Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:50 am

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 11:07 pm 
Devout Dirtbag

Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 103
Location: Washington DC USA
here is the Vitus 979 shifter boss assembly... don't think this changed over the years:

https://www.ebay.fr/itm/Kit-passage-man ... rk:20:pf:0

Peter Kohler
Washington DC USA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 11:20 pm 
rider | rBoTM Winner
rider | rBoTM Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:42 pm
Posts: 5362
Location: West Yorkshire
Peter, your 'Irish' Sean Yates mention is in the Sem section along with Sean Kelly, just above the photo of Sean's first Paris - Nice stage win in his white jersey. Don't worry, with such a long article probably written at intervals it's easy to make small errors. I've done it myself. Often.

I'll dig out the leaflet tomorrow, I think I know where it is. There's also a Peugeot catalogue but not sure of the year. I'll also try and brave the cold of the loft and check out the numbers on my frame.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 11:38 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:10 pm
Posts: 1053
Apologies.. With daylight and a magnifying glass I find there is indeed the slotted head of a bolt down inside my non drive side shifter boss. A steel bolt I reckon.

Quote:
Initial production beginning in June 1979 was 100 frames a day. On 10 December 1980 the 10,000th Vitus frame was completed.


Peter, I'm struggling to make sense of these figures.

Roughly, there are 78 weeks between (say) the 10th of June 1979, and the 10th of December 1980. Divide 10,000 by 78 and you get (roughly) 128. So that would be 128 frames per week. That is a long way from 100 frames per day, unless Bador/Vitus were working a one-and-a-quarter day week?

Are you sure that initial production was not rather one hundred frames per week?

If it was indeed one hundred per day it must have slowed down a hell of a lot to take until December 1980 to reach 10,000. That shouldn't have taken more than 100 (working) days? I guess even in France there are more than 100 working days in 78 weeks?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 5:03 pm 
Devout Dirtbag

Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 103
Location: Washington DC USA
Sorry, that must be a mistake on my part or from the original source. I will delete it and stick to the annual production figures. By 1992 it was quoted as being 130,000 total and since production ended another five years later, it was probably about 145,000 total.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:23 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:10 pm
Posts: 1053
Well, 1979 to 1992 is thirteen years, so 130,000 frames over that period is conveniently ten thousand frames per year. Divide 10,000 by 52(weeks in the year) and you get about 192. So, very simplistically, we're talking about 192 frames per week.

I have no idea as to whether production might have expanded or contracted over the years by any appreciable factor, or whether it was more or less 'steady state', but it seems to me that if you start out at 100 frames per week, eighteen months later you realise you've been making 128 frames per week, and thirteen years later you realise you've been making 192 frames per week... well.. that is a good business, and it sounds like a feasible scenario.

On the other hand, if you start out with the idea of making 100 frames per day, and eighteen months later you realise you've only made 18 frames per day, and thirteen years later you realise you've been making 27 frames per day... well.. that is prising a small success from the jaws of abject failure, and it doesn't sound feasible to me, but what do I know?

It does look suspiciously like somebody might've mistook 'le jour' for 'la semaine' It'd be a shame to delete the 'hundred per day' reference- It must have come from somewhere. You could instead note that the other production figures make it look possible that it's a week's production rather than a day's. That way someone might get back to you with clarification? But it's your call, of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Midlife and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group