When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

New Finds

-
The bicycle classification is all about the tire size
On the subject of middleweights.... I am doing a pair of bikes for my sister and brother-in-law. He is probably 250# or better. Will a middleweight manage????

EDIT: Mind you they will be doing very slow and casual riding along paved rail trails with their dog....
 
Last edited:
On the subject of middleweights.... I am doing a pair of bikes for my sister and brother-in-law. He is probably 250# or better. Will a middleweight manage????

EDIT: Mind you they will be doing very slow and casual riding along paved rail trails with their dog....
Brother SamG:
As GTs58 says, the classification is all about tire size. 26 X 1.75 is a middleweight. 26 X 2.125 is a ballooner. The difference in tire size has no relation to load-bearing capacity. That is a function of the design and manufacturing of the frame and other components. Some frames have reputations for sturdiness, like some Chicago-built Schwinns. I'm sure that you could get a range of opinions about that on this forum. Your edit shows that you understand that intended use is important. A bike that survives slow, casual riding may not hold up jumping curbs or doing wheelie hops. Have fun!
 
Brother SamG:
As GTs58 says, the classification is all about tire size. 26 X 1.75 is a middleweight. 26 X 2.125 is a ballooner. The difference in tire size has no relation to load-bearing capacity. That is a function of the design and manufacturing of the frame and other components. Some frames have reputations for sturdiness, like some Chicago-built Schwinns. I'm sure that you could get a range of opinions about that on this forum. Your edit shows that you understand that intended use is important. A bike that survives slow, casual riding may not hold up jumping curbs or doing wheelie hops. Have fun!
I didn’t think it would. The reason I asked was because 1817cent mentioned body weight in his comment and I want to be certain before exhausting my resources on the wrong bike. I have a newer Huffy frame that I’ve stripped down for parts that I could use with balloon tires, but I prefer to remain with a vintage theme. What’s disappointing is now I have to purchase new tires rather than using the balloon tires I already have!!! Unless I can make them fit??? Also not as much selection at the desired price range with the 1.75.
 
Last edited:
The Viscount aerospace was a type of frame they use on their 10 speed.The bike wasa nice but had the "Death Fork" It is a collectable if you have one with the original "Death fork"


VISCOUNT AEROSPACE GP-3.JPG
 
The red one is a Viscount (Bang Flyer I believe it says). The other is a Murray Meteor Flite. Know absolutely nothing about either one and these picture were taken literally off my truck!!!! I am googling something about Viscount and aerospace…..

It’s hidden by the basket but the Murray has a cool light on the front fender.

View attachment 1779325
The Murray is about 1965-66, that style of carrier appeared late 1965, chain guard style is 65.
 
The Murray is about 1965-66, that style of carrier appeared late 1965, chain guard style is 65.
I purchased this one yesterday from the same dealer who had them displayed adjacent to each other. They share common accessories and even had planters in the baskets and spokes suggesting they came from the same owner. This one had no badge and the shop owner had no info. But all else considering I assume they were his/hers Murrays of the same era/year.

328716067_664326872157838_1515480125849159030_n.jpg
 
Brother SamG:
As GTs58 says, the classification is all about tire size. 26 X 1.75 is a middleweight. 26 X 2.125 is a ballooner. The difference in tire size has no relation to load-bearing capacity. That is a function of the design and manufacturing of the frame and other components. Some frames have reputations for sturdiness, like some Chicago-built Schwinns. I'm sure that you could get a range of opinions about that on this forum. Your edit shows that you understand that intended use is important. A bike that survives slow, casual riding may not hold up jumping curbs or doing wheelie hops. Have fun!
The tires that are on the bike are 26x1.75. The tire I want is only available in 1.5. I’m guessing it should fit the rim but I’m sure that’s contingent on rim width which I do not know without calipers!!! Is it common for 1.5 and 1.75 to be interchangeable???
 
The tires that are on the bike are 26x1.75. The tire I want is only available in 1.5. I’m guessing it should fit the rim but I’m sure that’s contingent on rim width which I do not know without calipers!!! Is it common for 1.5 and 1.75 to be interchangeable???
If the ISO is the same the 1.5 tire should fit. But why would you want to go with a skinnier tire than a 1.75 middleweight tire? The classification for 1 1/2" tire is a Welterweight. Schwinn used that size on their T & C Tandems and two-year 53-54 Welterweight.
 
Back
Top