Hi all,
I took my WDM20 1942 for its first real ride today with the local VMCC. After 45 miles the forks snapped. The forks were original NOS unused not reproductions. It highlights the point that we are using very old parts. I am looking at putting steel rods into the forks and brazing them back together. Any thoughts for solutions?

email (option): banderson323@bigpond.com

Sorry to see that Bryce did you hit a pothole or something, what made it break..?

email (option): horror@blueyonder.co.uk

No pot hole it just broke doing regular riding on suburban streets Some people who know about these forks say they are reproduction. The guy I bought them from says they are not reproduction . I put them against a set of known originals and there is no difference.

Hi,Bryce have looked at photo of your broke forks and they definitely look different to the sets I have ,one set on bike the other spares. The top of the tubing which is broke where it meets the side plate doesn't look right! on all my sets that end is much cleaner and has a sharper contour than your set. Also having looked at the fracture looks like it was joined together, also a unusual place for a fracture. Even if you had hit a pothole you wouldn't do this kind of damage,I have given my old bike a lot of stick during off road messing about with no problems.I would remove them and give them a good going over before repairing them. You might be the first person to have tested a pair of Indian repros Dave

Hi,Bryce just had a quick look at a spare set and the casting number is on the lower forging just below where yours has fractured, mine looks like 66-5056 ? could be another digit as there is splatter where it has been brazed by factory. this number is on the inside of forging could be hard to see when forks are fitted.I guess if yours has this number then they might of have been badly repaired in the past. Dave

Your proposed fix is worth a try but remember, when you fix or reinforce one spot you are just sending the stresses to the next weakest point which, in this case, is probably another part of the same fork. Another indication that the forks may be repros is the damage to the upper yolk, which is visible on the photo. It indicates that the spring does not fit properly - unless the damage was done after the break, when you were riding home?

email (option): jonny.rudge@verizon.net

As Tim said on the other thread, that's an odd place for them to break. I can't imagine what would make a good grade tube snap there so cleanly over such a short time.

There is no stress concentration and it hasn't been subjected to years of vibration or abuse.

Did you have the forks blasted back to bare metal ? My impression is that what you've got there is a bad quality repair, probably with a new length of tubing inserted and simply butted.

Although the forks may look 'new', they could have been damaged in stock without ever being on a machine.

They look repro to me.
lots of little things that look wrong to my eye. A certaim coarseness about things hard to describe.
Not least the top bit.

No way I'd ride on those forks even after repair.

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

Hi Bryce,

This has nothing to do with the break, but:
I saw in your picture, that there is no dust cover (66-5203)fitted on the top bearing race. or is there?

Cheers,

Leon

As the price of WD bikes soars we will be seeing more of this.

new paint covers a multitude of sins.

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

I don't own a m20 but the part in question looks a bit rough to be made by bsa.
Don't try to repair that it will just go somewhere else and you might not be so lucky with the outcome. Surely you can get a whole new piece put in there .

I really wanted to confidentiality say those are genuine or Indian forks but although the finished detail at the top of the tubes isn't great, its not bad enough to say they aren't genuine.
BUT .. two things i do think,.. that type of break in that position is far more in keeping with poorly constructed repro ones OR badly repaired accident damaged genuine forks.
2. that top link shape is unusual for a BSA WM20. it may be earlier BSA or sidecar length link which were that shape but the M20 fork.links are normally the type with parallel centre section. I've also seen Indian repro links the shape of those pictured.

I saw in your picture, that there is no dust cover (66-5203)fitted on the top bearing race. or is there?

They are a set of sealed bearing I got off eBay, they seem to work ok

I may have got to why the forks broke. The spring on the bike is 10" and looks of a heavier weight than the one on my friends M20's, which are 9 1/2" and a lighter weight. As well the suspension damper was fairly tight with new bushes fitted as well. Perhaps these factors combined caused the break of the forks?

I think you are clutching at straws.

My my biased opinion this bike is not well put together.

the spindles do not look right, no washers to be seen anywhere under any bolt, and all painted over slapdash, whereas a lot of efort has gone into tank detail which is a BS factor.
I am not over familiaar with M20 but where the fork tubes are butted at the top looks oodd to me, the brake cable abutment looks crudely cast, as welll as the brake cable set up being very poor, is that red brake grease? and snap on nipples?
the speedo bracket looks to be a lot more metal than it should be?

The spring itself is of no consequence, one would swap springs forr side car use for example, and 1/2 an inch and a heavier gauge is nothing.

