Finaly Finished my Raleigh Lenton

ren531

Senior Member
Location
Lancaster uk
IMG_20190318_083423.jpg
IMG_20190318_083444.jpg
IMG_20190318_083606.jpg
IMG_20190318_083135.jpg
IMG_20190318_083206.jpg
IMG_20190318_083323.jpg
Just finished the Raleigh Lenton i bought late last year , i posted some photos of it on here before i started the project , its all original i touched up the white lining on the frame and laquered it cleaned greased everything replaced most of the bearings and chain got some replacment period mudguards because the originals where brittle and in many bits and i am very pleased with it, had a short ride on it and every thing is fine, i did find out it has an unusual 26inch wheel size 32-597 and not 590 like my other 26inch wheel bikes so very limited choice of replacment tyres hope you all like it as much as i do.
 
Last edited:

southcoast

Senior Member
Well done that looks great, especially considering the state it was in when you got it.
 

Kempstonian

Has the memory of a goldfish
Location
Bedford
Nice job! I'm guessing you must be quite tall... :smile:

Edit: I see from the above post I'm correct :thumbsup:
 

SkipdiverJohn

Über Member
Location
London
i did find out it has an unusual 26inch wheel size 32-597 and not 590 like my other 26inch wheel bikes so very limited choice of replacment tyres hope you all like it as much as i do.
Another nice old steel Raleigh back on the road! The more the merrier. :thumbsup:

It's funny you should say the tyre size is really unusual, because my Raleigh Arena gas pipe racer that I had in the early 80's had 26" x 1 1/4" (597) steel rims (may have been Weinmann ones from memory) and it wasn't considered an odd size then and tyres weren't a problem for it. I'd expect 26" x 1 3/8" (590) roadster wheels would fit straight on to your Lenton, so long as the brake blocks will adjust, and I know you can still get good tyres like Schwalbe Marathon in the 1 3/8" roadster size.
 

raleighnut

Guru
Location
On 3 Wheels
Another nice old steel Raleigh back on the road! The more the merrier. :thumbsup:

It's funny you should say the tyre size is really unusual, because my Raleigh Arena gas pipe racer that I had in the early 80's had 26" x 1 1/4" (597) steel rims (may have been Weinmann ones from memory) and it wasn't considered an odd size then and tyres weren't a problem for it. I'd expect 26" x 1 3/8" (590) roadster wheels would fit straight on to your Lenton, so long as the brake blocks will adjust, and I know you can still get good tyres like Schwalbe Marathon in the 1 3/8" roadster size.
It's easier to go 700c plus you get a better tyre choice, I had new Aluminium rims laced onto the original Sturmey Archer rear hub and matching rim laced onto a front dynamo I had knocking around on my Raleigh City.

DSCN0161.JPG
 

SkipdiverJohn

Über Member
Location
London
It's easier to go 700c plus you get a better tyre choice, I had new Aluminium rims laced onto the original Sturmey Archer rear hub and matching rim laced onto a front dynamo I had knocking around on my Raleigh City]
27" or 700 wheels definitely feel a little different to ride on than 26" though, which might be a consideration. When I was recently given an old mid 80's 3 speed from the Elswick factory in Barton-on-Humber, I was surprised to find it on 27" x 1 1/4" steels and it feels more ponderous and less manoeuvrable than my 26" Puch 3-speed which has similar slack geometry. The 27" 3-speed has been crashed and the back wheel is too bad to ever get really true, so when the tyres wear out it's going 700c, not from preference but because I picked up a very cheap modern CB Ladies 3-speed town bike donor with 700's. I'd have preferred to go 26" x 1 3/8" but the brakes and 1/2" loss of BB clearance made it impractical.
 
