Tim Isaac's
Match
© Rivendell Bicycle Works 1999
(For historical reasons only: the lugged Paramount project was ended
by Schwinn and Match did not have enough work to continue. All the
employees managed to find gainful employment, and Curt from Match is now
one of our two top builders.)
"Match" doesn't roll off the tongue like De Rosa or Colnago But
there's a ton of skill and experience and potential in a tidy little frame
shop way up there in Woodinville (Washington).
RR: How old are you and what's your history with bikes?
Tim Isaac: I'm 50. I started building frames half my lifetime ago,
1974. I was a competitive cyclist for several years in Colorado, where I
grew up, and there were a few guys putting frames together. They did
pretty good work, and I thought I should try it myself.
RR: Did they teach you?
TI: No, I took a job for a guy who imported Italian-style frames
from Mexico, and needed someone to do quality control at the factory down
there. So, I interviewed for the job, quit my perfectly good engineering
job, and headed for Guadalajara. I spent a couple years watching Mexicans
build bicycles and trying to find ways to do it better. I made my first
frame there‹I carved up some lugs to make it look like a De Rosa. At the
time, they brazed the Italian way‹pinning the lugs to the tubes, and
freeform brazing the joints over bricks.
RR: That sounds charming.
TI: Yes, but brazing's better with acetylene. You can select a tip and a
gas pressure combination that results in a quiet, but hot-enough flame
that wraps itself around the lug and produces a very uniform heat
envelope. You get uniform brazing temperatures, and the the flux doesn't
get blown off the tubing.
RR: How did you come to build your own frames?
TI: Well, when I decided to start making frames in 1974, the first
thing I did was build a fixture, to hold the tubes, and then I drew up the
frame on paper. It must have taken a month. I was self-taught, but it was
hard. Painful, actually. But after my sixth bike, a guy came in the shop
and insisted he needed a custom frame. He was sure he knew what he wanted.
He said "I've seen your bicycles everywhere," but there were only six. I
attributed that to the decals, which looked really good. I should mention
that after two years of solo building, Jock Fisher joined me.
RR: Who's Jock Fisher?
TI: He was a good bike rider in Denver. A tourist, a wood
craftsman, and he wanted to learn how to build frames, so he joined me in
1976, and we learned a lot from each other. Three years later he died of a
heart attack, in a bike race, and I just couldn't go back in the shop and
make frames by myself. From working with Jock, I learned that, at least
for me, it's better to work with other people, or at least one other
person. The interaction between workers, craftsmen, can be quite positive.
You learn from each other.
RR: How many frames did you build as a custom builder, and what were
they like?
TI: I built about 450 frames. They were traditional frames, built
with Reynolds or Columbus tubes. Mostly road racing frames. I always liked
the appearance of fastback stays with an integral binder bolt. Very
compact and extremely strong. I built all of my frames that way, except
for the first five. One of my early customers, Ron Hill, suggested I try
to make a frame for him. He showed me a photo of a custom frame with
fastback stays. I thought they looked great and have made all my frames
that way ever since.
RR: Why did you stop being a custom builder?
TI: I was starving to death. Getting skinnier and skinnier. And
it's even harder today. Custom builders today are selling to a smaller
market, and in that small market, they're competing with cheaper-to-make
TIG welded bicycles with the images created by professional marketing
staffs with millions of dollars to spend. And besides that, it's pretty
much a mountain bike world out there, and a big company can make or have
made a full suspension mountain bike frame in an hour and a half. So the
guy with the torch and the file and the traditional methods doesn't really
have anywhere to go with it. Nobody's asking.
RR: Yeah yeah yeah. How did you get together with Trek?
