

LOOK FOR THE TOPIC/QUESTION/ANSWER YOU WANT.
KNOWLEDGE IS POWER!
Also included are over 300 original old bicycle movies (NOT videos- but REAL 16mm FILMS) dating back to the 1930s and mountains of related historical memorabilia. The Archive materials represent a lifetime of collecting painstakingly accumulated over a period of nearly fifty years. The contents of The Archive were not recently obtained. Aside from limited displays at major museums and industry events, these items have never been on full display to the public. But you will begin to see many of them by merely visiting this site.
Another Einstein wrote in asking for info on his "CWC Chicago Welding Bicycle" and–of course–no photos. Then got mad when we corrected him by stating the bicycle was probably made by CLEVELAND WELDING COMPANY, not "Chicago Welding Company." Why THAT ticked him off we have no idea (it resulted in a deranged potty-mouth email–always the sign of great intellect and true brilliance).
People... if you approach us from the standpoint of "don't bother me with the facts- I've already got my mind made up" then it is pointless to ask for information that you'll just reject anyway. If you already know it all, then why bother? Think about this. There is the old mechanic's joke that says it costs one price if the mechanic does it... but the bill is MORE if you help!
Anybody who tells you they can positively, accurately date your bicycle just off of a name and serial number is just pulling your chain and doing WAGS. Serial numbers AND MODEL NUMBERS were often reused and they do not always follow a systematic progression. We originally began assembling bicycle serial number records in the 1970s- so we're not just jumping in to this thing 40 years later–today– later trying to guess and figure this all out! We have pretty much complete serial number records for the following:
• Westfield/Columbia
• Murray Ohio Mfg. Company (not "Murray OF Ohio" as some misinformed people in the hobby have taken to calling it in recent years. By the way– WHEN did this silliness start and who started it???)
• Dayton/Huffman/Huffy
• Shelby Cycle Company
• Elgin/J.C. Higgins/Sears
• Schwinn (and not the limited old tired stuff you find online over and over again, but far more detailed original factory records)
• Monark-Silver King Inc.
• Cleveland Welding Company
• Western Flyer
• Firestone
• B.F. Goodrich
• CCM
And we also have partial records for Colson, Snyder, Rollfast, Hawthorne, Hiawatha, Mead Cycle, Bowden (NOTE THAT WE HAVE THE COMPLETE ORGINAL SHIPPING LIST FROM THE FACTORY), Sherrell, Stelber, Hiawatha, Iver Johnson, Pierce, Good Year, and many more. And–of course– we have the original catalogues for just about ALL vintage bicycles. We DON'T GUESS. If you want professional, accurate information, instead of amateur guessing, here is where you get it.
But the biggest mistake that people make is they listen to DIY'ers and presume they can diagnose their own serial numbers in a snap. And they are usually wrong. This just is NOT a DIY proposition. It requires a lot of study and at least some expertise. And it is extremely rare that a model number or a serial number was used for one year and one year only. And forget "using the Schwinn format" or going by the name that is on the bicycle.
Here is a typical question we get: "I have a Western Flyer serial number 222xxx555. Who made it and when was it made?" WELL? Who knows? There were at least two dozen different companies that made bicycles and trikes badged "Western Flyer." That amounts to MILLIONS of serial numbers if you count all of the models over many decades of production. Any ID on that basis alone is sheer nonsense. This is just one reason why we have to SEE what you may have. At least THEN we know where to start looking. Anyone too lazy to take simple photos, but then expects us to sit and dig through millions of serial numbers is mistaken. And if that is offensive, so be it. You have our blessing to join the WAGS and guess your way to an answer.
We don't simply hand out lists. And we don't do WAGs here. We don't make up history here. And we don't state something as a fact just because "a buddy told us so." Or because we read it in a chat room or "forum." We only provide factual historical information here. No guessing. It has taken over 40 years and a lot of very hard work to assemble the listings we have. But we CAN tell you– ACCURATELY– when and who made your American-made bicycle–particularly if it is from the classic era. What's the classic era? Read your NBHAA.com FAQs!
