Jesper
Wore out three sets of tires already!
I received the Libertas (Belgium brand) frame I wanted to build-up into a touring bike. Fairly cheap for a Reynolds 531 butted frame and fork blades (steerer is Nervor), and Campy d-o's front and rear.
When cleaning the frame I discovered a crack in the drive side chainstay nozzle of the BB shell. I could not visually discern any frame misalignment, both stays looked okay with any deformation from the use of a kickstand.
The paint and livery appeared to be original with some added country touring decals from a previous owner.
Upon closer examination of the crack a small cavity was also revealed and it was obvious that the frame had been painted after the crack occurred due to paint being present in the crack/cavity.
I was irritated on many levels: 1) at myself for not requesting a detailed photo of all conjunctions (something normally done if images are not present or are of poor quality; frame price may have had an impact there); 2) at the seller who advertised "no cracks, dents", etc. and who said I had a good eye if I found a problem (I didn't even need my glasses! You be the judge!); 3) at the builder for allowing that frame out of the workshop!; 4) at that company for putting that bike out for sale.
Without removing the paint I assume that part of the crack is filled with paint and that a micro crack probably continues to the shell tube.
What is amazing is that the paint shows no cracking which would indicate to me that although the integrity of the frame was compromised it never flexed enough in that area to affect the paint (I looked quite closely with an eye loupe). This may be due to the frame size being small (ST approx. 52cm c-c) so not as much load being supported over the years.
I did learn a lot from this frame though; ultimately at no cost to me other than emotional (not much loss there either).
Frame was built very poorly with no regards to finish quality. The seat stay points are about as crude as you can get. No finish work appeared to be done on the frame pieces; paintwork quality was average at best (e.g. sloppy piping stripe around head lugs, etc.).
The frame is certainly lightweight for its time; but I think that these were marketed through the fact that they were built with 531 tubes and Campy d-o's because I can't find much redeeming value in the frame regarding its build quality.
Just that defect alone calls into question not just the integrity of the frame that you don't see; but also the integrity and level of pride that company had in their product at the time. I would assume that this frame was either their top or second from the top touring model (chainstays 43cm), and for this frame to leave the shop in that condition is unforgiveable. I can (and hope) that this frame was quickly knocked out by an apprentice during a time which production quantity trumped production quality. I'm not sure when the bike boom hit mainland Europe in the early seventies (frame date '71); but this frame may have been a result of the times. Still, I was surprised to see such a lack of quality workmanship from an established regional brand that was well regarded in previous years.
I will post a full set of photos for reference purposes before I pack it up again.
It would have made for some nice shop wall art, but I paid more than a broken wall hanger is worth.
When cleaning the frame I discovered a crack in the drive side chainstay nozzle of the BB shell. I could not visually discern any frame misalignment, both stays looked okay with any deformation from the use of a kickstand.
The paint and livery appeared to be original with some added country touring decals from a previous owner.
Upon closer examination of the crack a small cavity was also revealed and it was obvious that the frame had been painted after the crack occurred due to paint being present in the crack/cavity.
I was irritated on many levels: 1) at myself for not requesting a detailed photo of all conjunctions (something normally done if images are not present or are of poor quality; frame price may have had an impact there); 2) at the seller who advertised "no cracks, dents", etc. and who said I had a good eye if I found a problem (I didn't even need my glasses! You be the judge!); 3) at the builder for allowing that frame out of the workshop!; 4) at that company for putting that bike out for sale.
Without removing the paint I assume that part of the crack is filled with paint and that a micro crack probably continues to the shell tube.
What is amazing is that the paint shows no cracking which would indicate to me that although the integrity of the frame was compromised it never flexed enough in that area to affect the paint (I looked quite closely with an eye loupe). This may be due to the frame size being small (ST approx. 52cm c-c) so not as much load being supported over the years.
I did learn a lot from this frame though; ultimately at no cost to me other than emotional (not much loss there either).
Frame was built very poorly with no regards to finish quality. The seat stay points are about as crude as you can get. No finish work appeared to be done on the frame pieces; paintwork quality was average at best (e.g. sloppy piping stripe around head lugs, etc.).
The frame is certainly lightweight for its time; but I think that these were marketed through the fact that they were built with 531 tubes and Campy d-o's because I can't find much redeeming value in the frame regarding its build quality.
Just that defect alone calls into question not just the integrity of the frame that you don't see; but also the integrity and level of pride that company had in their product at the time. I would assume that this frame was either their top or second from the top touring model (chainstays 43cm), and for this frame to leave the shop in that condition is unforgiveable. I can (and hope) that this frame was quickly knocked out by an apprentice during a time which production quantity trumped production quality. I'm not sure when the bike boom hit mainland Europe in the early seventies (frame date '71); but this frame may have been a result of the times. Still, I was surprised to see such a lack of quality workmanship from an established regional brand that was well regarded in previous years.
I will post a full set of photos for reference purposes before I pack it up again.
It would have made for some nice shop wall art, but I paid more than a broken wall hanger is worth.