# Jeweled tank Autocycle Question



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 9, 2021)

I don't have another to compare, and most photos don't show them from the top. Are the Jeweled reflectors in the early straight bar tank in line with each other (front to back), or is one further forward than the other ?

Thanks


----------



## 1817cent (Dec 9, 2021)

Mine looks to be even on this bike.


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 9, 2021)

Yep straight across. V/r Shawn


----------



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 9, 2021)

Thank you for the quick response.
This is why I asked. My Autocycle tank Jewels are staggered, the right side is forward of the left. Also on my example they are surface mounted, not inset.
Being that my bike has not been restored, and is the only factory all-chrome version I have seen, leads me to believe this may be a prototype of this model.(?)


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 9, 2021)

That isn’t a real jewel tank and I don’t think that is factory. V/r Shawn


----------



## Kickstand3 (Dec 9, 2021)

Freqman1 said:


> That isn’t a real jewel tank and I don’t think that is factory. V/r Shawn



What ever that thing is bad ass


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 9, 2021)

Looks to me like a custom with some goodies. Those are reflectors attached to a tank. A real jewel tank has cutouts for the glass jewels to set in. I’d be interested to see the serial number on this bike. V/r Shawn


----------



## 1817cent (Dec 9, 2021)

Whatever that bike is, I LIKE IT!!  A unique bike for sure.


----------



## ABC Services (Dec 9, 2021)

I'm guessing the guy who owned this, owned a chrome shop.


----------



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 9, 2021)

ABC Services said:


> I'm guessing the guy who owned this, owned a chrome shop.



Yes, he did. His name was Mr. Schwinn
This is original Schwinn chrome since new. I got it from the grandson of the owner of an old Schwinn shop in Chicago.
I have had this apart and there is no wear on anything. Even the grease smells like the 30's The story was It has "been stored, since new, in grandpa's collection".
The seller had no more information. I have had it for decades .
I have not seen this exact type tank, with or without Jewels, I believe the Chainguard was a period upgrade, I have seen a couple of them.


----------



## Rust_Trader (Dec 9, 2021)

I’ve seen several original schwinns with that Chainguard, I have one.  Let’s see the inside of the tank. Does it have the cutouts or is it a motorbike tank with added reflectors. 









						Sold - FS Rare Prewar Schwinn Chrome Fenders | Archive (sold)
					

Pretty nice rarely found Schwinn Chrome fenders. These are for the front springer fork. Pretty clean with lots of chrome. They do show age and nice patina. Also comes with the big feather chainguard also in nice chrome. This chainguard is seen usually with aluminum fenders.  sold as a set $389...




					thecabe.com


----------



## mrg (Dec 9, 2021)

Ok, great looking bike but so many questions, what yr is the bike ( ser # )?, what badge?, tall frame, is the reflector in the door on the non louvered tank?, no horn?, post war large endcap AS pedals?, rubber/leather guard mount shim?, non deluxe Wald stem seems odd, what was added later, never seen support/parade bars added at factory ( kinda like admitting your fork/ aren't strong enough ) and who knows about the siren.


----------



## Balloontyre (Dec 10, 2021)

What year did the autocycle feature a straight down tube?


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 10, 2021)

Yea too much there that doesn’t add up. I don’t think Schwinn would have hung some reflectors on a tank and called it a day. The jewel tank was introduced in ‘36 and my suspicions are this is a later bike. Can you post the serial number? V/r Shawn


----------



## hzqw2l (Dec 10, 2021)

Cool bike. 
Who knows... Could be a one off display bike.

I had a factory all chrome post war CW Road Master once.

Although CW did offer a Chrome Master pre war there wasn't  any catalog offerings after WWII.

Interesting  for sure.


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 10, 2021)

It may have been a dealership display bike that they put together. Like Mark points out a number of different parts and from different years. If this was supposed to be a top end bike then why the 1" drive? Chromed out BC? I'm still saying not a factory bike. V/r Shawn


----------



## onecatahula (Dec 10, 2021)

Balloontyre said:


> What year did the autocycle feature a straight down tube?



Never


----------



## hzqw2l (Dec 10, 2021)

Freqman1 said:


> It may have been a dealership display bike that they put together. Like Mark points out a number of different parts and from different years. If this was supposed to be a top end bike then why the 1" drive? Chromed out BC? I'm still saying not a factory bike. V/r Shawn



Probably a Mead display bike...lol


----------



## 1motime (Dec 10, 2021)

Beautiful bike and presentation. Plating looks to be too fresh and even. No natural aging anywhere in those photos. Even if someone polished it every day for decades it wouldn't survive like that. Pretty cool  😎   Blinding in the sun though!


