Early style Elgin Blackhawk paint... pics?

[deco-rate]

I’ll throw my 2 cents in, which with inflation I normally charge 10 cents…

I have only been collecting bikes since the mid 80s, and I have NEVER seen the swoopy design of the 1933 catalogue pictures on a unrestored bike.

I have a 1933 falcon I bought many years ago from @bobcharnley. Serial #L5 5023. The tank is a little nicer than the bike, and I always assumed it came from a 34 or 35 bike. Now I am starting to question everything I thought I knew.

In one of the evolution of the bicycle books, you can see Alan Kinsey from Iowa has a red and black ‘33 but we don’t know what it looked like before it was painted. It is a beautiful bike though!!!

I really hope someone can solve this mystery with a good picture of an original ‘33 tank! Jeff

 

[rockabillyjay]

I have to dig up the pics of the 28” wheel falcon I had ages ago..but in thinking about this bike I found this.

28” wheel option is only mentioned in the first catalog advertisement ..after that they are only offered with 26” wheels.

Here’s a pic of an original 28” wheel bike with the common paint scheme.

Info about Elgin | General Discussion About Old Bicycles

I would like to find some info about this Elgin?

thecabe.com

 

[catfish]

Steve Castelli and myself. Back in the 90s.

 

[NBHAA]

Leon, I'm thrilled that you've chimed in. So have you, in fact, seen original paint versions of Falcons and Blackhawks as depicted in the 1933 catalog? It's my theory (and, yes, this is just a theory as I only have limited supporting data) that the Falcon, at least, has only ever existed in the paint scheme we're familiar with today. My supporting data points for this are as follows:

A) I have an original Falcon TwinBar bicycle with the following serial number: L4429. I know serial numbers are not gospel, but it's fair to at least assume that the frame was built early in production during 1933 based upon Mr. Columbia's serial number data. As you've mentioned, the CABE doesn't represent the entire world, but the only earlier serial for a Falcon/Blackhawk TwinBar to show up (serial# L4276) was the one owned by @Robertriley at one point and that was restored to match the catalog representation.

B) My bicycle, while possessing an old red overpaint, still has the original paint underneath. This applies to the tank as well which has the winged Elgin logo and white triangle graphics coming through from beneath the red overpaint that we're all used to. And while it's certainly possible that the tank may have been replaced at some point, the likelihood of that is slim considering the patina match and the fact that the frame darts match the more common look and not the 1933 catalog representation.

Again Leon, this is just a theory based upon the likelihood that my Falcon is early 1933 production and has an original paint scheme we're all used to.

I'd love to know your thoughts. Many of us do our best to figure these things out without the vast breadth of knowledge and experience you have the benefit of possessing. You can be a tremendous resource for the entire hobby if you simply share your insights. Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Hello...

No theory. No guessing. No conjecture. No "patina." No serial number shizz. The statement about Elgin Falcons and Blackhawks stands as it was made. No offense intended. Yes we still have the nice original from the Chicago World's Fair. And yes, we sold Castelli many of his bicycles and constantly answered his phone questions and made photocopies for him. When he repeated what WE said... people somehow imagined the knowledge was coming from him! The criteria for "expertise" somehow morphed in that era to being,,,"...and I own one..."

We detest arguing and constant guessing games and popularity contests conducted under a mutual admiration society basis rather than facts. So we let others run amok with all these things and they can have at it. The rule here seems to be if folks online or "in the hobby" (as it exists today) have not seen something or the anointed "experts" don't know about it, then whatever it is either doesn't exist or is "rare." Many things are indeed rare... but the decision to use that term is often all too common.

We have to marvel, for instance at how MOST Silver Kings on here are incorrectly identified and called "restored" with people spouting "information" from snips of catalogues. Yet REAL accurately restored Silver Kings are almost never, ever shown! Mostly customized hot rods, fenders missing and Japanese multi-speed hubs and wild seats and tires. But not restorations. And misinterpretations of literature galore mixed in as the seasoning. Why does every Silver King "wingbar" (a name I personally gave it decades ago) "restoration" have a 1938 horn button assembly installed? They didn't come that way except in 1938. But people see it and gush...WOWOWOW! WHY? Most on here have 1937 wheels with 1938 fenders and horn buttons. Chain guards from whatevers. WHY? After all these years. These poor bicycles seem to be the equivalent of 1932 Fords and 1949 Mercurys. Almost always customized– except the car people are mature enough in their hobby to admit it.

Tremendous resource? Thanks for the kind words. But too many envious haters and arguers on here to "share thoughts." I say something and there are those like alligators with their mouths open.... ready to eat and swallow and criticize. Even though they are in no position to do so. And argue anything and everything into the ground– often because their buddy has a photocopy... or somebody online has a link to a link. Ten to fifteen years later– somebody says the SAME thing I say or show... and that person is called SMART... or "knows his stuff"!

Years (DECADES) ago when we first showed our Schwinn "Grape Krate" prototype, people who saw themselves as "experts" yelled foul and argued for ten years over it. TEN YEARS. Musta been this... coulda been that... this was wrong... that was right... and who did I think I was to show this? THEN the next thing we knew... "Schwinn" (as it was then) was making the durn things, selling them as production models and cashing in on the whole thing! But by that time we never got a thanks or a letter or a consultation!!! ZERO recognition. And so it goes.

