Abner DONE!

[The Renaissance Man]

I'm at the point where I'm preparing for paint. The tank is already sanded.

I know for sure that I'll be using my no-nose tank (obviously) and a TRM chainguard. The other thing is the rear rack. From the beginning the plan has been to add it but I've gotten used to seeing the bike without the rack and I kinda like how it looks.

I rolled it outside to have a look both ways. Any thoughts?


Hocus Focus:

 

[SwissGuy]

I'm at the point where I'm preparing for paint. The tank is already sanded.

I know for sure that I'll be using my no-nose tank (obviously) and a TRM chainguard. The other thing is the rear rack. From the beginning the plan has been to add it but I've gotten used to seeing the bike without the rack and I kinda like how it looks.

I rolled it outside to have a look both ways. Any thoughts?


Hocus Focus:
View attachment 239988View attachment 239989

To me the lines flow much nicer without the rack.

 

[Uncle Shish]

I'm at the point where I'm preparing for paint. The tank is already sanded.

I know for sure that I'll be using my no-nose tank (obviously) and a TRM chainguard. The other thing is the rear rack. From the beginning the plan has been to add it but I've gotten used to seeing the bike without the rack and I kinda like how it looks.

I rolled it outside to have a look both ways. Any thoughts?


Hocus Focus:
View attachment 239992View attachment 239993

Real tough call ... both ways look fantastically cool. The rack does lend some balance to the front fender light/horn. The rack also brings a non-rounded aesthetic into the concept which is eye pleasing to me - everything else is flowing and rounded and the rack adds a 1950s spaceship feel to me.

 

[Captain Awesome]

To me the lines flow much nicer without the rack.

This ^

 

[metalchewy]

The rack would flow better if it didn't fit on the fender in this case. If it were raised a few inches to match the height and level of the top bar, I think it would really add to the flow.

That said, it's a lot of brazing or weld work to modify a rack to raise it up.

My vote would be for no rack, unless it's modified.

 

[BobbyStillz]

I'm at the point where I'm preparing for paint. The tank is already sanded.

I know for sure that I'll be using my no-nose tank (obviously) and a TRM chainguard. The other thing is the rear rack. From the beginning the plan has been to add it but I've gotten used to seeing the bike without the rack and I kinda like how it looks.

I rolled it outside to have a look both ways. Any thoughts?


Hocus Focus:
View attachment 239992View attachment 239993

No rack highlights the curves more. I vote, leave it off.

 

[OddJob]

The rack flows nicely with the chain guard. Complimentary, I guess you'd say.

But the curves that happen free flowing throughout without the rack; very appealing.

 

[curtisfox]

To me the lines flow much nicer without the rack.

True, but needs something like a tail light.........Curt

 

[The Renaissance Man]

It's interesting to get opinions about rack or no rack.

Most people here are seeing what I'm seeing without the rack. Had I not been taken by the look I would never had even bothered with considering dropping it and even bringing it up. I posted the same two choices on my facebook page yesterday evening and have been getting very different opinions!

 

[Pondo]

I love the look both ways, it's tough to choose. What bars and saddle will you be using? That could help the style.

 

[RustySprockets]

From a purely mercenary point-of-view, Abner serves as a showcase for your new tank. Do you really want to distract from that focus by adding the rack? The final decision might depend on the saddle you choose--it certainly did on Speedline BRAT.

 

[ingola]

No, it is silver paint using the 'mustard mask method'.

View attachment 239901 View attachment 239902

I didn't bother showing the process since it has been around for years now and @OddJob recently did a good job of explaining it again.

However, I did discover something unexpected this time.

When I first started using this technique I had seen it used by model car builders but with Vasoline. I wanted to use something that was water soluble and after searching around the house I landed on mustard. It checked most of the boxes that I had in mind; cheap, easily accessible, and high viscosity that would stay put. The yellow color was a bonus as it made it fairly easy to keep track of the application.

I said all of that to say that it could have just as easily been anything else but it just happened be what I found first. Fast forward to now and it had consequential effects.

Up until now I have applied the mustard over a painted base coat because I'm usually making fiberglass look like vintage metal. This time I started with real metal that had been chemically 'browned' which is basically controlled rust. As soon as I started removing the mustard mask I realized what I had done. The first ingredient listed in mustard is vinegar. Vinegar is acidic which removes rust! The result was that some of the brown metal had been cleaned by the mustard back in the direction of silver/grey metal.

Luckily the silver paint was fast drying so the acidic effects of the mustard didn't have enough time to completely wreck the base color. In some ways it was a happy accident in that it created a variegated color that has a natural look. The only downside is that it is not as dark brown as I had envisioned but not enough to make me refinish it.

View attachment 239904

Onward!

I find it actually gave it a more natural flacking effect the browning and steal and silver

 

[Brian macumber]

I'm kinda biased I like the look of a nice rack on a bike.

 

[kingfish254]

I'm at the point where I'm preparing for paint. The tank is already sanded.

I know for sure that I'll be using my no-nose tank (obviously) and a TRM chainguard. The other thing is the rear rack. From the beginning the plan has been to add it but I've gotten used to seeing the bike without the rack and I kinda like how it looks.

I rolled it outside to have a look both ways. Any thoughts?


Hocus Focus:
View attachment 239992View attachment 239993

Great rack, but I like it better without it. It detracts from the beauty of those curvy fat fenders and braces.

 

[The Renaissance Man]

After thousands of views and over a hundred comments on facebook, the overwhelming majority of people think Abner should have the rack. What's even more interesting is that even though only a few people have commented here, the results seem to be the complete opposite!

