A.E.Elsegood

Arnold used a collection of blank lugs, and would cut and file them himself to a variety of optional patterns. The small frame (9" seat tube) that I still have was one he would use as a sample, as with other frames he'd already prepared. That miniature frame was usually on display at York Cycle Rally on our stand, but there were always plenty of frames in the shop window from which to select one's preferred lug design. The lugs for both frame and forks, as I remember, came in orange boxes and were (in the main) plain tube cut-offs. I remember him using a selection of drills, saws and files to achieve the desired design although, at the age of 12-15, I admit I was more intrigued than enthusiastic or keen to imitate. Some of those skills perhaps came from his time with Langsett Cycles in Sheffield (approx. 1935), and might have been further developed in his work as an Armourer during the War (when, amongst other things, he built Bren and Sten guns and other specialist weapons). I can't for the life of me remember the name on those boxes that the lugs came in. The name Bayliss Wiley sticks in my mind, but perhaps that was only headsets and other parts. [Now you get to understand why I didn't follow him into the business!]

Once a customer had made a choice of the lugs he'd prefer, Arnold would drill, cut and file them to the desired shape, but avoiding anything that could be confused with, say, a Hetchins frame (which was characterised by its curly rear stays. Again, if you look at the lugs on my front forks, you will see they have been cut-out in the body of the lug as well as profiled at the brazed joint. I can't remember having seen any similar, except on his own frame. Also, if you look carefully, you will observe that when the frame went to Ellis-Briggs for stove enamelling, the lugs on the forks were not picked-out in white as was specified, whereas you may note they got it right as regards the lugs on the crown and headset.

Strangely enough, the fork lugs on the photo you've supplied (the blue Minster) are similar to those on my frame, but somewhat heavier and finished in chrome. The seat stays on the blue frame appear to wrap around the top tube, whilst on mine they terminate at a weld on the lug.
I also observe that the pump brackets are on the seat tube on the blue frame, which must have been a personal preference, as Arnold didn't like the mount anything there which would obscure the transfers.

At one time, I had a very short wheelbase track bike made specifically for a straight-line sprint. The forks were barely raked at all, so that it was almost impossible to turn the wheel to either side if you were wearing toe-clips, and it was fixed-wheel, so there was no chance of avoiding a contact between your foot and the front wheel if you did turn.
The frame was made for one of the Clifton CC lads for a season in which he wanted to capture the sprint championship, after which it came back to the shop. Perhaps Arnold made it specifically for the purpose and as a 'demo' model, but he gave it to me to ride during the period he was building my Minster to my specification. Interesting, using that machine in town! I came off it several times.

As regards bottle carriers, it was uncommon to fit drilled mounts at the time. You will note that the pump brackets were fitted to the top tube (crossbar) and this would leave room for a bottle carrier on the down-tube, subject to you not having any other clutter on there. If you look at the photo of my Minster, you will observe that I have the two original Campag cables for the derailleur and the twin chainwheel on the down-tube, and these would get in the way of any bracket for a bottle-cage. As the down-tube was the typical mounting for the levers and the cables at that time, my Dad and many others would mount the cage on the seat-tube, above or below the Minster transfer, but this could get in the way of the thighs or the ankles if it was a wide cage. The alternative, and more handy if racing, was to mount the cage on the handlebars.

More later.

Alan Elsegood