Bayliss-Wiley Unit Hub: Ahead of its time

My first serious lightweight bike was a modest Dawes made of Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a cottered steel crank with a single chainring, and a Simplex derailleur with 3x1/8 inch sprockets.

The rear hub was a Bayliss-Wiley “Unit” hub as it was known. (Pictured above.) Freewheels had always been a separate item that screwed to the hub, this one had the freewheel built into the hub as a single unit, hence its name.

Today we call this a cassette hub and is the standard equipment on most high end and even moderate lightweight bikes.

The Bayliss-Wiley Unit hub was introduced in 1938, and was produced until 1957. Not particularly lightweight it was never considered to be racing equipment, but was used by club cyclists, tourists, and young kids like me who were just starting out.

Looking back it was really ahead of its time and it would be 30 years later that the Japanese company Suntour introduced another, and failed. It wasn’t until the top two manufacturers, Shimano and Campagnolo introduced their cassette hubs that people took them seriously.

The freewheel was always considered an item that would wear out long before the hub, therefore at one time it made sense to have it be a separate component that could be unscrewed from the hub and replaced.

It wasn’t until freewheels went beyond six sprockets to 7, 8, 9, and 10, that an all in one unit or cassette hub was considered practical.

The Bayliss-Wiley Company was located in Tyseley, Birmingham, England and was founded by Cecil Bayliss and Arthur Wiley in 1919.

The company had what we would call today a niche marlet; they produced inexpensive but high quality bicycle components. Bayliss-Wiley kept the British working man on the road, back in the day when the bicycle was often the only form of transport for the working class.

They primarily made hubs, single speed freewheels, and bottom brackets; the parts that wore out and needed regular replacement. The company thrived through the 1920s, 30s and 40s, but not surprisingly declined in the late 1950s, when the British working man abandoned the bicycle and started buying cars for the first time. 

Taken over by Reynold Chains Ltd., the Bayliss-Wiley name finally disappeared in 1969. One of the most recognizable brand names when I started cycling in the 1950s, but not too many of today's generation will have heard of Bayliss-Wiley even in the UK.

You can read more on Ebykr.com

                   

A different round the world trip

This unusual story of a round the world journey by bicycle was recently brought to my attention. Way Wong a 26 year old Chinese student set out in late February from his home in Yinchuan in central China.

Almost all round the world journeys go from east to west, or west to east, but Wong is headed north and he has already crossed the border into Mongolia. From there he will continue to ride north through Russia.

Wong’s father, a wealthy industrialist is sponsoring the trip along with the Chinese government. The young cyclist will be constantly tracked by GPS and when he reaches Russia’s northern coast line, a boat will be waiting to ferry him across to the Polar Icecap.

On this part of the trip he will be accompanied by a dog sled team that will carry supplies. His bike for the journey over the soft snow will be a special one that has the front wheel replaced by twin skis, and the rear wheel replaced with a rubber track similar to a snowmobile. For the hard packed snow and ice sections Wong will use bike with studded ice tires.

The timing of this trip is crucial; Wong plans to cross the North Pole in summer when temperatures are at the highest. Depending on the temperatures and the condition of the ice, if necessary he will be picked up by boat again for the short trip into Northern Canada.

From there it will be a straight shot down the west coast of the Americas, from Alaska to the southern tip of Chile. In order to catch the seasons and cross both Poles in summer it will be necessary for Way Wong to keep up a blistering pace.

He will have to average 68 miles per day; obviously he will not do this on the Polar crossing, so he will make up the milage later. It will be on this fast downhill section along America’s West Coast that Wong hopes to make up time. 

He plans to reach Central America by next autumn so that as he crosses into the Southern Hemisphere it will be Spring and Summer again by the time he crosses by boat from the southern tip of Chile to begin his journey across the South Pole. Here he will be joined by the same dog sled team he used for the northern trip.

After crossing the South Pole it will be a long uphill slog back to China, but Wong is confident; he will have the advantage of all those miles in his legs, and there will be many more boat trips with relatively short land sections in-between.

There will be the longest boat trip from Antarctica to Albany on the south-west tip of Australia; Wong will then ride up the west coast to Darwin in Northern Australia. From there by boat again to Indonesia, Thailand then back into Mainland China.

