As an
Englishman I like to feel
that Britain is the true home of the Mountain Bike. However, if indeed
it was the product of "eccentric British engineering genius", it
definitely falls into the category of being yet another idea that we
British didn't bother to pick up and run with!
This is not an article about technical engineering though. It's about a
phenomenon that lasted no longer than three years in a town in the
North of England - Birkenhead - which has several claims to fame but of
which this is not one of them. At least not yet!
It's probably fair to assume that the phenomenon did not occur just in
Birkenhead. It could well have happened in many other places in the UK.
I'm only aware of one other possibly similar instance, which I haven't
yet researched [the Bogwheelers of Darlington, as described on page 151
of The Spaceframe Moultons by Tony Hadland], so for
the moment it's Birkenhead in the lead for the invention stakes.
First of all let's consider what a Mountain Bike is. For this
definition there is no better source than the book titled
The Birth of Dirt by Frank J. Berto, an
American writer
and professional cycle engineer who has been involved with Mountain
Bikes from their inception in the USA.
In his book, FJB states that a Mountain Bike should include six
essential features, namely:
1. 26" Tyres, at least 2" wide.
2. Flat, roadster style bars.
3. Derailleur gearing.
4. Good brakes, using either drums or the cantilever system.
5. Off road use - and
6. Be of Marin County USA, origin.
It's also worth noting - again according to FJB - that mountain bikes
were invented around 1970 in the USA. Remember this date!
So what do we have? A bike that's been beefed up to accommodate riding
across rough ground, up, over and down mountains and no doubt across
muddy river beds.
At this point let me start to explain where I'm coming from with the
title of this article, and hopefully you'll see at the end - or maybe
earlier - how I can even question the origin of the Mountain Bike.
I want to take you back to England in 1958. This was still a rather
tired little country even though the war had been over for thirteen
years. Children and teenagers made their own amusements. If somebody in
your street owned a television it would have been bought on credit, and
would have been an attraction for visitors because they were still
quite rare. Cars were the property of the well-to-do and life as such
carried on very much as it had done before 1939, although drastic
changes were only a few years away.
I was thirteen in 1958 and had a burning desire to own a motorcycle!
However not just an ordinary road going motorcycle, but a scrambler!
(Moto Cross Bike) This desire had been fuelled by watching scrambling
on television. (Somebody else's I hasten to add!) Every Sunday
afternoon I would watch Arthur Lampkin, Jeff Smith, Dave Bickers and
others roar around muddy fields, flying through the air with perfect
balance and performing such acrobatic feats on two wheels that I became
well and truly hooked.
As a thirteen-year-old in the North of England in 1958, the chances of
obtaining such a machine were what dreams were made of. But I was not
the only thirteen year old with this dream. There were many others and,
by some trick of fate, we had all built bikes that resembled as closely
as a bike can, one of those motor cycle scramble machines. We called
our machines "Dirt Trackers" or "Track Bikes". [Not to be confused with
the single-speed, fixed-wheel, lightweight racing bikes, traditionally
referred to as track bikes.]
I now ask for the reader's tolerance as I dive down into the well of
memory and produce details of a typical "Track Bike" that would have
been state-of-the-art those days. Most of the following details refer
to my own bike.
1. The Frame - The type of frame used would have been a normal cycle
frame from a basic road bike, certainly not a lightweight or a racer. I
used a Raleigh Trent Tourist that was quite strong although rather
heavy.
2. The Wheels and Tyres - The wheels were 26" with a 1 3/8th inch steel
rims, again as found on most "hack" machinery those days. The tyres
were "Avon Gripster", which were the only ones we could find that had a
"knobbly" tread. I recall that Avon originally produced these for
speedway bikes, cycle speedway being popular those days, but using a
different type of machine to those that I'm discussing here.
3. Front Forks - I used a set of Webb girder forks that were originally
produced for use on motorised cycles (cycles with a clip-on motor).
These forks were similar in some respects to the old style Harley
Davidson fork with the girder arrangement and large spring at the top.
There was a fair amount of damping but they were a heavy item. These
forks were popular with most of the "Dirt Trackers", being available
from a dealer in Birkenhead who had bought a load in a surplus sale.
4. Handlebars - I used a set of handlebars that actually came off a
scrambler! Very wide - and heavy - they had a strengthening bar across
them and certainly looked the business in bright chrome. Motorcycle
handlebars were the norm with most of the other lads.
5. Saddle - a large sprung saddle was used, lowered down as far as
possible and the nose taped to the cross bar. There was no technical
merit in this taping - it just looked good!
6. Brakes - I used a hub brake unit on both the back and front wheels.
Both came off an old tandem and were built into ordinary rims for me.