----------



## cyclingday (Dec 10, 2021)

Yeah, and Jussie Smollett got mugged by a couple or rabid MAGA supporters.

You can believe what ever you want to believe, but the TRUTH does not LIE!

Until you can prove that to be a factory built production bike without a shadow of a doubt, it’s obviously someone’s idea of a fantasy build.

Mish/Mash Motorbike with custom embellishments.
Cool bike none the less, but I’d ease up on the story you got when you bought it.
It’s too easy to blow holes through that one.😆


----------



## Obi-Wan Schwinnobi (Dec 10, 2021)

Lol 


onecatahula said:


> Never



😂 yup


----------



## Obi-Wan Schwinnobi (Dec 10, 2021)

cyclingday said:


> Yeah, and Jussie Smollett got mugged by a couple or rabid MAGA supporters.
> 
> You can believe what ever you want to believe, but the TRUTH does not LIE!
> 
> ...



And the election was “stolen” if you want to go that route Marty..


----------



## cyclingday (Dec 10, 2021)

I never said, the election was stolen.
But, what are you going to believe, your own eyes, or what fanciful story someone is telling you.


----------



## Archie Sturmer (Dec 10, 2021)

cyclingday said:


> Motorbike with custom *embellishments*.
> Cool bike none the less, but I’d ease up on the *story* you got when you bought it.



Perhaps the seller also embellished a story behind the bicycle’s history;
(but why would a *seller* do that?).

I am skeptical about the story, because it fails to ever fully disclose the part about the bicycle twice taken out of storage, only for “grandma to ride to church on Sundays”.

I would do the simple math on grandpa’s age and would like to see some of the other bikes of his collection.

I recommend either leaving the add-on reflectors as-is; or looking inside the tank for any interferences for the drill holes for the reflectors, one might find that one side might be easier to re-drill than the other(?).  When making matching pairs, it is best to measure 4-times, and cut twice.

There are other styles and sizes of reflectors and _escutcheons_ that also might look nicer.


----------



## Balloonoob (Dec 10, 2021)

LOL. How dare you call that a factory schwinn (says the guy who admittedly knows next to nothing about what is factory correct on a schwinn).                      Yeah, and Charlie got molested.


----------



## Obi-Wan Schwinnobi (Dec 10, 2021)

cyclingday said:


> I never said, the election was stolen.
> But, what are you going to believe, your own eyes, or what fanciful story someone is telling you.



I just notice you like to use one side of the coin for your analogies, so I thought I’d just offer up the other side of said coin in comparison..


----------



## cyclingday (Dec 10, 2021)

I think we got the puppet that the people wanted, so my take on the election, is, ok,
Let’s see what this guy can do!
So far, I’m not impressed.
As for the bike in question, it’s pretty obvious that it is a parts built bike.
Whether it was chromed and built at the factory, still remains to be seen.
Until that proof can be presented, I’ll remain skeptical.


----------



## Maskadeo (Dec 10, 2021)

I knew when I first saw this thread that it would not let me down!


----------



## Mr. Monkeyarms (Dec 10, 2021)

I'm not knowledgeable enough to recognize different era Schwinn parts but feel this is a custom. Schwinn did some off the wall things and think if this is a factory bike it would have been some type of promotion and been in print somewhere. In my mind this would have been Schwinn's answer to the CWC Chrome Master. Purely speculation on my part. If mine I think I'd have to add Schwinn decals to break up all that chrome, maybe a chrome Schwinn chainguard then ride the wheels off of it! Cool bike!! 😎  😎


----------



## kreika (Dec 10, 2021)

Said seller owned a chrome shop. Hmmm, one must ponder. 80 years of collecting dust would equal patina. Even if you wiped it down every day there’d be places you just can’t clean, and aging would build up. I don’t see that anywhere on the bike. I think it’s really cool looking and should be enjoyed as is whatever it is. PS don’t ride it by the ocean! lol


----------



## buickmike (Dec 10, 2021)

Anyone who has ever had a Schwinn would know. The bicycles were held to the highest standards. The fit of its components, The quality of the materials,  A style that speaks for itself.  They just wouldn't put something together lopsided.