Wong is looking for volunteer cyclists to help as a pace line, especially down the US West Coast and also along Australia’s west coastline. There is a tentative plan for the Australian leg of the trip, to use trained kangaroos to carry water and energy bars in their pouches.

However, the animal’s trainers have run into a glitch, in that the kangaroos have learned how to unwrap the energy bars, and are eating them. The BBC is filming a documentary of this epic ride; the title will be “Wrong Way Wong.” You can read more here.

                          

Replacing McQuaid: Mission Impossible

I have just read an interesting piece on the cycle racing blog, “The Inner Ring."

It appears you may as well try to oust the Pope as try to get the UCI’s president Pat McQuaid removed from office.

This doesn’t surprise me, I have seen the workings of Cycling’s national governing bodies both in the UK and the United States, and they are structured pretty much the same as the UCI is described.

Clubs affiliated to their national governing body send delegates to an annual congress where officials are elected. These officials in turn become national delegates and get to elect a President and other officials at the world level at the UCI Congress held every four years.

At the club level and even at a national level, work is often on a volunteer unpaid basis; however, if you get elected to a national level there are certain perks. Travel is one of them; an all expenses paid trip to Switzerland every four years to the UCI congress for a start.

Then there is the Olympic Games every four years; who wouldn’t like to go to the Olympics for free? The top officials that represent each individual sport for each country get to go. There is an awful lot of working hard for little or no reward to get to these top positions, but when you get there it is like being the member of an exclusive club.

So having worked so hard to reach the top, even at a lower national level, are you going to make waves at a world level and vote the head guy out of office? Unlikely, unless you have aspirations to be President yourself, in which case you had better have a lot of buddies who you can count on to vote for you.

I’m sure many of the people who voted McQuaid into office ended up with nice paying jobs with the UCI. Others no doubt get to go to big races all over the world. The Tour de France, The Giro d’Italia, etc, etc.

If you are one of McQuaid’s cronies why would you vote him out? You would have to start all over again to ensure having an “In” with the new guy. If you back the wrong guy and he doesn’t get voted in, you lose; you are out of the exclusive club for ever.

McQuaid was first voted into office in 2005, and re-elected in 2009. The next vote is not for another two years in 2013, and there is no guarantee he will step down then.

In the mean time the Professional Riders might break from the UCI and form their own league, rather like the NFL and the NBA.

This looks like a distinct possibility, because McQuaid will stay where he is at least until 2013, and the UCI is not going to change. For that to happen the whole system would have to change, right down to the national and even the club level.

                          

Cyclists Misbehaving

“There is nothing wrong with the world except for people misbehaving.”

Think about it; if people behaved themselves, there would be no crime, no wars. No need for armies or police.

There would be no need to lock our doors, and we could leave our car or bike anywhere unlocked.

Utopia of course; a fantasy world that will never happen.

Here is a comment on the current bikes vs. cars situation in New York City from a Jack Brown, a former bike store owner no less.

I think his words sum up the situation probably as good as any I have read.

"Cyclists can be anywhere, at any time: on the sidewalk, riding the wrong way down the street, and you have no peace. The anarchy that has been allowed to prevail is astonishing.

According to butterfly theory, according to chaos theory, I am sure that the level of emotional and psychological damage wrought by the bicycle far exceeds the damage done by cars. The cumulative effect is equivalent to what happened on 9/11."

I think the comparison to 9/11 is a little strong; however, he is talking about “Emotional and Psychological” damage, not actual physical harm being done. That cars have far more potential to do physical harm than bikes is not the issue here.

In reality pedestrians are not being mowed down in large numbers and killed or seriously injured by cyclists, but the fear that it could happen causes emotional stress; in the same way that living in a high crime area causes stress.

Like living in the constant fear that you could catch a stray bullet at any time; it the fear that is real, not the odds in your favor that you will never actually be shot.

The problem is being caused by a minority of cyclists, just as a minority of people misbehaving can turn a community into a high crime area. No one notices the dozens of cyclists riding in an orderly and proper manner along a street or bike lane.

