-
Agreed. I don't take too much stock from what kit Pro riders used, even now. There's a long history of custom frames painted in another manufacturer's colours and disguised parts. When the pros refuse to ride something (Delta brakes) or insist on something (Coppi and other Italian riders with Simplex) it is significant.
They could also be very resistant to innovation, French Cyclotourists were using aluminium cranks and cable operated front and rear derailleurs with a full spread of gears in the 30s. The resistance to new technology wasn't just due to sponsorship or race rules but racers' superstition and prejudice. The obsession with chain tension is a case in point. The double cable on the Juy51 was to address this non-problem,
the cables joined above the chainstay and only one ran to/from the shifter.
As my frame has the double roller and an integral Simplex rear hanger, I can't think how else it would have been equipped- and anyway I have the derailleurs and double shifter all in unused condition (which was far from easy) so it's moot 😊.Here's another page from the Dancing Chain describing the Juy51's cables.
1 Attachment
-
You are reading a single comment by @absurdbird and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
absurdbird
I certainly would not describe the Simplex Tour de France as 'rugged' - it was flimsy and very prone to going into the spokes with terminal consequences. It was also tricky to set up compared with the Campag Gran Sport, and could never cope with anything bigger than a 23 tooth sprocket. Even restricting yourself to 22 teeth you would still have been well advised to pray when engaging bottom gear, especially when it mattered in race.
It is a misconception (encouraged by the trade, naturally) to imagine that professionals 'adopt' equipment through choice - they use what they are paid to use - and this has even applied to top 'amateurs' at times. I have heard that Dave Bedwell (an independent at the time, so perfectly entitled to be paid) when asked why he still used a Simplex (in 1960) he replied: 'Cos I get paid three quid a week to use it'. My informant was dead impressed at the time because as an apprentice he only earnt £3.17.6d (£3.87.5p). Another story is that a big name in Cyclo Cross was given a new 'plastic' Simplex for every event he rode.
Paradoxically, Coppi insisted on having a Simplex TdF for the 1949 Tour, which he duly won. He did this in the face of strong opposition from his Italian sponsors. This was before the advent of the Gran Sport, and I think the alternative would have been the 'Cambio Corsa' which Bartali had used to win the previous year. This victory must show either that Gino was the greatest rider ever, or prove the power of prayer. Times change and we change with them, but Fausto never had any time for the Cambio Corsa.
There were plenty of Simplex adverts in 'Cycling' in the late '50's and early '60's, usually a full page near the back, with plenty of those excellent Daniel Rebour drawings.
Going back to the original question about that double pully, if you look at the text on the copy of page 154 (is it from The Dancing Chain?) you will note the words 'second cable to adjust the cage torsion spring' which is exactly what I was talking about in my previous post. This was certainly a Huret feature and quite possibly Simplex also. I don't think it's possible now to be sure what any particular double cable roller was intended for when it was installed, so I suggest you use it any way you can.
What a pity the 'Fifty Years of Simplex Development' was not more carefully edited. The large number of errors makes the whole thing a bit doubtful. For example between page 49 and 50 Henri Pelissier changes to his brother Charles, and on page 58 Louison Bobet is only credited with two Tour victories when in fact he won in 1955 also.