----------



## bobcycles (Dec 10, 2021)

Vicious Cycle said:


> Yes, he did. His name was Mr. Schwinn
> This is original Schwinn chrome since new. I got it from the grandson of the owner of an old Schwinn shop in Chicago.
> I have had this apart and there is no wear on anything. Even the grease smells like the 30's The story was It has "been stored, since new, in grandpa's collection".
> The seller had no more information. I have had it for decades .
> I have not seen this exact type tank, with or without Jewels, I believe the Chainguard was a period upgrade, I have seen a couple of them.




Fred R sold the bike some years back...maybe 12 or so not decades, I remember the auction clearly I was living at my
current address...  As for the legitimacy of factory build?  I wouldn't count on that.. There were in fact Jewel tanks
available in 1936, which is what this frame looks like, someone screwed big reflectors on a 35 or 36 motorbike, who 
knows how long ago.  I would refrain from calling this a stock bike, or factory chromed...  Any of what you see here
could have happened in the 40s, 50's or who knows when.  Neat old piece for sure.... but doubtfully any sort of 
prototype.


----------



## Handle Bar Hoarder (Dec 10, 2021)

i 


Vicious Cycle said:


> Yes, he did. His name was Mr. Schwinn
> This is original Schwinn chrome since new. I got it from the grandson of the owner of an old Schwinn shop in Chicago.
> I have had this apart and there is no wear on anything. Even the grease smells like the 30's The story was It has "been stored, since new, in grandpa's collection".
> The seller had no more information. I have had it for decades .
> I have not seen this exact type tank, with or without Jewels, I believe the Chainguard was a period upgrade, I have seen a couple of them.



i want to know what the 30 s smell like ?????


----------



## mrg (Dec 10, 2021)

* 


*


----------



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 11, 2021)

Thanks for all the love. I was trying to get some info on a unusual bike and now I am being miss-quoted and worse.
This did come from Fred and that is what he told me aprox. 20 yrs. ago. If he was trying to blow smoke up my A** there would have been more, not less info.
  I never said Schwinn put this out as is, But I will bet my eye teeth (at least one) that this bike was chromed since new. (I have an all chrome '39 Paramount that Richard Schwinn said "was not made" until he learned it was owned by Al Crossley, then he said , yes they did do special bikes for some people. BTW that chrome is also still in stellar condition even though the bike was well used)  I have been working on and collecting Schwinns for 40+ years and they were at the top of the game where chrome is concerned. 
  The crank is dated 1936 and the ser.# is N8651, I think it plausible this could have been a Prototype, Show bike or Mock up. If this was put together from parts it must have been done in the '30's as all the pieces are in near NOS condition.
 Maybe some of you can mince this up for four more pages, all I wanted was information. I did get some in between the insults, thanks.


----------



## OSCAR...N... (Dec 11, 2021)

Vicious Cycle said:


> Thanks for all the love. I was trying to get some info on a unusual bike and now I am being miss-quoted and worse.
> This did come from Fred and that is what he told me aprox. 20 yrs. ago. If he was trying to blow smoke up my A** there would have been more, not less info.
> I never said Schwinn put this out as is, But I will bet my eye teeth (at least one) that this bike was chromed since new. (I have an all chrome '39 Paramount that Richard Schwinn said "was not made" until he learned it was owned by Al Crossley, then he said , yes they did do special bikes for some people. BTW that chrome is also still in stellar condition even though the bike was well used)  I have been working on and collecting Schwinns for 40+ years and they were at the top of the game where chrome is concerned.
> The crank is dated 1936 and the ser.# is N8651, I think it plausible this could have been a Prototype, Show bike or Mock up. If this was put together from parts it must have been done in the '30's as all the pieces are in near NOS condition.
> ...



Well said Sir.!!!..

NOW WITH ALL MY RESPECT TO YOU. 

JUST FORGIVE EVERYONE.!!

ENJOY YOUR BEAUTIFUL BIKE.!!

STAY SAFE WITH FAMILY.!! & FRIENDS.!!

FELIZ NAVIDAD.!!!   AND...

HAPPY HOLIDAYS.!!!