TI: I attended a bicycle show in Ohio, one bleak January or
February in 1978. I rented a hotel suite to show my frames and try to sell
some. About half a dozen of my recent customers in Denver were nice enough
to loan me theirs, so I showed up with what looked like a complete line of
frames. I took a bunch of orders at that show and started selling to shops
back east. Two fellows from Trek were at that show. I was looking over
their bicycles and admiring them. Later, one of the Trek lads came to my
both and complimented me on the lighting and the general impression my
frames made. He complained that he couldn't find a single flood light in
any of the hardware stores, which didn't surprise me, because I bought
them all two days before. I loaned him a few of mine, and within a year we
were talking about a position. Dick Burke and Bevil Hogg‹the two top men
at Trek‹were looking for changes, and wanted me there, and the security of
a larger company, the chance to control the general direction of design
and fabrication were more than I could resist. Plus, it would mean a
regular paycheck, and I couldn't say no to that one, either.
RR: Why you? They could have hired another custom builder.
TI: Well, they'd seen the bikes I made for the Olympic team, so I
had a good reputation.
RR: When did you start at Trek, and what did you do, exactly?
TI: In 1979. At that time, the frame factory was like a high volume
custom shop, with a high volume of custom shop problems. My plan was to
design fixtures that guaranteed consistency from one frame to the next. It
required new machining operations, semi-automated brazing, and
electrostatic painting. Our assembly area was also in need of a new
layout.
RR: But how did your experience as a custom builder in a two-guy
shop help you there? It seems like it wouldn't help at all. It seems like
it might even hurt.
TI: Well, I had an engineering background, also, so that helped. And I
traveled to bike factories around the world, studied them, and I brought
back the best ideas. It was a lucky break, though.
RR: What was your most challenging design at Trek?
TI: It must have been the road frame from Reynolds 753. The
challenge was to engineer a frame that could be built with a minimal
amount of heat, so the metal wouldn't suffer, and could be built
efficiently. So I designed special investment castings that made that
possible. The seat tube was captured by a nifty little shelf, so instead
of sticking the seat tube all the way through the lug, we could just cut
it off straight and butt it up against this shelf near the top of the lug.
That's the way all seat lugs are made these days‹it's just a better way.
Then there were sockets to hold the seat stays, and the sockets were
designed with similar shelves, which eliminated mitering the seat stays,
too. The seat post binder boss was also built in, so we didn't have to
braze that on either. By eliminating caps and binder barrels and a seat
tube that normally would pass through the seat lug, the brazing time was
reduced by 60 percent, and the metal suffered less. I learned a lot from
that project, and later I designed other castings based on the same idea,
for other parts of the bike-dropouts with built-in cable guides and chain
hangers, and so on.
RR: They sound like clever short-cuts.
TI: They were clever, and the only thing they short cutted were
things that were problematic in the build, or harder to control. Smart
castings often allow you to build a better bicycle. Using castings in this
way makes the outcome more precise and consistent and predictable. Don't
call it a short-cut.
RR: Rivendells are notorious as being really labor-intensive.
Waterford thought so, Joe says the same, and that seems to go against your
engineering values.
TI: They're a lot of work now, but I think any good bicycle
evolves. You believe in the design, but "design" to you means something
different than it does to me. For you it means how the customer sits on
it, and how parts fit on it‹tire clearance and chainring clearance, and
all those details we've been working out on your All-Rounders, and how it
behaves when you ride it. For me, it means how is it built? We have to be
sensitive to your definition, but for our definition, that's where I look
at them evolving. We'll be able to evolve the design so it's easier for us
to build it, and the the frame will be improved. There are things right
now that are difficult, but it'll be easier later on.
RR: What changes would you make?
TI: Um...well, the way the All-Rounder is currently configured,
there's more labor than there needs to be. Assemblying chainstays and
working out seat lug shapes. You know, we're carving up Road seat lugs to
shape them like All-Rounder lugs. The seat stay plug has a radius on it
that creats a gap between the tube and shoulder‹it's an excellent plug
with some unique design features that I really like, but I'd change that
one detail on it. And fitting up the rear dropouts to the chainstays could
be easier. Functionally there's no problem, but from a builder's point of
view, it could be improvedŠand all those things are in our plans for
revision. And when that's complete, they'll be as strong and straight and
pretty, but easier to make.
