Another Schwinn World...But A Traveler...Rusty...1952...

[GTs58]

Ya '53 as in hit the sales floor in '53 would/could make sense. '52/12 hub and a mid year '52 frame would still get all the '52 build components. Any chance you think it could make the sales floor Christmas of '52?

No way would it be on the floor for Christmas in 52 with a 52-12 dated hub. The hub inscriptions were most likely done before the hub was even built. How many hubs does it take to fill a container before it's loaded on a boat and shipped across the pond? The serial dates are the dates when the numbers were stamped on the drop out. Not even God knows when that frame was actually built. Schwinn was still using MR (Dec. 80) serial stamped head tubes building frames with head badge build dates in 1982. I'm leaning towards the idea that the bike was actually built in and is a 52, but the rear wheel was built up by someone that located a 52 hub to supposidly match the so called build year and then blew the deal on the front wheel. 52 was a big sales year for lightweights.

January 53 Reporter

 

[SirMike1983]

You might keep the original hub and have a shop replace the rim, especially if you were inclined to keep the alloy shell hub. If the bike was still under a bike shop warranty, you might also be able to get the work done at reduced cost.

 

[HARPO]

@rennfaron @GTs58 The 1952 chart I posted earlier was from Angelfire (same one apparently), which was what had gotten me excited about the Date in the first place.

It didn't connect until I saw the "12" on the hub that the bike wasn't assembled until 6 months later (which really doesn't make sense). Why leave a frame hanging around that long and not build it up?
So, I'm leaning more towards a damaged rim years later. Might have been a lot cheaper than purchasing a new wheel from a bike shop.

 

[Oilit]

@rennfaron @GTs58 The 1952 chart I posted earlier was from Angelfire (same one apparently), which was what had gotten me excited about the Date in the first place.

It didn't connect until I saw the "12" on the hub that the bike wasn't assembled until 6 months later (which really doesn't make sense). Why leave a frame hanging around that long and not build it up?
So, I'm leaning more towards a damaged rim years later. Might have been a lot cheaper than purchasing a new wheel from a bike shop.

There's no doubt the rear rim was replaced and you need a new front, the hub is close but who knows? You have the 1952 head badge, that clinches it for me.

 

[HARPO]

There's no doubt the rear rim was replaced and you need a new front, the hub is close but who knows? You have the 1952 head badge, that clinches it for me.

Frame number also tells the tale...

 

[rennfaron]

There has been some discussion about the difference between frame dates and hub dates. Some guys think they should be very similar. If you have a bunch of original bikes you will find that that is rarely the case. @GTs58 has talked about this quite a bit. I typically see anywhere between 2-4 mos difference. They made the frames in one process and then built the bikes in another process. It is rare but I have seen a frame stamped in one year and should receive that year of components but it receives the next year. Like a frame '62/10 that has '63 stuff on it. 6 mo difference would be pretty abnormal but I am pretty sure I have seen that before and isn't out of the realm of possibilities with the bikes.