SEAT POSTS.
Of seat posts little need be said. Such adjustability in height as once existed was had by the slot in crank, the saddle position being fixed. The rear-driver allows a large vertical adjustment, which is still obtained by telescoping one tube into another. In this there is no recent change save in the modes of fastening, which are more in the direction of internal binders, nearly all working on the principle of expanding one of the tubes to bind on the other by the use of a wedge. Many of these devices are neat, convenient and invisible. A peculiarity is the one on the Wolff-American, working by an external lever and using an internal “thumb-latch,” which jams of itself when borne down to the horizontal. The goose-neck spring stem, of the day when saddles were borne high above the frame, has disappeared; but if the present craze for short heads and extreme drop continues the tall rider will be compelled to return gradually to this or some other device for raising up, including the long draw-out of the stem which used to be characteristic about six years ago.
CHAPTER XII.
HANDLEBARS, GRIPS AND BRAKES.
KELLY ADJUSTABLE BAR.
The old-time handlebar was almost invariably passed directly through projecting lugs on the “head,” made for the purpose of holding it. For a number of years it was straight and solid, varying from fifteen inches in length to the other extreme of even thirty or thirty-two. The usual handle or grip was pear-shaped, although in a few instances round; the common material was horn, but wood and rubber were sometimes used. The common mode of fastening was to work the end of the bar into a sort of “tang” like the end of a caseknife or similar tool and hold the grip on by a thin nut run on the bar and let down into a cavity in the end of the handle. This illustrates again adaptation of old devices to new uses.
As lightness came to be more considered, makers having also found it easier to manipulate hollow steel tubing, the hollow bar was introduced. The dropped and the cow-horn pattern were not long in coming. The present type of bicycle compelled the ends of the bar to be carried backward in order to bring the grips within reach of the rider; but the various curves upward and downward, with ramshorn and other twists which have sometimes seemed almost humorous, are of such recent date that they need not be referred to in detail. The straight pear-shaped grip became a T, then a spade, then a shape resembling the short and chunky pistol stock; then—on the rear driving safety—settled into the oblong shape, slipped upon the end of the hollow tube, which has become so familiar and has hardly changed except in the material used to make it.
PLYMOUTH WOOD BAR.
Concerning the length of bar—more properly, width, since the point is the measurement in a direct line between the grips—the London Cyclist, in a long and ponderous article about three years ago, argued against the short bar, declaring that “its absurdity is apparent.” The reasons given were two: that a bar less than what the editor dictatorially pronounced the proper length (about 23½ inches) brings the grip around in the way of the thigh in making a short turn, and that a short bar is hygienically wrong. The hands should not be brought nearer than when they hang at the sides. “By measuring the distance between the shoulders, or between the seams of the coat, and then throwing the handle grips 1½ to 2 inches farther out on each side, or by measuring the distance between the shoulders over all from outside to outside of the shoulders, riders will obtain the proper length of bar for their own individual requirements.” The writer proceeded to say that men put their hands on the bar not because the grips are too far apart, but because the grips are set too low, and he found a supporter in a Coventry firm who said they had always adhered to 23½ inches and wished “manufacturers as a body would follow their own convictions more and not be so led by a few riders who think they are authorities on cycle construction.”
LYNDHURST
ADJUSTABLE BAR.
As to this, a maker may well take a stand and stick to it when impossibilities are demanded, as when the craze for lightness called for steady reduction in weight without impairment of strength, or when, as now, people seem to call for such excess of crank-hanger drop as involves risk of “drop” of a disagreeable nature; short of such positive folly, and in general, the maker will do well to keep in touch with the public and provide what is wanted, even if it be not the most rational and if he reserve the right of having his private judgment. As to length of handlebar, we count this, along with crank-throw and saddle, a matter for individual choice rather than for the dictum of any individual authority. A long bar is certainly a plague in passing through doors and in leaning a wheel safely; it is probable that women more or less err in having saddle too low and handles too high; it is certain that fashion (apparently set by the scorcher class) governs the bar and the grips; and yet the better course for “authority” is to let the rider do as he pleases, which he is pretty sure to do willy-nilly.