RR: Since Joe's been building our frames for a year and a half now,
and you're just coming on board, do you see him as competition, and how
does it feel to chronologically follow a guy who you hired for his first
brazing job?
TI: I am not just coming on board with Rivendell.
Rivendell is coming on board with Match! I've been at this a long time,
and Match may be new, but inexperienced we are NOT. We've got one of Joe's
frames here, and it's a really fine frame. Good details, lots of care in
it, and there's nothing to take away from it, at all. But we build bikes
as good, and as pretty, as anybody's. We have the skills and we care as
much, so it's just a matter of putting the time into it.
RR: Well, what I meant was, he has a history with us and you're just
starting to. Anyway, why did you leave Trek, and where did you go next?
TI: Trek became a very stressful company, a huge company. There
were so many changes, so fast. I was ready for a change, and for warmer
winters.
RR: And then where to? You're building Schwinn Paramounts these
days‹how did that happen?
TI: It's a long story. In 1988 I started working for Diamond Back,
trying to help them get their Chinese bike production under control, and I
spent so much time traveling to China, that I finally ended up living
there. It was a tough environment to work in. Every thing I communicated
required translation. Diamond Back was buying bikes from China Bicycle
Company (CBC). CBC at the time lacked the technological advancement of the
Taiwanese, but with a relatively new factory, I had the kind of influence
I was looking for. They wanted more export business, and I wanted them to
be more reliable before I'd approve bicycles from them for Diamond Back.
After a few QC trips to CBC, they offered me a permanent job as VP of
Engineering-another once in a lifetime opportunity. They planned to build
the world's biggest bicycle factory, and I couldn't resist. My wife, Judy,
and our children‹we moved to Hong Kong. I commuted across the border to
the factory, and our children went to British schools. That this had all
stemmed from making custom frames in Denver, still amazes me. But I wanted
to be making fine bicycles again, and we wanted our children to go to
English schools and have normal American upbringings, so I gave it up and
came home. Judy and I decided we'd start a small company to make really
fine lugged frames.
RR: What was the first step? And don't forget to talk about the
Paramounts.
TI: Well, I went to Taiwan to investigate the cost of specific
machines I'd already used and had lots of experience with-machines that
are indestructable and operated with high precision and eliminate the
time-consuming steps that machines simply do faster and more accurately
than people can. I wanted to eliminate the tedious work, and the things
that present so many opportunities for human error, so I could concentrate
on brazing and finishing. I knew of two places making these machines and
went to visit both of them.
I stayed at a hotel not far from the machine factory and was waiting
for an elevator, and when the door opened, there was Skip Hess. {Skip
Hess's dad started Mongoose, and Skip Hess Jr. recently quit as Schwinn's
Sr. VP.-ed}. We were both surprised, and we chatted a bit, then went our
own ways.
The factory visit went well, and I went back home to Hong Kong that
same evening. The next day I set off walking to the American Consulate's
office in Hong Kong to get a fresh new thin passport to start this next
phase of my life with, and saw an American coming down the hill, and it
was Skip again. This second encounter was too coincidental-remember, I'd
seen him in another country just the day before‹and we talked about what
caused us to find each other in different countries two days in a row on
the far side of the planet. We had dinner that evening and I told him my
plans to leave CBC and to start Match Bicycle Company in the states.
Schwinn was then buying more than 150,000 bicycles from CBC, so we had
that in common already. Skip divulged the plan to revive the Paramount,
and my next challenge was right in front of me again. My first custom
frame had been a Paramount. It was built as the result of a visit to the
Schwinn factory. Frank Brilando showed the factory to me. I was 16 years
old visiting Chicago for the chance to compete in the Nationals at
Northbrook. I'd won the state championship in Colorado and was off the
races. Now, half way around the world, I sat with a friend discussing the
future of that same bicycle. Within a year I'd set up Match, and we got
the Schwinn Paramount contract.
