# What do we have here?



## szathmarig (Aug 21, 2017)

Colson, or CWC?
I know the chain ring is CWC, but what is the rest?


----------



## fordmike65 (Aug 21, 2017)

CWC


----------



## rustjunkie (Aug 21, 2017)

Seat post clamp, head tube joints, shape of seat stays are CWC identifiers


----------



## TieDye (Oct 11, 2017)

rustjunkie said:


> Seat post clamp, head tube joints, shape of seat stays are CWC identifiers
> 
> View attachment 664158 View attachment 664159 View attachment 664160



This is the bike my husband bought.  It is a 37 CWC Roadmaster  with an incorrect front fender. I just bought the right one off a Cabe member last night. The truss rod holder is also missing for the neck stem. The head badge is Roadmaster. Serial number was found and is D34479. Its a 1937 CWC Roadmaster Roadster that needs a few things and a lot of work.


----------



## CWCMAN (Oct 12, 2017)

"D" indicates 38-39
looks like a hang tank frame to me.

The blue/red bike below is my original paint example. The cream/blue one I recently sold. Both are "D" serial.

It's an uncommon bike with few examples known to me. Finding the tank is going to be difficult.

Whats up with the duel stamping on that bottom bracket  Very strange. Is that the same bike on the first post?


----------



## TieDye (Oct 12, 2017)

CWCMAN said:


> "D" indicates 38-39
> looks like a hang tank frame to me.
> 
> The blue/red bike below is my original paint example. The cream/blue one I recently sold. Both are "D" serial.
> ...



A hanging tank will not fit this frame. The bars are too close together. Why means it's an early 37. Late 37 is when the hanging tanks fit. The bike is the same bike. The little H and number is someone's drivers license or the county or state's registration number. The hub dates it March of 1937. As I said, early 37 before the tanks fit. They had 3 versions of the same frame. They began producing the Roadsters in September 1935. Those early ones had the narrowest frame spacing, then the 2nd version, which is what ours has. Yours, because a tank even fits between the bars is a late 1937.


----------



## CWCMAN (Oct 13, 2017)

I think your assumption is incorrect. Your early vs late theory is wrong.

You have a "D" serial bike. Your bike is not a 1937 based on the serial dating chart. 

Where is your information coming from?

The bike above is a hang tank style frame and not the traditional roadster style.

Have you tried fitting a CWC hang tank on that frame ? The CWC tank is NOT the same tank as the hang tank used on Snyder built bikes. The two are often confused. A side by side comparison of the tanks will clearly show the difference. They are not interchangeable.

The Snyder tank is more common, the CWC tank is not common at all. In my thirty years of collecting bikes, I've known of less then ten CWC hang tank bikes. In fact, the catalog offerings do not even include this model or even make mention of it.

The CWC built Wards Hawthorne Comet is the only catalog offering of this model bike that I am aware of. Does anyone have proof otherwise?


----------



## TieDye (Oct 13, 2017)

CWCMAN said:


> I think your assumption is incorrect. Your early vs late theory is wrong.
> 
> You have a "D" serial bike. Your bike is not a 1937 based on the serial dating chart.
> 
> ...




I am basing my comments on information found here on the CABE and in a Roadmaster book.  I will try to find that post from the CABEand put the link here later.  Both your bikes above have a carrier and the Roadmaster Roadster did not come with racks.  See the black and white picture of a boy on a 1935 early 36 Roadmaster Roadster.  Roadmaster started producing bikes in September of 1935. The earliest ones had the very small paisley in the chain ring. The model number was 022S. In 1936 they had the double paisley chain rings with a bigger paisley than the little one on the 35 and early 36. I am attaching a black and white catalog page from early 1936. Also see the color catalog pages from 1937 for the model 0226 and 0226S.  Look closely at the rear fender reflector housing differences, and the handlebar differences, lack of carrier racks, and especially the lack of a hanging tank etc.  Then look at the page for 1938 with the model 226, in which the bars are completely different and house the style of tank that is on our 1952 and 1953.  You said both of yours are D serial numbers.  Our first number is a 3, I bet yours are both in the 8 to 9 range.


----------



## TieDye (Oct 13, 2017)

CWCMAN said:


> I think your assumption is incorrect. Your early vs late theory is wrong.
> 
> You have a "D" serial bike. Your bike is not a 1937 based on the serial dating chart.
> 
> ...



See my pictures posted above.


----------



## CWCMAN (Oct 13, 2017)

TieDye,
I am aware of the information above regarding when CWC started producing bicycles, how many were produced that year Etc, Etc, Etc. However, you are totally confusing two different models and some of the information you posted above is incorrect.

Lets start from the beginning.

The small paisley chain ring was the first style used from the beginning of production through 1936. In 1937 the larger paisley chain ring was introduced. Also, all the 1936 model bicycles used triple step rims.

The bike posted above by szathmarig is a hang tank frame and I am assuming it is the same bike that you now own and posted a picture of the serial number?????

The serial number that you posted is a "D" which based on the CWC dating chart is a 1938-39.

The bike on post one is not a roadster style frame, plain and simple.

And for your information, some roadsters did come with rear racks as early as 1936 (see model 0526)

We are talking pre war CWC bicycles here and not post war since your mentioning your 52 and 53. Those bikes are not part of this discussion but rather the bicycle that is on post one.

Regarding the catalog pictures you posted above as comparison reference. With exception of models 126, 226, and 726, the rest of the bikes are "Roadster" bicycles. The bike in post one IS NOT A ROADSTER. Apples and oranges.

As far as the serial numbers on my blue/red hang tank and my former cream/blue, your are wrong again. D20005 and D15615, both built earlier then yours. Check Mate.....