Again they were heavier than ordinary rim brakes, but the stopping
power was out of this world, especially in the rain.
7. Transmission - I used 1/8th inch pitch chain with a Sturmey-Archer
4-speed rear hub gear. The ratios used were constantly being changed, I
think I eventually got down to a bottom gear of 25 inches by using a
rear cog from an old Myford Lathe that had an unbelievable 36 teeth. Of
course, this resulted in a top gear of somewhere around 55 inches!
Believe me, riding on the road was tiring! To digress for a moment, we
never considered the derailleur gear system because we didn't think it
would stand up to the type of surface we rode over. Also I personally
felt that a "gearbox" should be self contained and well lubricated,
which the old Sturmey-Archer was.
8. Sundry - I fitted mudguards - it rains a lot in the North of England
- because they helped give the impression of my fantasy scrambler. I
recall that my rear mudguard (fender) was about eight inches long - and
was a sawn off section from a Greaves scrambler. Lights were fitted, I
had a bracket on the handlebars to carry my lamp unit, and the brake
levers were fitted with plastic covers that had "ball ends," again as
scramblers did. The horn was a bulb horn and the pedals basic rubber
platform units.
That information should enable you to appreciate just what we were up
to in 1958/59, a good ten years before events in Marin County! As an
aside, I often think about building a replica which, who knows ...
maybe one day.
So now lets' get back to the basics of this article. Was the mountain
bike a British invention that was born and passed away before the
innovators of Marin County came along?
Comparing the British model with the definition in Frank Berto's book,
the result is - with a little bit of end play - this:
a) 26" wheels - yes, but only 1 3/8th inch tyres, albeit knobblies.
Let's say evens!
b) Flat roadster style bars - I think we're on the same wavelength
here. Dropped bars were certainly never used - evens again?
c) Derailleur Gearing - definitely not, for the reasons explained
earlier. However, in the context of applying a wide range of gears -
isn't the concept the same? Maybe a point to the Mountain Bike.
d) Good brakes - absolutely, we are in the same ballpark here!
e) Offroad use - absolutely!
f) Be of Marin County, USA, origin. My only defence here is that if you
look hard enough in Marin County you might well find some former
residents of Birkenhead!
I think it's fair to say that, point for point on the above,
comparisons between the two machines are pretty similar. Most certainly
the intentions behind them are the same even though we used sprung
forks before the original Mountain Bike and we used mudguards.
And I also think I've managed to produce a fair case to support my
theory that Britain produced the first "Mountain Bike" even though it
was the product of fertile schoolboy minds. What do you think?
Before I close the article I must relate to you how this country "might
have missed becoming a producer of these machines."
During the building of my own bike, I would spend a lot of time in the
local bike shop, chatting up the proprietor about tyres, etc. One day
he showed me a catalogue for Viking Cycles that contained a photograph
of a speedway bike. These were simple, stripped-down machines used for
cinder circuit racing, mainly in the South of England.
What intrigued me was that the speedway bike had an extended down tube
that came below the axle, and was supposed to alleviate whip in the
frame.
Thinking that Viking must be ahead in thinking in the cycling field I
wrote to them about my "Track Bike," thinking that they might like to
build some similar machines, as one does when the shoots of
entrepreneurial thinking start to grow. No reply, so I wrote to
Raleigh, from whom I did get a reply which went along the lines of:
"Thank you for your letter ... would not be commercially viable
… current range suits all our customers … thank
you for
your interest ... do not feel that it would have a wide appeal
…
Goodbye!"
Sic Transit Gloria
Tommy Sandham read the above article and wrote:
Enjoyed
reading your account of the mountain bike being invented in England.
Perhaps it was also invented near Glasgow around the same time? I too
watched Jeff Smith on tele every Saturday afternoon. I too had a Trent
Tourist frame number ag22212N. I did not have the money or ability to
fit telescopic forks, but learnt all about gearing. I must have been
the only person ever to ask for and buy alternative gears for a 3-speed
Sturmey Archer hub. With my low gear I could climb anything. No use
telling you where, unless you know Drumchapel, Glasgow quite well...!!!
I've driven up some of those hills in my car and wonder how I ever did
it on the bike.
I too had lumpy
bicycle
speedway tyres. Never found them in Glasgow but bought a pair while on
holiday in Norfolk. When I went scrambling on my Trent Tourist and you
hit a rock, you got a hell of a jar through the wheel, through the bars
and into your arms...
Anyway, just thought I'd let you
know there are others out there with similar interests and memories!
Regards,
Tommy
David Minter emailed from Australia to highlight this fascinating and well-illustrated account of early French cyclo-cross: Think 'cross is hard these days? Think again.