RR: Would you have started Match without the Schwinn contract? And
how many Paramounts did you build?
TI: Well, sure I would have. I just told you I was over there this
time on Match business, getting the machinery lined up. But the Paramount
deal was a great way to get started, that's for sure.
RR: Skip Hess recently quit Schwinn and joined Giant. Does that
jeopardize your Paramount deal?
TI: It's hard to say. The bike is good enough that it should be
able to stand on its own merits. Schwinn's own testing has proven it to be
the toughest frame they have, and there's no reason why they shouldn't
sell a lot of them. But we'll see. How well a frame sells depends so much
on how much support it gets. How it's promoted, and other things.
RR: It's pretty amazing to me that you'd start a frame shop and
specialize in lugged frames. But why now? Don't you wish Match could have
begun at a time when people aspired to own a handmade, lugged bike, rather
than saw it as a "retro" statement, good for a chuckle and a warm thought?
TI: Why now? The answer seems so obvious when you are dedicated to
a good idea. I like lugs. I believe in them. I've spent untold hours
working out designs for lugs, and of all the frames I've had a hand in,
and there have been millions, I'm most proud of the lugged ones.
RR: You've had a hand in millions of TIG-welded frames by now, so
you must believe they're strong and reliable, and it's pretty clear that
people aren't aching for lugged frames these days, so why did you decide
to build them? And, is there a Match brand frame in the future?
TI: Well, sure I know TIG-welded frames are reliable, but I still
think brazing with lugs is the best way to build frames. It's just more
difficult. Well-designed and brazed lugged joints are much stronger, and
it's fairly easy to understand why that is. The lower temperature of
brazing preserves much of the tubing's original mechanical properties, and
the lug itself is an external butt right where the stress is greatest. So,
with reasonable tubing and good brazing, a lugged frame can easily last a
lifetime. But lugged frames are just more expensive to build. You can get
entire frames made in Taiwan or mainland China for less than the cost of a
good set of lugs.
As far as a Match-brand frame goes, I don't see it happening. I don't
want to sell bikes, I just want to build them. Certainly, we'd like the
Paramount orders to keep coming in, and we're glad to be making Rivendells,
but we'd like to get a few more frames coming our way, too. But, as I
said, it's hard to compete in price with TIG-welded frames. They're much
less expensive to build and far more profittable to sell, since they cost
almost as much and sometimes even more than a nice lugged frame.
RR: You don't see of a lot of cracked TIG-welded frames though. It
happens, but it's not an epidemic, and with oversized CrMo tubes and the
city-use most people subject their bikes to, durability isn't likely to be
a problem. And the low cost of TIG-welding, especially in Taiwan or
China-well, the natural conclusion is that those bikes are just great
values.
TI: Well, Grant, they are great values! What the factories have
accomplished, in building those bikes, is minimizing the effort and
expense to construct the frame, with as little human physical skill as
possible. In some cases they've eliminated it entirely, with robotics. So
where does that take it? They're using the same material as weŠ so the
distinction comes from using lugs and the labor, and you either like it or
you don't. It's a wonderful way to build a frame, and it's extremely
strong. It comes down to what the rider wants-craftsmanship or pure
engineering. They both get you the same thing, functionally, but one has
more "people" in it. Whether one is a better value than the other depends
on what you value.
You know, it seems like we're always defending lugged frames. Over and
over we're explaining and defending them, and that can't sit well with
everyone, especially those people who think a tig-welded frame is great.