Last edited:

woodbutcher

Veteran
Location
S W France
View attachment 458434 View attachment 458436 View attachment 458423 View attachment 458425 View attachment 458426 View attachment 458428 Just finished the Raleigh Lenton i bought late last year , i posted some photos of it on here before i started the project , its all original i touched up the white lining on the frame and laquered it cleaned greased everything replaced most of the bearings and chain got some replacment period mudguards because the originals where brittle and in many bits and i am very pleased with it, had a short ride on it and every thing is fine, i did find out it has an unusual 26inch wheel size 32-597 and not 590 like my other 26inch wheel bikes so very limited choice of replacment tyres hope you all like it as much as i do.
The bike looks great and it raises a question in my tiny mind ?? l have been trying to get proper, ie rational advice on the size of bike frame suitable for me.
The simplest calculation l have found so far is to take your individual "standover" height ie the distance between the floor and your crotch with your feet together, in cm, and then multiply by .66. In my case gives me a suggested frame size of 51 or 52 and this seems to work ok with the other size guides ie. the saddle height required so that your knee is slightly bent when your foot (in the correct position on the pedal) is at the lowest point of the revolution of the crank.
How would that all work with your individual measurement , Hope you don't mind me asking, lm just trying to find a real person for comparison:bicycle:
 

SkipdiverJohn

Über Member
Location
London
l have been trying to get proper, ie rational advice on the size of bike frame suitable for me.
The simplest calculation l have found so far is to take your individual "standover" height ie the distance between the floor and your crotch with your feet together, in cm, and then multiply by .66.
Standover height needs to take into account the type of footwear being worn. It can make half an inch difference between wearing a pair of thick-soled work boots and, say, a pair of light canvas leisure shoes. For me it varies between 34" and 34 1/2" depending on footwear. The tallest standover frame I ride is an early Raleigh Pioneer hybrid, 23 1/2" size, with a crossbar height of 34" I ride another, slightly later Pioneer, also 23 1/2" frame size, which has a crossbar height of 33" The only difference is the earlier frame has more BB clearance, like a MTB, the later one is closer to being a general purpose road frame in clearance.
In my case, with a high BB frame, the comfort/safety limit for frames I ride is my standover clearance in heavy boots minus 11 inches. Given that you ride racing bikes, which sometimes have a high BB clearance to allow pedalling round corners without pedal strike, you will probably not go far wrong with your inside leg measurement in cycling footwear minus 11 inches.
Edited to say there used to be two widely-used "rule of thumb" frame sizing measures; one was inside leg in bare feet minus 9 inches, the other one was height in bare feet divided by 3. Inside leg tends to give a bigger result. For me the height measurement works perfectly, as my ideal frame size is 23 1/2" whereas I am not really comfortable on frames of 24" or over, although I may be able to physically ride them. Its the stopping and starting bit that is the issue.
 
Last edited:

woodbutcher

Veteran
Location
S W France
Standover height needs to take into account the type of footwear being worn. It can make half an inch difference between wearing a pair of thick-soled work boots and, say, a pair of light canvas leisure shoes. For me it varies between 34" and 34 1/2" depending on footwear. The tallest standover frame I ride is an early Raleigh Pioneer hybrid, 23 1/2" size, with a crossbar height of 34" I ride another, slightly later Pioneer, also 23 1/2" frame size, which has a crossbar height of 33" The only difference is the earlier frame has more BB clearance, like a MTB, the later one is closer to being a general purpose road frame in clearance.
In my case, with a high BB frame, the comfort/safety limit for frames I ride is my standover clearance in heavy boots minus 11 inches. Given that you ride racing bikes, which sometimes have a high BB clearance to allow pedalling round corners without pedal strike, you will probably not go far wrong with your inside leg measurement in cycling footwear minus 11 inches.
Edited to say there used to be two widely-used "rule of thumb" frame sizing measures; one was inside leg in bare feet minus 9 inches, the other one was height in bare feet divided by 3. Inside leg tends to give a bigger result. For me the height measurement works perfectly, as my ideal frame size is 23 1/2" whereas I am not really comfortable on frames of 24" or over, although I may be able to physically ride them. Its the stopping and starting bit that is the issue.
Thanks for that info. l will compare that method with the method l described and see if there is a happy medium :smile:
 
Top Bottom