So people think they can do their own research and get quickie answers - often for very difficult issues. Quickie answers are not necessarily ACCURATE answers. They may make you feel better, but quickie responses seldom tell you what you really need to know. NBHAA is not a do-it-yourself web site, but rather is a real archive. We are concerned with accuracy and facts. We do not use "consensus," blogs, chats, gossip, fuzzy Xeroxes, other people's opinions or wild guessing to arrive at our responses. Such methods may be democratic and invite a lot of interaction on a web site, but such stuff is why you are looking for answers in the first place...right? And such stuff is why it became necessary to have our GTCC section.
Ever see a car that was designed by a committee or group of people rather than one knowledgeable designer who KNEW what he was doing? Same thing. Our files are not on the internet and are not open to the public. That would take a huge, HUGE server and lots more expense. We just cannot possibly put over 60,000 items in digital format on the web- plus all of our lifetime of expertise. We can't possibly teach you everything we know about classic bicycles by a mere web site! Sometimes, you just have to rely on a real human being who has first-hand knowledge- as incredible as that may seem to some Internet users today. We prefer to give you accurate information and that means you can't DIY here.
• If requesting via e-mail, take good, clear photos of the bicycle or part in question. If you write without photos, we really can't help you.
• And remember this: if you write with the DIY attitude that you already know it all because you saw a Xerox or photocopy someplace or a picture on somebody's web site or some newsletter said XYB then you're starting from a bad position. IF you are going to tell US what you have instead of us telling you, then the point of us assisting you is lost.
• When taking photos, leave people and other objects out of the photo and try to shoot against a neutral background such as a wall or garage door.
• Take photos of the WHOLE bicycle as well as any detail areas- and be sure to show the chainguard- if any. Load your photos from your digital camera into your computer. If you scan your photos, do them into JPEG/JPG format and send them as attachments.
• Do not attempt to bury photos in the actual text of your letter since this may not display properly...or at all.
• If you do not have a scanner and you need to scan, use some place like Kinko's Copies (in most areas of North America) and have them do the scans for you. Avoid gang scans (bunches of photos all crammed into one scan). Have each photo scanned individually and send each photo individually (our server likes to re-format multiple attachments, which makes it either difficult or impossible to retrieve your pics).
• No digital camera? No problem. Either scan your print photos or have them put on CD-ROM by your developer. If all else fails, take your regular photo negatives to Kodak or your local photo developer and ask them to put the photos directly onto a CD-ROM computer disc. You can even have Kodak or most overnight photo developer shops do both old-fashioned paper prints AND/OR store your pics on CD-ROM computer disc. Then use the photos on that CD-ROM because they are now digital photos. Put them in your computer and send them. This service does commonly exist and is very reasonable.
Sadly, most "bouillabaisse bikes" are presented by the sellers as "original". Believe it or not, increasingly, "bouillabaisse bikes" are showing up in prestigeous auctions and museums! Often the auctions and museums will feature such bicycles in nice glossy catalogues with elaborate and authoritarian-sounding descriptions. So... caveat emptor and read our NBHAA GTCC.
Price guides exist, but A.) guides are usually wildly skewed as far as realistic prices and B.) guides very often incorrectly identify years and C.) guides do not take into account varying conditions of a bicycle, nor how much to deduct if various parts are missing. For instance, on some bicycles, the tank or the headlight alone might be worth more than the entire bicycle itself! D.) ANY printed matter regarding pricing of old things ALWAYS has a limited time when it is of any use (IF it was correct in the first place). Price guides are never reliable for more than a limited period of time. AND, E.) In THIS hobby... and on the internet, nearly everybody considers themself an "expert".
While we do have the largest and most comprehensive listings of serial numbers for most of the bicycle companies, but we still require photos. Anyone who doesn't is just giving you a presumptive guess. And nobody can look at even a Schwinn serial number and tell you which exact model it was- except in the case of SOME made-for-motors frames. THAT is impossible. And even then there are no universal responses that are accurate without SEEING it. We won't pump sunshine your way, just the facts. Period.