I'm thinking that the folks here at ratrodbikes might just see things through a different lens! I'm left to wonder if it is because RRB members (like myself) see bikes more as a canvas for art as opposed to traditional classic bike collectors staying truer to the original examples. But that is only speculation. I'm sure that every individual has their own reasons for liking what they do so I don't want to generalize it.

Anyway, I actually lean more toward leaving it off. But I could change my mind before it is over so I think I will go ahead with making a rack for it (just in case).
I took one out of the mold on Friday.

You're probably thinking "Wait, don't you already have one on the bike?". Yes, but the rack that I had shown in the Hocus-Focus pictures will not actually work with this frame due to the seat post clamp. Depending on the year, some Shelby wishbone frames had narrow clamps and some had wide clamps. As far as I know, the wide clamps came after the 'Speedline' racks where used and are not compatible. However, I offer the TRM Speedline racks with both wide and narrow spaced mounts and I currently only have one of the wide versions in stock. So I have started another rack with the correct narrow spacing. I've been needing to make one since the last one sold anyway. If time permits and I decide to go with it, I'll at least have the option. If not I'll have one in stock and ready to be sold. Win/win.

 

[Captain Awesome]

After thousands of views and over a hundred comments on facebook, the overwhelming majority of people think Abner should have the rack. What's even more interesting is that even thought only a few people have commented here, the results seem to be the complete opposite!

I'm thinking that the folks here at ratrodbikes might just see things through a different lens! I'm left to wonder if it is because RRB members (like myself) see bikes more as a canvas for art as opposed to traditional classic bike collectors staying truer to the original examples. But that is only speculation. I'm sure that every individual has their own reasons for liking what they do so I don't want to generalize it.

Anyway, I actually lean more toward leaving it off. But I could change my mind before it is over so I think I will go ahead with making a rack for it (just in case).
I took one out of the mold on Friday.
View attachment 240285


You're probably thinking "Wait, don't you already have one on the bike?". Yes, but the rack that I had shown in the Hocus-Focus pictures will not actually work with this frame due to the seat post clamp. Depending on the year, some Shelby wishbone frames had narrow clamps and some had wide clamps. As far as I know, the wide clamps came after the 'Speedline' racks where used and are not compatible. However, I offer the TRM Speedline racks with both wide and narrow spaced mounts and I currently only have one of the wide versions in stock. So I have started another rack with the correct narrow spacing. I've been needing to make one since the last one sold anyway. If time permits and I decide to go with it, I'll at least have the option. If not I'll have one in stock and ready to be sold. Win/win.

The old quandary……..

In the end you’re building it for you and as a showcase for your stellar products. I’m good with whatever you decide

 

[The Renaissance Man]

The old quandary……..

In the end you’re building it for you and as a showcase for your stellar products. I’m good with whatever you decide

It may seem counterintuitive, but having over 100 people voicing their preference for the rack actually helped cement my inclination to leave it off. I found myself being a little disappointed by all of the support for it and uplifted when the opposite opinion showed up. That made me realize that there was never any doubt how I felt about it once I compared it both ways.

I'm moving on without it in my plans (at least for now). And, there's an added benefit in that it's one less thing to do in this final stretch!

 

[BobbyStillz]

It may seem counterintuitive, but having over 100 people voicing their preference for the rack actually helped cement my inclination to leave it off. I found myself being a little disappointed by all of the support for it and uplifted when the opposite opinion showed up. That made me realize that there was never any doubt how I felt about it once I compared it both ways.

I'm moving on without out it in my plans (at least for now). And, there's an added benefit in that it's one less thing to do in this final stretch!

(Sorry for the novel) It is fascinating... depending where you posted on Facebook, you may have had more people in the collector, restorer, preservationist, and purist demographics. Here, in the buildoff, I feel there is more focus on customization, innovation, and vision.

Your work is amazing, and your skillsets enviable. You could make an aestheticly accurate Shelby no problem. But I'm really excited to see your spin on the Shelby base.

Some very incredible, even rare, bicycles miss the mark for me design wise. Sometimes it's too many stock accessories, sometimes it is the lines of the bike, sometimes it's a weight balance issue (visually).

For instance, the frame I am using (Murray Eliminator). It is one of my favorite frames, however, it bugs me that the rear loop of the frame bends away from the sissybar instead of being aligned evenly in parallel. There's another deco bike (I don't remember the make/model) that has a waterfall style fork that curves toward the front of the bike like a 'shoulder' instead of an 'elbow'. It is extremely rare, and very popular, but I hate it. It is so offputting due to the proportions. The fork is 4x thicker than any other tube on the bike, and the 'shoulder' fork immediately kills the forward movement of the design. Oh (last one), and the 'machete' style chainguard on '60s Hawthornes and Rollfasts. Ruins the lines of the frame and sprocket.

I love Shelbys (all of them), and the rack on your paticular frame has always felt like it was added as an afterthought to the design. Everything on the bike is curved, then they stuck an inverted triangle on the back . But this is my OPINION, which means nothing!

#imgladyoudroppedtherack

 

[The Renaissance Man]

I've spent the last two days working on the 'do-over' mold for the inserts. It has no effect at all on Abner but yet it has to be done.

__________________________________________


Back on May 2 I posted this:

Tell tale looking holes in the headtube. I'll need to address that at some point.

View attachment 230266

It was an attempt to provide a clue at the time about the no-nose tank. But it was something that I knew I would actually need to "address at some point" and I'm finally getting back to it now. I got this Gambles Hiawatha badge in a week or two ago and finally opened it today.

Judging by the ghost image on the headtube and reference pictures on the web, I'm pretty sure it is correct for this bike.

 

[JA331]

I usually prefer classic bikes without racks but your build as it stands looks great with it and without it. I like that it is mounted low compared to most. I however would lean towards leaving it off as its draws attention away from the beautiful tank and to a lesser degree those awesome full fenders.