----------



## sarmisluters (Dec 11, 2021)

Vicious Cycle said:


> Thanks for all the love. I was trying to get some info on a unusual bike and now I am being miss-quoted and worse.
> This did come from Fred and that is what he told me aprox. 20 yrs. ago. If he was trying to blow smoke up my A** there would have been more, not less info.
> I never said Schwinn put this out as is, But I will bet my eye teeth (at least one) that this bike was chromed since new. (I have an all chrome '39 Paramount that Richard Schwinn said "was not made" until he learned it was owned by Al Crossley, then he said , yes they did do special bikes for some people. BTW that chrome is also still in stellar condition even though the bike was well used)  I have been working on and collecting Schwinns for 40+ years and they were at the top of the game where chrome is concerned.
> The crank is dated 1936 and the ser.# is N8651, I think it plausible this could have been a Prototype, Show bike or Mock up. If this was put together from parts it must have been done in the '30's as all the pieces are in near NOS condition.
> Maybe some of you can mince this up for four more pages, all I wanted was information. I did get some in between the insults, thanks.






Vicious Cycle said:


> yourself, Prewar Paramounts were chromed ? Prewar Autocycles were found with painted over chrome fenders.  So who is to say this cannot be a Factory Schwinn chrome job  ?   Also remember Marty putting down that Central California motorbike as being unrestorable as original paint ? Then he sucker punched everyone by winning the bid on ebay ?! Ha ha, makes you think eh ?





Vicious Cycle said:


> Thanks for all the love. I was trying to get some info on a unusual bike and now I am being miss-quoted and worse.
> This did come from Fred and that is what he told me aprox. 20 yrs. ago. If he was trying to blow smoke up my A** there would have been more, not less info.
> I never said Schwinn put this out as is, But I will bet my eye teeth (at least one) that this bike was chromed since new. (I have an all chrome '39 Paramount that Richard Schwinn said "was not made" until he learned it was owned by Al Crossley, then he said , yes they did do special bikes for some people. BTW that chrome is also still in stellar condition even though the bike was well used)  I have been working on and collecting Schwinns for 40+ years and they were at the top of the game where chrome is concerned.
> The crank is dated 1936 and the ser.# is N8651, I think it plausible this could have been a Prototype, Show bike or Mock up. If this was put together from parts it must have been done in the '30's as all the pieces are in near NOS condition.
> ...



Don’t listen to the pundits.
Ask yourself, look at the facts,  Prewar Paramounts were chromed, no ? Prewar Autocycles were found with painted over chrome fenders ?  So WHO is to say this cannot be a Factory Schwinn chrome job ?

Be happy with that bike, and the fact you got it from a reputable member of this hobby.  Some people have given up their beloved bikes because of issues with certain members of this hobby. 

Vicious Cycle, thanks for sharing.


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 11, 2021)

Not trying to be confrontational but the Fore brake, stem, and guard were not available in ‘36 and I can’t really make out the pedals. My reading of your post was that this bike came from Schwinn like this which is highly unlikely given the later parts.  V/r Shawn


----------



## sccruiser (Dec 11, 2021)




----------



## Superman1984 (Dec 11, 2021)

Handle Bar Hoarder said:


> i
> 
> i want to know what the 30 s smell like ?????



By Now like raunchy old ass I bet❗
Not even like the Chanel No5 or Liz Claiborne some of those late 40-50's women wear🤔  
Ever smell a moldy car or musty refrigerator? 🤣🤣🤣


----------



## manuel rivera (Dec 12, 2021)

sarmisluters said:


> Don’t listen to the pundits.
> Ask yourself, look at the facts,  Prewar Paramounts were chromed, no ? Prewar Autocycles were found with painted over chrome fenders ?  So WHO is to say this cannot be a Factory Schwinn chrome job ?
> 
> Be happy with that bike, and the fact you got it from a reputable member of this hobby.  Some people have given up their beloved bikes because of issues with certain members of this hobby.
> ...



Well said


----------



## Archie Sturmer (Dec 12, 2021)

If you *don’t* *listen* to the CABE,
then you may be stuck to *ask* *yourself*:

Are the Jeweled reflectors in the tank in line with each other (front to back), or is one further forward than the other ?