Although age for many collector bicycles can be provided with serial numbers, this too is a tricky business, not always for amateurs and do-it-yourselfers. For instance some numbers were re-used, or placed in different locations; or combined with new model numbers (in cases other than Schwinn). Some bicycles used model numbers as well as serial numbers, others (like Schwinn) did not. For the majority of old bicycles, alas there are no complete serial number records, including for Schwinns prior to 1948 (due to a fire at Schwinn). Some bicycle retailers (such as Western Auto and Sears) used as many as a dozen different bicycle manufacturers to make their bicycles, so one needs to know both the year AND the actual manufacturer. This is not for amateurs and WAGs.
We coined a definition published a classic bicycle definition first in a 1978 newsletter, Classic Bicycle & Whizzer News (CBWN)... and again published and copyrighted another definition in November, 1979 issue of Bicycle Dealer Showcase (BDS) magazine. CBWN was the first and ONLY newsletter in the hobby starting in 1977- such as it was in those times. BDS was read by over 20,000 bicycle dealers and industry people. We also taught CLASSIC BICYCLE seminars in bicycle industry trade shows like the BDS EXPO (predecessor to today's INTERBIKE) in the 1970s. So we were first- it was our idea and no matter who says what today- nobody back in those times disputed our definition or had one of their own. And this definition included the time period of 1920 to roughly 1965 and included singletube, balloon and middleweight bicycles. It was followed (or in some cases overlapped) by the "musclebike" period which includes Krates and the like. The classic era was preceded by the antique era which covers 1919 and earlier, although we do feel that some bicycles such as the Charlie Chaplin bicycle and others from the antique era qualify as classics.
Since we introduced and published the first definition of "CLASSIC BICYCLE" any number of people and books and articles have come forward YEARS- EVEN DECADES LATER- attempting to put their own spin on the definition. Or to modify the term to suit their own misguided needs and ideas. But the first is the first and the reason the term exists as it is presently understood in general is because of our original concept and definition. PERIOD.
The word, "purist" may even be raised as if it is a naughty, vile, evil term. Without descending into a debate over semantics and insults, suffice to say that restoration- true restoration- is exactly what a purist would and should do! As a consequence, anyone who undertakes a restoration, then, by definition IS a purist! Otherwise, if you are not performing a restoration, you are doing a customizing job. Why people are suddenly ashamed to admit that they did a custom job instead of a real restoration is a mystery. THIS is why you have so many Pontiac LeMans cars showing up at vintage car auctions with "GTO" names and parts on them! This is why so many 6-cylinder 1970s Barracudas and Challengers show up at classic car auctions dressed up as "HEMI-CUDAS" or "HEMI-CHALLENGERS"... these are customized fakes- regardless of the cute "resto" names on them. Why can't we just admit- hey, it's a FAKE CUSTOM somebody MADE up? As in it is NOT restored...it is CUSTOMIZED! If your bicycle didn't come from the original factory with an iridescent purple paint job and a thousand lights and blinding chrome- its a CUSTOM! If your Schwinn has a Shelby sprocket and a Roadmaster seat- it's a CUSTOM. It is NOT restored... it is customized! Go ahead- you CAN say it!!!
Restoration is restoration. Customizing is customizing. They are NOT the same. PERIOD. End of story. Schwinns did not come with Rollfast chainguards. Colsons did not come with ROADMASTER parts on them (unless you read bogus Smithsonian Magazine stories or L.A. Times articles). Bicycles from the 30s did not come with imported wheels from the 70s or hubs from the 90s. Original paint jobs were not swimming under a sea of clearcoat. THIS is customizing, folks. Call it what it is.
Bottom line: the classic bicycle info out there is rife with errors, many of the errors quite serious... and many of them are in books and newsletters. Yet the errors are firmly believed by most collectors. We have been tempted to write a correction book on the existing articles and books covering classic bicycles so far in existence. We probably won't try to publish a correction guide on paper since it would be voluminous. However, watch the GUIDE TO CORRECTING THE CLASSICS (GTCC) section on this site which includes corrections of erroneous books, articles, etc. GTCC is a guide to correct errors in the books and articles and auction catalogues which have been distributed over the past few years and which are presently available. Watch for new additions to that section very soon!