It is the cyclist brushing past you on the sidewalk at 15 or 20 mph that you notice, or the one who blows through a red light and you don’t even see until he flashes past the hood of your car. It is not the fact that either encounter was not even that close; it is the emotional stress caused by the shock, the surprise.

The stress causes fear, a fear of what could have happened. Fear is then transformed into anger; it is the natural human way of coping. Pretty soon just the sight of a cyclist makes a person angry, and there is a loss of sympathy for the cyclist’s vulnerability. An attitude of, “If these maniacs don’t care for their own safety, why should I care?”

I don’t feel by writing here I can change the situation, anymore that I can stop wars or crime; all I can do is speak to those who do care. Half the battle is understanding the other person’s point of view, and trying to understand why some pedestrians and motorists are angry with all of us.

Know that the fear and resulting stress caused by this anarchistic minority is all too real. Fear breeds anger, and anger breeds hate.

I refuse to live my life in fear; I will not ride my bike in fear. By not riding in fear, I am not riding in anger. Knowing that the motorist’s anger towards me is basically born out of a fear that he/she might hit me, is in a small way comforting.

And by riding in a responsible and courteous manner I am soothing the fear, thereby calming the anger. It is one of the few things a responsible cyclist can do.

Here is some interesting reading on the subject in Chicago Magazine and from NYC in the New York Magazine and The Gothamist   

                           

Dictatorships

As countries around the world ruled by Kings and Dictators, rather than democratically elected governments fight for their freedom; it seems the UCI, the world governing body of the sport of cycling has its own dictator in the form of President Pat McQuaid. (Above.)

The former Irish pro bike rider has managed to piss off just about everybody, from the bike industry, to the promoters and now the professional cyclists. Without all of these different entities there would be no sport of cycling, and yet he still he remains in office.

Unfortunately we need organizations like the UCI just as countries need governments, democratic or not. Within separate countries there are smaller local governments, and usually within a democratic society these too are elected officials that can be voted out of office.

In theory that is. In practice there are cities within democratic countries where local mayors and other officials have been in power twenty or more years, about the length of time many of the world’s dictators have held on to power. Often they stay in power because there is no alterative candidate to oppose.

And so it goes on in any society, below any system of government there are smaller systems run by officials, some paid some not. Many unpaid volunteers do a job out of love for what they do, or for the benefit of the group as a whole.

It might be a group as small as a ladies sewing circle, or an athletic club; when the group gets beyond a certain size it needs structure in order to continue. That means a set of rules, and elected officials to oversee the day to day running of the club or organization.

I always tended to shy away from holding any official position within a cycling club where I was a member. I did on many occasions act as event organizer for bike races, it was something I enjoyed doing, but that was as far as my bike officialdom went. I was like the majority of members in any cycling club; I just wanted to race and ride my bike.

Here I have to generalize in my observations, which can be a mistake because there are always exceptions to the generalization. But over the years I have seen two types of people who become officials in cycling clubs.

There are the nice guys, they are the ones who step up because they have the ability to organize and do the job. Often it is time consuming and no one else wants the job, so they volunteer for the benefit of the group as a whole.

Then there are the control freaks; they want to see the job done their way, and by volunteering they will be in charge ensuring that things are run according to their way of thinking.

When it comes to club level elections of officials, the nice guys will often only take on the job only if no one else wants to do it, but if there is someone else willing to run they will not oppose. So the controlling types tend to end up in charge.

Don’t get me wrong, this is not necessarily a bad thing. A bike store owner may start a local club and put money into it. This could be considered a private enterprise, and not particularly democratic, but as long as it benifits the members what harm is there?

Also at a club level if the membership does not like the way things are run, they will leave and join another club, or form a new one.

It becomes a problem when it reaches National or World level as is currently happening with the UCI. We have a person in charge that is running this organization the way he and his cronies see fit. Not necessarily a way that is for the greater benefit of the sport.

The UCI President in theory could be voted out of office; however, the average members of clubs affiliated to their National Cycling bodies cannot do this. And like getting your local mayor out of office you also need a strong candidate to oppose the incumbent.

The only group with any power to oppose the Pat McQuaid and the UCI right now are the professional cyclists. Their demand of representation before major rule changes are made is not unreasonable.

Does the UCI need the professional cyclists more than the Pros need the UCI? It is going to be interesting.