Have fun.

Leon Dixon
National Bicycle History Archive of America
(NBHAA.com)

 

[SKPC]

Ok, look again at the advertising from 1933 posted above and the link below again.....

Oldest Elgin FALCON on the Road???? | Classic Balloon Tire Bicycles 1933-1965

That's It!!!!!!! That's It!!!!!!! Take a Look at the Seat Post Base,,,,,,,,,,, It's Short Like Mine!!!!!! lol, lol,,,, So, Why Does Yours have the Long Seat Post Base???? Great Catalog Research Question???? Thanks!:)

thecabe.com

The rendering with the lost design is of a super ballooner 26-er(tubed) as stated in the sidebar of the ad itself and written on the tires. The 28" option was also offered in both Blackhawk and Falcon with the thinner rims in 28", perhaps through 35? Were there two different frame sizes in1933-35? I see no fender spacers on the super-26. The triple step rims I keep seeing in most of the bikes above had to be from 1934 & after. Clearly the fat, wood, metal-clad 26" clinchers were 1933 only?

 

[deco-rate]

@catfish That picture is awesome!
I’m a believer now! It is stunningly beautiful! I wonder where that tank is today???

On Falcons, I was thinking about starting a thread on why Elgins only used Musscleman hubs in 1933. (Read the ad!). Except the Mussleman date codes start in 1935?
Has anyone ever seen a ‘33 Musselman brake hub???

 

[rockabillyjay]

@catfish That picture is awesome!
I’m a believer now! It is stunningly beautiful! I wonder where that tank is today???

On Falcons, I was thinking about starting a thread on why Elgins only used Musscleman hubs in 1933. (Read the ad!). Except the Mussleman date codes start in 1935?
Has anyone ever seen a ‘33 Musselman brake hub???

I’m pretty sure that tank is not original but restored

 

[rockabillyjay]

Hello...

No theory. No guessing. No conjecture. No "patina." No serial number shizz. The statement about Elgin Falcons and Blackhawks stands as it was made. No offense intended. Yes we still have the nice original from the Chicago World's Fair. And yes, we sold Castelli many of his bicycles and constantly answered his phone questions and made photocopies for him. When he repeated what WE said... people somehow imagined the knowledge was coming from him! The criteria for "expertise" somehow morphed in that era to being,,,"...and I own one..."

We detest arguing and constant guessing games and popularity contests conducted under a mutual admiration society basis rather than facts. So we let others run amok with all these things and they can have at it. The rule here seems to be if folks online or "in the hobby" (as it exists today) have not seen something or the anointed "experts" don't know about it, then whatever it is either doesn't exist or is "rare." Many things are indeed rare... but the decision to use that term is often all too common.

We have to marvel, for instance at how MOST Silver Kings on here are incorrectly identified and called "restored" with people spouting "information" from snips of catalogues. Yet REAL accurately restored Silver Kings are almost never, ever shown! Mostly customized hot rods, fenders missing and Japanese multi-speed hubs and wild seats and tires. But not restorations. And misinterpretations of literature galore mixed in as the seasoning. Why does every Silver King "wingbar" (a name I personally gave it decades ago) "restoration" have a 1938 horn button assembly installed? They didn't come that way except in 1938. But people see it and gush...WOWOWOW! WHY? Most on here have 1937 wheels with 1938 fenders and horn buttons. Chain guards from whatevers. WHY? After all these years. These poor bicycles seem to be the equivalent of 1932 Fords and 1949 Mercurys. Almost always customized– except the car people are mature enough in their hobby to admit it.

Tremendous resource? Thanks for the kind words. But too many envious haters and arguers on here to "share thoughts." I say something and there are those like alligators with their mouths open.... ready to eat and swallow and criticize. Even though they are in no position to do so. And argue anything and everything into the ground– often because their buddy has a photocopy... or somebody online has a link to a link. Ten to fifteen years later– somebody says the SAME thing I say or show... and that person is called SMART... or "knows his stuff"!

Years (DECADES) ago when we first showed our Schwinn "Grape Krate" prototype, people who saw themselves as "experts" yelled foul and argued for ten years over it. TEN YEARS. Musta been this... coulda been that... this was wrong... that was right... and who did I think I was to show this? THEN the next thing we knew... "Schwinn" (as it was then) was making the durn things, selling them as production models and cashing in on the whole thing! But by that time we never got a thanks or a letter or a consultation!!! ZERO recognition. And so it goes.

Have fun.

Leon Dixon
National Bicycle History Archive of America
(NBHAA.com)

If you have the Worlds Fair bike that took place in 1933-34 Chicago..so it should have the earlier style paint job but I seem to remember a pic from the fair (looking for it now) and it has the common style paint (with the triangle on the tank and winged decal). So if that earlier paint existed I would think it would have been on display at the fair in 1933

 

[catfish]

I’m pretty sure that tank is not original but restored

I know it's restored. Steve was doing the bike over while I was there.

 

[rockabillyjay]

I know it's restored. Steve was doing the bike over while I was there.

@catfish I figured you knew that..I remember that bike from Evolution of the Bicycle book.. it seemed like @deco-rate thought it was original thus proved that paint existed…or maybe I misinterpreted