It's a distasteful part of the business, and an uncomfortable part of this
interview, to me. I don't like to defend lugs, you know. I just like to
make lugged frames. But it seems like we're fighting for our lives with
things that matter only to us and a few others, and I don't want to convey
that idea, that negativity. I don't want to resort to selling lugged
frames by trodding on TIG-welded frames. I don't like TIG welded frames,
but I've had a lot of great rides on them. I like the rides, but not the
frames. That doesn't mean they aren't good, or great values. I'm talking
for me, personally. Anyway, to always put TIG frame against lugged
frames... is not what we're about. The success of TIG-welded frames is the
result of millions of marketng dollars, and the frames are successful. The
manufacturers are survivors. We're never going to be able to compete with
Chinese labor, but that's not what I even want to do. And, I'm not the
kind who says "Buy American," out of hat, either. I know what I like, and
I liked lugged frames, and I do like American lugged frames, and I think
their survival is important, but not from a functional-value perspective
where it comes down to "performance per dollar." Does a $1,500 lugged
Rivendell-designed, Match-built or Joe-Starck built bicycle frame have to
compete with an engineered frame made either by robots or Chinese labor? I
hope it doesn't. I hope there are still people who want certain
refinements and styling and the type of craftsmanship that you can get
only in a lugged frame. Those are the people we're serving. But it's even
more than that. I started off building lugged frames, and it's still what
I like to do, and that's why I started Match--so I could do that.
RR: Okay, no more TIG-talk. I would like to add, though, that I'm
not anti-TIG. That's a pretty dumb thing to be anti-. I bring up TIG-welded
frames because they're the standard these days, and lugged frames are the
odd ones, and to appreciate a good lugged frame, it helps to compare it,
in as many ways as possible, with the standard frame of today, that's all.
So, let's forget about TIG and talk about lugs for a while. TIG-welded
frames are fine. No need to rustle any feathers.
TI: That sounds good to me.
RR: How do you distinguish a good lug design from a bad one?
TI: Well, a lug needs to meet a lot of different requirements. One, the
design must be brazable. Two, it should be something that is reasonably
economical to make. And three, it should be beautiful, elegant, and look
purposeful at the same time. The lug gives the frame a character, or
personality. Lugs are a big part of what distinguish one frame from
another, even among lugged frames. The curves of a lug set a mood for
putting a frame together. It starts when a frame is tacked-that's where
the frame's geometry is set and where the tubes fit together, never to
come apart again. If the lug fits poorly, the tacking operation can start
a sequence of events that leads to a misaligned frame. A proper lug
reduces the amount of heat required during tacking, reduces the amount a
filler metal to hold the frame in proper alignment.
RR: How would you describe or explain brazing to someone who doesn't
know exactly what it is, and how it works?
TI: The molten brazing materia l- brass or silver - gets drawn into
the gap between the lug and the tube, by capillary action, and it goes to
where the heat is. So, that being the case, I'd say brazing is observing
and understanding heat flow. You have to be aware of what's hot and what
isn't hot, so you know where the brass or silver is going to go. That's
the essense of brazing. When you're starting out, you're seeing colors and
watching the heat flow, but you don't know how to respond to it, so you
try things, and some don't work. When you start making the right
decisions, when you can read the heat flow and know when to add the filler
metal, how much to put in, how long to maintain the heat, knowing whether
you should allow it to cool, or to heat it moreŠ that's brazing. What the
brazer tries to do is not only braze the joint thoroughly, but to use the
minimal amount of brazing material to do that, so that when he's done
working, there's almost no need to filing, sandblast, or rebrazing, to
make the edge clean and sharp. Reheating isn't good for the joint or the
metal, and having to go back like that won't be necessary if you've done a
good job the first time. From a production point of view, it's just so
inefficient, so expensive to have to go back and fix up your problems. We
can't have that at Match.
RR: And what makes a good brazer?
TI: I think one of the things that makes a good brazer is knowing
how to approach each lug. Each style lug is different, and you need to
practice on them in order to work out the sequence, and the path you take,
before you do it on a frame. So "a good brazer" is creative and
experienced. If one guy has brazed a thousand frames, all with the same
type of lug, and is then given a completely different set of lugs, he'll
have a good idea of the best way to braze it. But if you have another guy
with equal aptitude and less overall brazing experience, but with more
experience on a particular lug, he'll probably do a better job on that
lug, because he knows how it responds to heat.