You might get the wrong answer that way, but *who* *is* *to* *say* what is crooked. https://ratrodbikes.com/forum/threads/show-me-your-chrome-plated-bike.113912/

https://thecabe.com/forum/threads/chrome-everything.36945/


----------



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 12, 2021)

Freqman1 said:


> Not trying to be confrontational but the Fore brake, stem, and guard were not available in ‘36 and I can’t really make out the pedals. My reading of your post was that this bike came from Schwinn like this which is highly unlikely given the later parts.  V/r Shawn



Thank you for this constructive point. Is there a date code on the fore brakes ?
The only thing I can say, with some certainty, that came from Schwinn is the Chrome, not the whole assembly as shown. 
I would think that Schwinn had a pre-run of the Fore-brake, to test, before it was released to the public, this would be normal.
I know that nothing quite like this was available in '36, that is why I started this thread.


----------



## PlasticNerd (Dec 12, 2021)

Balloontyre said:


> What year did the autocycle feature a straight down tube?



1936 was the first and only year jewel tank Autocycle w a straight down tube, SIRRY MY BAD! It had a curve down tube 😂😂😂


----------



## PlasticNerd (Dec 12, 2021)




----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 12, 2021)

Without provenance, as in the case of your Paramount, or some documentation I don’t think anything can be said with certainty. If this were a ‘36 prototype that would have been about a full year before the brake. I’ve seen the blueprint but don’t remember the date but for sure the tank had the regular jewels and not add-on reflectors. My gut says a dealer did this as a display bike to draw people in. Unless you can document this it will be hard to convince anyone otherwise. It’s a cool bike and you should just enjoy it for what it is. V/r Shawn


----------



## markivpedalpusher (Dec 12, 2021)

PlasticNerd said:


> 1936 was the first and only year jewel tank Autocycle w a straight down tube



If you can find a 36 straight down tube AC you’ve found a unicorn- doesn’t exist…


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 12, 2021)

So just curious what the Schwinn folks think this is? V/r Shawn


----------



## OldSkipTooth (Dec 12, 2021)

Geeez guys, didn't you get the memo? It's a one off Prewar Chrome Deluxe Schwinn Silver King Auto Psycho.


----------



## PlasticNerd (Dec 12, 2021)

markivpedalpusher said:


> If you can find a 36 straight down tube AC you’ve found a unicorn- doesn’t exist…
> 
> 
> markivpedalpusher said:
> ...


----------



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 12, 2021)

Really not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am pretty sure the reflectors were added, but they would be on a prototype or mock-up too.
Before this arrived I was mostly skeptical, when I disassembled it for a good clean and polish I was pleasantly surprised at the lack of any wear on anything.
The bike was never really used, why ?. If it was put together from parts, it was done when new, period correct, parts were available. It is not for sale and I have no reason to guild the lilly. 
 As all the people that could provide provenance are long dead I will just enjoy it as much as any of the other things in my garage that the "experts" say don't exist.


----------



## Archie Sturmer (Dec 12, 2021)

Most appear to now agree that the bicycle is not and never was a prototype. Prototypes are used in development and operational testing; yet it showed no wear.

That was a good test, using the scientific method (apply robust skepticism, perform a test).  And a test with pass-or-fail criteria; i.e., no wear = not a prototype, not used for testing.

I recall a member once misunderstanding the scientific method; he thought that it meant that his initial beliefs were valid (opposite of skepticism), unless proven wrong.

Sometimes I sarcastically yet lightheartedly use the phrase, “maybe it’s a prototype!” to explain some of the the many one-off examples of custom bicycles shown on this site; (usually a frankenbike).

We understand that the fallacy of so-called “never-documented prototypes” is that they cannot be proven (by definition).


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 12, 2021)

Vicious Cycle said:


> Really not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am pretty sure the reflectors were added, but they would be on a prototype or mock-up too.
> Before this arrived I was mostly skeptical, when I disassembled it for a good clean and polish I was pleasantly surprised at the lack of any wear on anything.
> The bike was never really used, why ?. If it was put together from parts, it was done when new, period correct, parts were available. It is not for sale and I have no reason to guild the lilly.
> As all the people that could provide provenance are long dead I will just enjoy it as much as any of the other things in my garage that the "experts" say don't exist.



I contend the bike was never used because it was built as a display piece in a dealership. Some of the parts on the bike weren’t available until ‘37 or later such as the Wald 3 Stem and I’m thinking that guard about ‘39. I claim to be an expert on nothing so it’s pretty easy to discount my observations but I’m just telling you what the evidence suggests to me. V/r Shawn


----------



## mrg (Dec 12, 2021)

I’m still thinking a dealer creation for window display with a mix mostly period parts ( looks like post war pedals tho ), very cool bike but don’t think from Mr. Schwinn.