Back in the 1970s, we wrote an article on classic bicycle restoration. In that article, we stated that Webster's Dictionary defines restoration as a "return to original condition". Thus, blindingly bright blue chrome and paint jobs swimming in clear coats and non-original colors fall more under the realm of customizing rather than restoration.
Q. But I saw it in a book, magazine, newsletter or a web site...so it's gotta be correct...right?
A. Unfortunately, sadly, not always true. Read our GTCC section if you really want to know the score. Especially when it comes to the classic bicycle hobby wherein people can just write whatever "histories" they like and publish them as fact. Some people don't like to hear (or read) this and even get angry (a sure sign that they don't WANT to know any better).
Here are a couple of good examples of gross misinformation. Take the case of the Sherrell Classic bicycle. A relatively new bicycle, this oughta be a snap to get the facts and history accurate...right? Wrong. Virtually every article, auction catalogue listing, photo caption, etc. we have seen about the relatively new Sherrell bicycle in recent years has been incorrect (go back and check for yourself). Why? One museum published the wrong date several times and it became cast in stone. Spokespersons for such outfits made things worse by repeating the incorrect date...or making up others. Publications did the same, picking up on the lead of the famous museum. Even the venerable, prestigious Smithsonian bought into the hysteria and boldly published (despite our direct advice to the contrary) a date of "1979" in their September, 1996 issue of SMITHSONIAN MAGAZINE. AND THIS article made it on the internet! (To this date, the Smithsonian has defiantly refused to correct their silly error, oddly stating it unimportant and "purist" to do so...that we'd have to "agree to disagree"). And you thought the almighty Smithsonian-the god of antiquities- knew it all? Go check it out for yourself... the article is still online.
Auction houses followed the crowd and published the same erroneous dates (check the date in the past Schwinn Chicago Auction catalogue for instance- again- despite our advice to the contrary). There can be no "matter of opinion" about actual dates when things were made. The publishing of a date of model or date of manufacture should never be left to a mere "opinion" or creative fancy- especially when coming from amateurs. But publishing houses and magazine editors today seem to have no problem playing fast and loose with history- especially when they can fall back on the excuse that they are providing "entertainment." Their replay will often be, "...Yes, but we sold a LOT of those issues...!" That's all that matters, huh?
The original literature for the Sherrell bicycle (and yes, we have it) flatly states, "INTRODUCED IN 1987."And we personally know this to be true, especially since we knew the fellow who made the bicycles. So how do all of the auctions and publications and museums come by the earlier date? How do dates for Sherrells suddenly get published as 1979? HOW? People- even those who ought to know better- BELIEVE IT. Of course, everyone feels covered since somewhere in these books and magazines and catalogues, there is some kind of small-print caveat that they are not responsible for accuracy, or some similar statement. But people who read books don't read the fine print and they're not "in" on the secret joke!
Also, recently with books, publications and articles on the hobby being released in ever-increasing volume and frequency, misinformation is being spread at an alarming rate. We have to decide, are we talking history? Or are we talking customizing? Are we talking mere entertainment disguised as history? One book pictures a Schwinn Aerocycle sitting in majestic shininess... except that the front fender oddly appears flared on BOTH ends...and the braces are most definitely NOT Schwinn...and it has numerous other problems. A knowledgeable Schwinn collector should know that prewar Schwinns with FLAT braces only have ONE rivet at the axle eyelet, not two as found on other bicycles. It was a Schwinn hallmark. Yet, there it is in full blazing color in a hardbound serious-looking book from a major publisher! Check the braces on this one...shown in books and museums. There are numerous other problems with this bicycle we can't even begin to address here. And the concoctions are not limited to the Aerocycle and DX. The Elgin Blackhawk pictured? Wrong headlight, wrong horn and wrong placement for both. Horn belongs on a special bracket attached to the truss rods and should be either an Elgin or EA, not Delta. Headlight should be mounted above the horn. Speedo cable is installed backwards and the screech-owl siren belongs on an Elgin Falcon, not on a Blackhawk. The Whizzer pictured? A Pacemaker, except with a girl's J.C. Higgins front sprocket chainwheel, and engine with parts from different years and versions, and a very missing piston. All in living color, all repeatedly published in books, magazine articles and shown in museums.