RR: When you get a new set of lugs, what do you do?
TI: Do you mean, for instance, what will we do when we get your new
lugs?
RR: Okay. I mean, we are getting new lugs, and that remark about how
you have to "learn" lugs makes me wonder how long it's going to take, and
does that mean the first few frames will be crummier than the ones that
follow.
TI: No, no, no! We'll figure them out before building with them.
First we'll braze some with surplus tubing‹"stumps," which are just
cut-off ends. Curt may start off, and he'll give his feedback to Martin
and Kirk, and then they'll try some. Since they'll be brazing with Curt's
feedback, they'll be farther along with the lugs than they would if they
started from scratch. Each brazer will share his observations, and in a
short time, we'll all know how the lug heats up and holds the heat, and
where and when to add the brazing material. We'll work it out before we
use the lugs on real frames, so don't worry.
RR: Are the new lugs going to be challenging? They're fancy...
TI: All lugs are challenging!
RR: But these are fancier than most, so what I mean is, are they
going to be harder to braze than Paramount lugs, for example?
TI: They're fancier than the Paramount lugs, but they're about the
same in that way as the current Rivendell lugs. One nice feature is the
reinforcing rings at the edges. They'll take a little longer to heat up,
but they'll heat up more evenly, and will hold the heat well, and that'll
help the brazing. One of the advantages of doing large numbers of bicycles
with the same lugs, is the extremely high level of skill you acquire
because you're so familiar with that particular lug. Repetition builds
skill in a way that occassional building, or building with a wide variety
of lugs or methods can't.
RR: What do you think about "pinning" frames before brazing them?
TI: Some of the Italian builders do that, they put steel nails
through the lugs and tubes to hold the tubes and lugs together before and
during brazing. They say it reduces the number of times the joint has to
be heated. It's impressive, to see those nails sticking in the lugs, but
personally, I don't like drilling holes in perfectly good tubing or lugs.
If you ever have to replace a tube in a pinned frame, the filed-off nail
could rip the lug when you pull out the tube. You have to find the nail
and drill it out before pulling the tube. It's not a quality difference,
as much as a matter of style, though. I prefer to tack the tubes and lugs
together using the same filler metal used in brazing, usually bronze. Then
braze it carefully, so the tacked portion holds everything together while
you work on another part of the lug. It takes concentration, timing and a
good memory for what you've already done. The glasses we wear are a help,
too. They enhance the glow of the metal and actually show us in advance
where the brazing is best started and completed. They let you see when the
brass starts to flow under the lug.
RR: What kind of glasses do that?
TI: We use a didymium lens with a 3.0 flip-up. They aren't "the
secret to good brazing," and they won't make a bad brazer good, but if you
already have the skills and learn how to use these glasses, they do help
you see beneath the lug.
RR: Why did you call your frame shop "Match"? That's a choppy name
for a bicycle company. It's not a pretty name in the usual sense. It
doesn't roll off the tongue.
TI: But I like it! "Match" came from a famous magazine, Paris
Match. My old friend Ron Hill subscribed to it and I thought it was a
great name for a bicycle. When the time came to start my company, the name
Match was still with me. So "match" it is, with a lower case "m."
RR: O-kay. How did you get your match builders?
TI: They found me. Word got out that I was starting up, and a lot
of builders applied for work. There were plenty of applicants, and I've
turned away some people I didn't want to turn away, but there's only so
much work here. It was interesting, though, seeing the reactions to the
shop. It's a close community here, and I'm not a native, so when the
builders came by, they thought "Where did YOU come from?" If they have
experience, they're immediately impacted by the set-up, the dedicated
stations and machinery that lets a builder concentrate on building, rather
than being distracted by readjusting fixtures, or moving things out of the
way, or having to walk over there find something he needs. They were
surprised that suddenly, in the midst of their tight community where they
thought they knew everybody who had anything to do with making bikes,
here's a "clean, well-lighted and professionally equipped place" ready to
take on serious framebuilding.