Post a picture of your entire bicycle with serial D34479


----------



## CWCMAN (Oct 13, 2017)

All the bikes below are Roadsters


----------



## CWCMAN (Oct 13, 2017)

*Not a Roadster*


----------



## TieDye (Oct 14, 2017)

See corrected post.

View attachment 692110


----------



## TieDye (Oct 14, 2017)

CWCMAN said:


> *Not a Roadster*
> 
> View attachment 691672



This is the bike we own serial number D34479.  It is badged a Roadmaster and is definitely prewar CWC.  Yes, the wrong fender is on the front, but we have the correct one coming with the flat braces. The 3 stepped front rim is original, and the rear is not as far as we know.  It was badly repainted. If this is not a Roadmaster Roadster, then what is it? It does look like the 1939 model 0226-S.  Is that what you think it is?  We were told it was a Roadster when I asked here before we bought it.  I did find this model in the catalog. CWCMan, do you think we have this model here?:


----------



## TieDye (Oct 14, 2017)

Oh, and there are wrong size tires on this bike in the picture.  They are not 2.125 here.


----------



## CWCMAN (Oct 14, 2017)

TieDye,
I think I already told you what model is it on post #5. I also included pictures of my bikes as reference of what yours should look like.

You have a hang tank frame (missing the tank and a few other parts of course). Your bike is not a roadster. The roadsters top and lower bars are closer together as in the pictures that I provided and the catalog pictures that you posted as well. 

As I mentioned before, this model bicycle does not appear on any catalog that I am aware of. I am not sure why that is. 

CWC also built this same style bike for Montgomery Wards which is known as the Hawthorne Comet. This bike is offered in their catalog but not Roadmaster.

Chain guard, tires, stem, seat and as you mentioned, front fender are not original to the bike. I bet that the rear wheel is the original one and not the triple step front.

Strut holder? not sure what you are referring to but what you have looks correct to me. It's hard to tell from the picture but the bars may be correct ?

This model bicycle is pretty rare in terms of number. The tank will be the hardest part to locate.

I've owned three of this same model bike. My current is badged Elite, the cream/blue is badged Roadmaster and the other was badged SPEED.

All the others that I am aware of are badged differently, Cadillac, Aero Flyer ETC. I have not seen many that were badged as Roadmaster.

I've owned my blue/red bike for over 30 years. Many bikes have come and gone but this one will remain in my collection.

These prewar CWC bikes just float my boat.  A few more examples below. I'll have to dig for the other pics.

Good luck with your bike.


----------



## CWCMAN (Oct 14, 2017)

It's also possible that your bike is a tank less model ?

Your bike looks like a re paint so I'm not sure??
Below is the wards Hawthorne offering of this same frame made by CWC.


----------



## CWCMAN (Oct 14, 2017)

TieDye,
Since you are missing a few parts, you can build this bike as model 226S or deluxe it up with the other parts. That is the rout I'd go.

Although it's the same frame. Your bike is not a Hawthorne Comet. The Hawthorne's have a few different parts that are not like the Roadmaster. I just included it for reference. 

Neat little bike for sure.


----------



## TieDye (Oct 14, 2017)

CWCMAN said:


> TieDye,
> I think I already told you what model is it on post #5. I also included pictures of my bikes as reference of what yours should look like.
> 
> You have a hang tank frame (missing the tank and a few other parts of course). Your bike is not a roadster. The roadsters top and lower bars are closer together as in the pictures that I provided and the catalog pictures that you posted as well.
> ...



Yup, the chainguard, seat are not right.  The stem we weren't sure but felt most likely it's not right. (So if someone has one, let me know) I meant truss rod holder, so I used the wrong word there, but ours doesn't have one and I think if it's a 39 that would not have one, right? My hubby will be happy to put the correct front fender on it because the one that's on it isn't right at all.  He doesn't really care if he finds a tank for it.  He likes how it looks without one.  We got the bike cheap, and he loves his Roadmasters, so this one will be enjoyed, and that's what counts.  He isn't trying to have a show bike.  He has this one that I guess we will call a 1939, and a 1946-7, a 1952, and a 1953--all Roadmasters.  I have a 1950-51 ladies Roadmaster too.  I love it.  It rides the best of all I have.  Thanks for your help.  I do appreciate it.


----------



## TieDye (Oct 14, 2017)

CWCMAN said:


> It's also possible that your bike is a tank less model ?
> 
> Your bike looks like a re paint so I'm not sure??
> Below is the wards Hawthorne offering of this same frame made by CWC.
> View attachment 692250 View attachment 692251



Nice bike.  Ours is Roadmaster badged.  And, yes, ours was badly repainted.  It was originally dark blue and white or cream.


----------



## buickmike (Oct 14, 2017)

My friend offered this   bike to me months ago he was told it was a rainbow? I might call him.But only interested in wheels at this point. Wish I had more to add to this thread. Maybe the rims are orig equip for36?


----------



## TieDye (Oct 14, 2017)

buickmike said:


> My friend offered this   bike to me months ago he was told it was a rainbow? I might call him.But only interested in wheels at this point. Wish I had more to add to this thread. Maybe the rims are orig equip for36?
> 
> View attachment 692254



I was told by a bike shop owner that the triple steps were found on 1936's.  CWCMan also said that.  We have one on this bike.  We'd like a rim to match the rear one I guess.  If you want a triple step, maybe we could do a swap?


----------



## buickmike (Oct 14, 2017)

I haven't talked to him for at least 4 months.And then the last bike he sold me he wanted to buy it back(never a good sign)   I'll just stay with my double drops. I. got  .  a bunch of them laced up and ready to go


----------