----------



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 13, 2021)

Well I am glad that is settled, tidy, and in a box with a bow.
 If this chrome was not done by Schwinn (which is all I ever contended) then I'm Jimmy Hoffa, so I guess that mystery is solved too, by science.
  Kind or reminds me of the blind men and the elephant, everybody is right.


----------



## cds2323 (Dec 13, 2021)

Freqman1 said:


> Not trying to be confrontational but the Fore brake, stem, and guard were not available in ‘36 and I can’t really make out the pedals. My reading of your post was that this bike came from Schwinn like this which is highly unlikely given the later parts.  V/r Shawn





Freqman1 said:


> I contend the bike was never used because it was built as a display piece in a dealership. Some of the parts on the bike weren’t available until ‘37 or later such as the Wald 3 Stem and I’m thinking that guard about ‘39. I claim to be an expert on nothing so it’s pretty easy to discount my observations but I’m just telling you what the evidence suggests to me. V/r Shawn



I know the brake was available in 37. Do you have any documentation that the stem wasn’t available in 36? I’m thinking it was available in early 36, if not, I might have to remove some on bikes I own. And I think the chainguard ( if it’s the Wald one I think I see) came out in early 37. 

This is an interesting and unique motorbike.


----------



## saladshooter (Dec 13, 2021)

I'm pretty sure the wald #3 was out in 1936


----------



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 13, 2021)

I have a Schwinn blueprint for the front brake drum dated 10-1-34 
As soon as I get it converted to a format I can attach I will forward it.


----------



## BFGforme (Dec 13, 2021)

Vicious Cycle said:


> I have a Schwinn blueprint for the front brake drum dated 10-1-34
> As soon as I get it converted to a format I can attach I will forward it.



Snap a picture of it.... just got more popcorn....


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 13, 2021)

Bottom line is nothing is going to prove one way or the other what this is. I still don’t think this bike/frame came from Schwinn chromed and not in this configuration.


----------



## cds2323 (Dec 13, 2021)

@Freqman1

I wasn’t trying to prove one way or another what this bike is. I only wanted to clear up confusion on the stem. You had twice stated that it wasn’t available in 36, and since others might repeat what they read I felt it should be cleared up. I thought it was earlier than 37 so I went through all my stuff when I got home. Clearly available in 36, the patent was even filed in June of 35. Other Wald advertising I have claim it as the sales leader from 36,37 & 38.




The chainguard has a patent design issued in April of 37 after being applied for in Jan 37 (if it is the Wald one I think it is)


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 14, 2021)

cds2323 said:


> @Freqman1
> 
> I wasn’t trying to prove one way or another what this bike is. I only wanted to clear up confusion on the stem. You had twice stated that it wasn’t available in 36, and since others might repeat what they read I felt it should be cleared up. I thought it was earlier than 37 so I went through all my stuff when I got home. Clearly available in 36, the patent was even filed in June of 35. Other Wald advertising I have claim it as the sales leader from 36,37 & 38.View attachment 1527164
> 
> The chainguard has a patent design issued in April of 37 after being applied for in Jan 37 (if it is the Wald one I think it is)



Thanks Chris---my error. That aside I don't recall that stem ever being used on a Motorbike. Like I said I'm an expert at nothing but thanks to both you and Chad for bringing this to my attention. V/r Shawn


----------



## Oldbikeguy1960 (Dec 14, 2021)

Archie Sturmer said:


> Most appear to now agree that the bicycle is not and never was a prototype. Prototypes are used in development and operational testing; yet it showed no wear.
> 
> That was a good test, using the scientific method (apply robust skepticism, perform a test).  And a test with pass-or-fail criteria; i.e., no wear = not a prototype, not used for testing.
> 
> ...



I think by no wear he means the bike had not been ridden by people from the 1930s to the 1970s down Repack when he got it.
You are splitting hairs and there is nothing scientific about your logic. First of all you have to present a hypotheseis, followed by a theory. Then you have to prove the theory, which you cannot do by insulting the other scientists. The bikes owner actually has more proof on his side than you do, since it would take a lifetime and a small fortune to source all NOS or 9/10 show bike parts to produce one bike so all the armchair quarterbacks (or scientists) can hate all over the thread.
I think he was asking for information to help make a determination or in scientific terms prove a theory. All you have done in effect is blame Man for global temperature cycles which have occurred since about 4 billion years ago and are actually moderating. How were internal combustion engines, factories and coal burning a factor during the dinosaur ages or the ice ages?
Maybe I went too far. But I do that a lot.