All of us should try to use care in stating dates and histories...and regardless of whether you are a collector, editor, writer, auction house, or museum. If you don't know- simply say so. Once misinformation hits print...right or wrong...it's gospel.
Q: Are there any plans to make NBHAA into a digital library that can be accessed online?
A: This is a wonderful idea and we know that several organizations out there (Microsoft, Google, YaHoo and others) are supposedly working on a huge project to make a large digital library. We certainly would love to get involved in that project. But so far we have not been able to contact anyone who can connect us so that we can be a part of this effort. For instance have nearly every bicycle catalogue produced by Pope/Columbia, Monark-Silver King, Inc, Murray, Shelby, Cleveland Welding, Sears, Montgomery Ward, Whizzer, Mead Ranger and so many more. But almost no one has ever seen this stuff! If you have GOOD contact information, please let us know. It would be a shame to have our huge bicycle library remain forever on paper- and perhaps lost or scattered to the winds when we are gone.
Q: "My bicycle is JUST LIKE this picture I saw on the internet... or in a book- except it doesn't have... and it may be missing .... And it's a different color... and...and...and... But it's the SAME thing! How much is it worth?... and I already know when it was made, because it's JUST LIKE..."
A: Jusssst like it- only different, huh? We get a jillion of these letters and they all start out pretty much the same way. The writer is often too busy to send photos (too much time, too much work) but saw something on a DIY web site or in a book. The writer is usually in a big hurry and wants to know everything RIGHT NOW! They'll even try to get us to look at the DIY web site or auction site or copy the pic from the site and send it to us. The picture is usually something that kinda-sorta looks like a bicycle or part the person has. So the writer figures, HEY! VOILA! THIS IS IT! THIS IS WHAT I HAVE!! Then the writer wants us to fill in the blanks in a WAG scenario. First, we can't go by what other people identify. Second, we can't help you without photos of YOUR bicycle- not something you saw somewhere else. We need to see YOUR bicycle or part. Photos of something that kinda-sorta looks like what you have won't work. "Looks just like" from your eyes is not the same as from our eyes. Finally, when we DO get photos of YOUR bicycle and ID it for you, don't pretend you knew it all along or post the information in an ad without mentioning where you got it. Eh?
Q: "I'd send you photos of my bicycle but I took it all apart and sandblasted it. Now I wanna know everything you can tell me about it and how it's supposed to look. But I never took any photos before I stripped it."
A: AND...we get a jillion of these letters too...and they also start out pretty much the same way. Again, the writer is often too busy to send photos (too much time, too much work). People... do your research FIRST. THEN you do your disassembly and paint stripping, etc. It's too late to look for bits of original paint or graphics once they've been sandblasted to oblivion! Second, we can't help you without photos of YOUR bicycle- not something you saw somewhere else. We need to see YOUR bicycle or part. Photos of something that kinda-sorta looks like what you have won't work. And if you've already done the dreaded disasembly, you can STILL take photos of the parts- preferably BEFORE stripping off the paint and graphics. Like any serious restoration, do your research FIRST. THEN ya do your restoration.
MORE NBHAA FAQs WILL BE COMING IN THE FUTURE, SO CHECK BACK OFTEN!

Click on the colored letters at right to : Send Email to NBHAA
This page, all design and contents, all photos unless otherwise noted are Copyright © 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009 by Leon Dixon/NBHAA, All rights reserved. The information and photos on this website may not be reproduced in any form without expressed written permission of NBHAA or its curator.
Date of last update to this page: 29 JULY 2009