RR: Is it bigger than it needs to be?
TI: I don't think so. I don't want to outgrow it and have to move.
And understand, I've known shops where, for two things to happen at the
same time, one guy has to move. It's not uncommon. Sometimes it's a matter
of necessity, the builder can't afford more space, but for good
production, it helps to have room and organization. If you set up the shop
right, good production is easier. If the flow isn't in one direction, a
certain inefficiency is created. But if you have enough space, it can
notch up the quality, because there are fewer opportunities for mistakes.
I had the whole shop laid out on paper before I owned a single tool or
machine.
RR: How did you evaluate the builders, during the interview?
TI: It's not easy work. You detect in some people that they'll be
great, that they're committed and will make it work. And, there's a way
that builders can talk to other builders. I'm not saying I didn't watch
them braze, because I did, but if you've done a lot of brazing, and you're
good, and you're competent, then certain things come out in a
conversation. I talk to you about brazing one way, like we might do here,
and I talk to them another way. It's like, when I'm showing you a fixture
we have, you can look at it through your eyes, and maybe it means
something if you've seen other fixtures, but it means more if you've used
other fixtures, or tried to build a certain joint, a fork or a bridge or
whatever, without a fixture. An experienced builder can appreciate those
things more. When I was showing Curt around, for example, I could I read a
lot into his answers and responses. I'd show him our fixture for mitering
seat stays, and he'd say "whoa," and I knew exactly why, I knew what he
was thinking about it.
RR: Is there a "match" way to braze frames, or do you hire
experienced builders and let them do it the way they've always done it?
TI: We share our skills and learn from each other, as I alluded to
earlier, and what evolves from that is a consistent way to braze. I think
any good frame shop would do the same, so I'm not going to say there's a
"match method," or anything like that. We're after the best joints humanly
possible, and we're after consistency, from frame to frame. Good brazing
is gentle. We're not in a hurry. Good brazing has a natural speed to it,
that results in a clean joint that needs very little clean up. If you go
too slow, you bake off the flux, and if you go too fast, you make
mistakes, you force things and cause more rework. We use dedicated
machines to cut the tubes consistently and accurately, and non-adjustable
fixtures-as opposed to adjustable ones-that always put the bridges in the
right spot. Those machines make the bikes more accurate and consistent,
and they also free up time for humans to do their best brazing.
RR: What's the easiest frame joint to braze?
TI: It depends on the lug shape. On the All-Rounder? It's got to be
the seat lug. It takes about five minutes with the torch. But there's more
to brazing than just the "torch time," There's the set up, tacking,
fluxing, brazing, cleaning up the flux.
RR: That's enough about brazing. You're married and have three
children at home still. What does your wife think about starting up a
frame shop and specializing in the least popular style of frame today?
TI: Judy's faith in this project and her support have given me the
energy and enthusiasm to make it work. Moving around was hard. I was away
for a year at a time, twice, and our family lived in China for a few
years, too. It wasn't easy. But Judy knew the plan all along was to get
the experience that would prepare us to open the shop and build lugged
frames. And, she has lots of bicycle experience herself. I met her at
Trek, and she worked there for six years, buying all the parts for the
complete bikes and frame production-wheels, rims, tubes, lugs, seat stays.
Buying those parts is a huge responsibility, making sure the hundreds of
parts from dozens of vendors show up on time, so you can get the bikes
out. Then she did the same thing another four years at Diamondback. She's
supportive, but not just supportive. She knows the business, and she knows
the pressures, and she's committed to Match, too.
RR: But it seems like really crummy timing. I sometimes think the
big share of the new bike market is half young kids who grew up on BMX or
mountain bikes and lack any warm-fuzzy feelings for lugs, and half midlife
crisis guys who don't have a history with lugged bikes, and just want
something really "high tech." I think Rivendell can squeak by, but our
volume requirements have to be smaller than yours.