----------



## Freqman1 (Dec 14, 2021)




----------



## Oldbikeguy1960 (Dec 14, 2021)

Oldbikeguy1960 said:


> I think by no wear he means the bike had not been ridden by people from the 1930s to the 1970s down Repack when he got it.
> You are splitting hairs and there is nothing scientific about your logic. First of all you have to present a hypotheseis, followed by a theory. Then you have to prove the theory, which you cannot do by insulting the other scientists. The bikes owner actually has more proof on his side than you do, since it would take a lifetime and a small fortune to source all NOS or 9/10 show bike parts to produce one bike so all the armchair quarterbacks (or scientists) can hate all over the thread.
> I think he was asking for information to help make a determination or in scientific terms prove a theory. All you have done in effect is blame Man for global temperature cycles which have occurred since about 4 billion years ago and are actually moderating. How were internal combustion engines, factories and coal burning a factor during the dinosaur ages or the ice ages?
> Maybe I went too far. But I do that a lot.



Another error in this post was stating skepticism is the precursor to proving scientific fact.
 Science cannot prove some things any more than religion can. Some things are believed whether there is proof or not. Some things will not be believed whether there is proof or not. In the end people believe what they want and look for proof to verify their beliefs.
The OP was looking for information, not proof. Maybe he wants to believe, but if that were all he would do like I do sometimes and just believe. Asking people who are also trying to use what they believe as proof is like wetting your pants in a dark suit. It may or may not feel good but you certainly hope nobody notices.
Some say it cannot be proven without evidence, I say it also cannot be DISPROVEN without evidence. The subject lays right where I believe the OP left it. Up for discussion but not to be condemned by naysayers based solely on their belief that you have to be a skeptic, and in effect try to disprove everything.
Sir Isaac Newton believed in a force he called gravity. The haters were around to tell him there was no proof and that we were held to earth by, idont know some magical force or something. If I recall, Newton did not spend years of his life attempting to disprove his own theory. He set up experiments in order to take his hypotheses, Gravity to the Theory of Gravity. Then he compiled data from his experiments in order to prove the existence of Gravìty to write what we now know as the Laws of Gravity.
For reflection are a couple screenshots on the origin and meaning of the word skeptic. Determine honestly whether you meet the original definition or the accepted meaning


----------



## Oldbikeguy1960 (Dec 14, 2021)

Freqman1 said:


> View attachment 1527268



But sir, the horse isn't dead. It is just lazy!


----------



## markivpedalpusher (Dec 14, 2021)

Oh boy the bike hobby is now science I’m out…


----------



## Handle Bar Hoarder (Dec 14, 2021)




----------



## Oldbikeguy1960 (Dec 14, 2021)

T


markivpedalpusher said:


> Oh boy the bike hobby is now science I’m out…



Thats the whole point. It doesn't need to be science. It is enough for me to build a bike the way I want, I do not care who likes it or not. But a member suggested it had to be done scientifically and then gave erroneous information about how science works while violating the rules of skepticism that he suggested govern science.
I am not a rocket scientist, but I did play one on TV.  I do probably have more of a science oriented background than most lay people though, and have successfully argued points of science with persons more educated than myself.
I also do not claim to have omnipotent knowledge of the universe and have been wrong on occasion. I do however try not to comment on things I do not have enough knowledge of to debate. When I am wrong I will, like the famous philosopher Arthur J. Fonzarelli say I am wwwrrrrnnnngggg.
Point I am making is, don't leave man. I will for my part do what I can to take the science back out of this hobby and make it what it should be. Fun.


----------



## OC_Rolling_Art (Dec 14, 2021)

An interesting thread and an interesting bike, one that has a story for sure.

No dirt, grime or the beginnings of rust in the most recessed areas speak to me, I realize the bike was taken apart and cleaned and polished. For chrome to look that nice from the '30's it would have had to be in a vacuum; and if lovingly cleaned and religiously polished since then - the chrome would start to look a little thin in spots, especially in the areas most easily wiped or polished (top bar and tank would be the first and last things wiped down would be my guess), with the first copper-plated layer starting to show in spots.