Brian Morrison wrote from Leighton Buzzard, Bedfordshire, England:
I read the Mike Daly article
with interest. My thoughts exactly! I too had a 'track bike' when I
lived in Essex in the late fifties/early sixties. The way in which I
created it was, I now shamefully realise, nothing short of vandalism. A
neighbour died and his widow sold me his bike. It dated from the
nineteen twenties or thirties and was a Raleigh Gold Vase.
It had some
exquisite features such as a rear hub that combined a Sturmey-Archer
two speed hub with a drum brake. The front brake was a centre-pull
caliper and the handlebars were 'North Road' drops on a beautiful
extended stem. The frame was finished in black with fabulous gold leaf
transfers. With cream celluloid mudguards it was probably 100% original.
What did I do with
it? I stripped the frame with 'Nitromors', painted it red, fitted
'cowhorn' bars, knobbly tyres etc. and made it my track bike. May I be
forgiven!
Still cycling at
62, I have a 1980's Holdsworth Elan, a modern Ribble 7005SL and an MTB
but I still wish I had the Raleigh Gold Vase.
Patrick Elsdale emailed, from South Queensferry, West Lothian, Scotland:
I feel I must e-mail regarding, who invented the mountain bike. Well it obviously depends on the definition of mountain bike. However, I add my tuppence worth:
When we were kids in the late sixties early seventies we all had trackers which were a home-built general purpose stripped down bike, usually with 3-speeds and just about nothing else to aid going anywhere we could.
In the late seventies, a year or two after Edinburgh Bike Coop started, I was working there and built a bike with the express purpose of having one that would go up hills as well as down hills. At this time the nearest thing was a clunker, not at all the same thing. This bike was based on a cromo frame with 650 (continental equivalent to 26") and the fattest tyres I could find which were a variety of zig-zag about 40mm wide, if I remember correctly. Later we found a Finnish tandem winter tyre that was fatter but alas much heavier. The Zig Zag gave an acceptable compromise especially after I chopped up an old tyre and glued bits of it on a bit like a tractor tyre. This gave a lot of grip in mud but a less than perfect ride on tarmac; also after a while bits would fly off. The gears were 5-speed derailleur with a 44 or 46 tooth on the front - it would go up hills nicely! The brakes were more fun, as the frame was built for 27" wheels. Therefore we had to fit the longest arm brakes we could find. Thus the braking was OK but not brilliant. Bars were straight alloy and a B17 saddle finished it off. There was nothing else like it at the time and everyone thought it was a totally daft idea. Only a few years later I was able to feel fairly smug. This bike actually still exists, although alas is converted to nearer original spec.
A few years after this I built a modified bike specifically as a round town racer, which has reappeared as a Cannondale Bad Boy and also as a Edinburgh Bike Coop Courier. It started with a hand-built short-wheelbase butted frame. To this was added a 1936 K series 3-speed Sturmey-Archer hub for pre-selection and fast changes, running on a mixture of 3-in-1 and WD40, it worked well until it exploded doing a quick start. I replaced this setup with a 7-speed block and bar changer. The rest of the bike was braze-on cantilevers, again, straight alloy bars and a B17. Wheels were mountain bike racing rims, imported at great cost, with 1.75" slicks. This bike was famous for having steering so quick it was almost unridable, and fantastic acceleration and cornering. The weight was next to nothing.
As an afterthought, I realize the madness never stops. I just very recently built a fast commuter, 1980's Giant Cadex Carbon/Alloy frame, straight carbon bars, twist grip for the rear mech and the front changer left on the down tube. A sprung B17 (again) and rat trap pedals, subtle. Fairly quick too. On this basis I feel I must claim the first mountain bike. Of course, I assume there will be spurious claims to contradict this. I will be glad to hear your comments.
In a later email, Patrick wrote:
I think the whole mountain bike thing is as you suggest, something that just happened. As I said above, when I built my first bike it was as something that could handle rough tracks, hills, mud, etc - conditions typically found in Scotland. To me a clunker is essentially a downhill bike. I had a Schwinn and it certainly did not go up hills! My definition of a bike is something one pedals. By this definition a clunker is not really a mountain bike, since you need a pick-up truck to get it up the hill in the first place!
I would suggest that from a UK perspective the first 'mountain bikes' that might reasonably fulfil the job description were Trackers from circa 1967ish (that was when I had mine, they had been around longer than that) since they were specifically built by kids to go anywhere. And that included all the sorts of places one might unreasonably expect take a 3-speed bike. They even made knobbly tyres for them! We had cowhorn bars and not much else on them. The whole point was that they were built by the owner, and thus each was different. I do not really have anything else to add to my previous words on the subject, all I know is that no one else was cycling round on a bike that that.