TI: We want more work, that's for sure. As far as the timing
goes‹it's taken this long to learn what I have to know, to do it right! So
the time is right. There are still cyclists who respect craftsmanship and
the best materials. I know I'm not following the market trends, but even
if nobody else was building lugged frames, even if match was the last
place on earth building them, this is what I'd do.
RR: But don't wish you could turn back the clock to the mid'70s,
when everybody wanted frame was lugged, or at least steel?
TI: Well, if you're asking: Do I wish that the cycling populace was
aching for fine, lugged steel bikes?- the answer has to be yes, but it's
not going to happen. But don't think the mid '70s were the golden age in
terms of quality, so that's to our advantage.
RR: There were many of nice bikes back then. If you take any
mid-to-upper end road frame from 20 years ago and compare it to what you
get today for an equivalent dollars
TI: What you get is a certain look, and a certain value system
that contributed to that look, and looking back, we call that whole thing
"classic." But there are a lot of misconceptions about the "hallowed
frames" of the '70s. You've got to understand that the European frames
were new to Americans, who were comparing them to ballooners and other
bikes that cost a lot less and weren't so fancy. The brands were exotic,
and our eyes were glazed over. Some of the frames were very good, even by
today's standards, but if you stripped them of paint and decals and rated
them objectively, by looking at the miters and brazing quality and finish
work, most of the "best brands" were nothing special, and in some cases
were pretty shabby by any standards. In those days, a prestigious name
that rolled off the tongue was a smokescreen. When the Americans started
building frames, a lot of this became evident. Eisentrauts and Ritcheys
and a dozen others - including my own - were at least as good, and usually
better than the even the best European frames. I still stop in my tracks
when I see a 1972 Colnago, but I look at it as a symbol of a time when
cycling was simpler, and cyclists had a passion and a reverence that's
just different from what it's like today. It reminds me of good times, for
sure, but I don't worship it as a work of art. It's not like a Rembrandt,
it's just a Colnago. I don't mean that in a disrespectful way, but
objectively, it's not the epitome of the art.
RR: Materials have gotten better-
TI: A lot better. Precision castings, stronger steel alloys, and
better paint. It's still possible to take good materials and braze or weld
them into garbage, but when you do a good job, a great job, then you have
something special. Our brazers are as good as anybody. They've had intense
training, lots of experience in a relatively short time, and each has an
aptitude for it to begin with. The match method of brazing is, well, I've
already said it's probably not unique, but I can say it's a refined,
systematic approach that uses material and flame economically, and treats
the metal well, and gives a clean, beautiful result that I'd put up
against anybody's. And we do it over and over again, consistently. It's
too bad we have to paint the frames, because the paint covers up things
we'd like to show off.
RR: One more brazing question, even though I said no more: How
active are you in the brazing? Do you still braze at all? And if you
don't, how do you spend your days?
TI: I could sit down and braze all day, but I'm not the best brazer
because I'm out of practice. I'm rusty, so I restrict myself to jobs where
other can make me look good. I get to do that. And, as you should know,
I've put in a lot of time doing the cad drawings for your new lug designs,
because the casters don't work off sketches, you know. I still find great
satisfaction designing things and setting up a frame shop that's both
small and personal, and efficient - not in terms of speed, but accuracy
and precision that are consistent, which means we don't have to undo our
mistakes. We don't cover up brazing by excess filing or clean-up. We don't
spend undo time aligning frames, because they come out so straight the
first time. Our fixtures are dedicated to each frame, so there's no chance
of us building a Paramount with a Rivendell dimension, or vice versa.
Mostly, I have a great crew. They solve problems and create solutions.
They figure things out, and they care about what they're doing. They know
match is important to me, but I know it's important to them, too. It's a
good arrangement. I wish we had more business, and maybe that'll happen,
but in the meantime, I'm happy.
© Rivendell Bicycle Works 1999
|