Pretty neat jumbo-sized faceted glass reflectors! I wonder if they are studded and go into a factory punched hole or a drilled hole? What does the badge say?

Everything on it being chromed but no decals also speaks to me... Sometimes things are hidden in plain sight.
Whoever built the bike sure had a vision for something flashy, and unique, and if displayed in a dealer's window it must have been a draw.

I'd ride it.


----------



## Archie Sturmer (Dec 14, 2021)

_Neat_ bike. I have never seen an all chrome bike like that one before.

We know that chrome plating shops can make parts very-shiny.  Wouldn’t it be neat to make-up an all-chrome bike, kind of like Rollfast, “the first chromium bicycles of the world”.  And wouldn’t it be neat to also have a bunch of deluxe parts and accessories (also chrome plated) on such a bike, and to then add reflectors on the sides of the tank.  That would be _really_ neato!

Some might frown upon making an all-chrome bike from an original-paint classic, but I still think that it would look neato and shiny.


----------



## BFGforme (Dec 14, 2021)

Time for more popcorn...


----------



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 14, 2021)

Well, what have we learned so far, The stem was available in '36, the fore-hub blueprint is dated 10-1-34, and I don't think there is any argument that Schwinn had a chrome shop.
 It is also well known that Schwinn built special bikes were produced for special people.
That leaves the chain-guard...


----------



## Vicious Cycle (Dec 14, 2021)

" a scientist can tell you 10 ways that fluid can pass through fabric, I prefer to unzip my pants"


----------



## Oldbikeguy1960 (Dec 14, 2021)

Archie Sturmer said:


> _Neat_ bike. I have never seen an all chrome bike like that one before.
> 
> We know that chrome plating shops can make parts very-shiny.  Wouldn’t it be neat to make-up an all-chrome bike, kind of like Rollfast, “the first chromium bicycles of the world”.  And wouldn’t it be neat to also have a bunch of deluxe parts and accessories (also chrome plated) on such a bike, and to then add reflectors on the sides of the tank.  That would be _really_ neato!
> 
> Some might frown upon making an all-chrome bike from an original-paint classic, but I still think that it would look neato and shiny.



Am I missing something here? Or do I sense a note of condescension in this post?
I didn't post on this thread to enter into a contest to see who can urinate the farthest.
But condescension really does make me want to do just that.
Maybe this is why I don't play well with others, I am not very good with these kinds of attitudes. 
It is not everyone by any means, 95% of everyone on here has been pretty cool about this. A couple percent insist that only a word from God will convince them that this bike is not a blatant fraud whose owner should be burned at the stake for Heresy.
All of that I can handle, everyone has at least two things in common and opinions are one of those things. My opinion is like a courtroom trial, the benefit of a doubt or a preponderance of evidence. With no preponderance, the benefit of a doubt wins. He isn't trying to sell you the Holy Grail or the Ark of the Covenant. In fact he isn't trying to sell you a bicycle either. Prove him wrong with real proof or maybe it is time to go flog some other dead horse.
Back to condescension.
If there is one thing in life that I cannot stand it would be people who think they are geniuses in their own mind with a condescending attitude toward us mere mortals, morons or less evolved creatures. 
After running down this guy's bike and then getting bested by an arrogant newbie this post ridicules the OP and his bike as well as all who agree that anything is possible whether you are talking bikes, cars, science or extraterrestrials from Nibiru.
This is exactly what a skeptic is NOT, or did some people miss the dictionary meaning I posted earlier. 
You do not get to ridicule the messenger or the message just because you do not agree with the subject. The OP is being nice and trying to shrug this off. Me not so much. Am I alone here in saying that if you have nothing good to say on a subject go find one more to your liking or stop insulting people who don't fall on their knees and announce your genius and their stupidity to the world.
Well, my microwave is dinging so my popcorn should be done. Hope I don't choke on it reading the replies to my tirade.


----------



## Oldbikeguy1960 (Dec 14, 2021)

Vicious Cycle said:


> " a scientist can tell you 10 ways that fluid can pass through fabric, I prefer to unzip my pants"



Damn I like that answer!


----------



## markivpedalpusher (Dec 14, 2021)

Ok enough of this, the date on your patent is October of 36. And that is par for the course. The for-wheel brake was debuted in 37. Your bike is a made up fantasy bike by someone who has a thing for chrome. Stop gas lighting! We are all out of popcorn.


----------

