretty good!  Although I don't think the clipper is an ugly bike.

I do agree w/ the other people that the X53 is pretty much hideous...all sorts of weird angles on that tank...not for me.  Just like most post-55 bikes...not for me.

Then again, most of you might hate me for my other idea:  I think the Elgin Bluebird (although not the absolute ugliest), is definately not an attractive bike)

And, it took awhile to grow on me, but I like the uniqueness of the 39 Alexander Rocket bike (seen below)...does anyone have one they want to sell?


----------



## Larmo63 (Apr 29, 2011)

I hate to be the fly in the ointment, but I LIKE the Colson girl's bike BECAUSE it is weird. I like the first bike in the thread too, the Shelby. I just hate crappy, new, and cheap bikes. The newer poorly made 50's and 60's "modern" bicycles may look cool, but they don't ride well and they fell apart quickly. I remember. Been there, done that. Nowadays they are rare and supposedly valuable, partly because they fell apart as you rode them!


----------



## Larmo63 (Apr 29, 2011)

No ugly riders allowed???







cyclonecoaster.com said:


> Why doesn't everyone bring their ugliest bicycle to the CYCLONE COASTER Sunday ride THIS Sunday May 1st -- ride vintage -- ALL RIDERS & UGLY BICYCLES WELCOME --


----------



## slick (Apr 29, 2011)

Lol!!! I"m out!!!


----------



## Larmo63 (Apr 30, 2011)

Oh, the humanity!!!!!!!!


----------



## Luckykat32 (May 26, 2011)

The ugliest has to be the Bowden Spacelander...that thing is all kinds of wrong!


----------