It may be the angle of photo but the top links look too be a different angle to the top ones? new bushes and a tight damper would not do this, for a damn good bump will loosen them, [and your teeth]

The guy who buily may well have been sold the forks as "NOS", not everyone these days is honest or well informed.

Can someone put up a pic of genuine BSA forks so we can compare?

I have been riding girder fork bikes of all kinds for nearly 50 years and never seen a break like this, in fact never seen any break, for all their faults girders are very strong.

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

Thanks for your objective opinion Ken. These Military bikes were for practical use not known for there cosmetic features. There are washers etc and the bike runs well. I think you are right the spring is not the factor, just a dud fork blade.

Speaking with the ( very old ) metalurgists hat on that fracture is totally wrong for a break in a girder in that position.
To me it looks rather like a brittle fracture through a butt weld as is oft done in furnature factories to use the off cut from the end of a length of tube.
Wrought steel is strongest in tension so a heavier spring would not have caused a good length of tube to fracture like that. It would have necked & stretched before failure.
However a cast structure is far weaker in tension than compression and a weld is structurally a casting.
Fatigue strengths of wrought steel tube is in the hundreds of trillions of stress cycles so you could count that out as well.

email (option): wariron@tpg.com.au

Not to incite too much criticism I hope. But here is a similar shot of my BSA forks. Ron

email (option): ronpier@talk21.com

A bit longer spring wouldn't do that, the spring isn't even mounted in a way as to stretch that area of broken tubing anyway.
I pointed out the shape of the top link earlier & you can see Ron has the normal shape on his forks.
The links of that curved type are usually a different length ..ie sidecar type...or repro. the solo M20 top link should be 3 3/8" centres.. i suggest checking that as although it wouldn't cause a break it isn't what you would expect to see on NOS WM20 forks.
BSA i don't think even made a top link with curved centre portion in 3 3/8" hole centres. so what I'm saying is... your top links are either BSA but wrong length for solo... or if they are correct 3 3/8" centres they are reproduction links which suggests other parts may also be.

They don't look quite right to me and I would certainly suspect they were pattern...More photos of other parts of the forks should confirm it as there are detail and finish differences on the pattern ones.
Top and bottom links are not parallel to each other on original forks and the correct free length for a new M20 fork spring is 10"...
I would strip them to bare metal and take a number of comparative measurements etc. to determine just what you have before committing to refitting them...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Ian, i think someone suggested top & bottom links should be parallel ..but i wasn't saying that , after about 1935 BSA went over to top & bottom links that weren't parallel to each other as you say.
my posts are questioning the actual link shape & have included a drawing in my last post to explain what i meant.
the solo m20 top link have centre section with parallel edges not curved like the ones on the broken forks.

Hi Fred...'It may be the angle of photo but the top links look too be a different angle to the top ones?'....

It was this comment that Ken made that I was referring to..I assumed he didn't mean to put 'top' twice in his description and that he meant 'top' and 'bottom'...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Yes i re read the posts & edited mine after seeing he wrote that.
I've looked again at the broken fork & the rear tube finishes lower than the front where they meet at the top.
but although that's as all my (genuine) forks, on mine they are less staggered.

yes you are right, that comes of posting too late at night

what I am trying to say is that the top links look as if they are angled up, whereas the bottom ones look as if they are angled down?

they may not be parallel to each other but should at least slope the same way.
Of course it might just be the photo.

another optio is that you have a mixture of original and repro parts.

bit of a worry either way, could end up nasty.

I have heard rumours of Indian 16H Norton forks breaking but never seen any.

It just makes me angry that this sort of stuff can be sold.

The rigmorole that has to be gone through to sell goods within the EU yet made in the EU, yet we allow this stuff to do the rounds.

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

Thanks heaps for helping me out with this problem. The top links measures 3 1/2" and the bottom links are 3 3/4". I have fitted another set of forks that came off another bike. What concerns me is that the spring looks odd in that when the weight is on the spring budges out in the middle toward the front of the bike and rubs the top of head stem of the frame. I am worried that the same thing will happen again.

Yes, those top links should deffo be 3 3/8" centres for solo.
The top spring mounts vary, I've seen ones with the bolt hole in the centre (on my earlier BSA that has a smaller diameter headstock) & ones with on off centre hole which throws the top of the spring slightly out away from top of headstock, i have both types.

Hello Bryce.Do you have the proper trumpet shaped spacer on the top of the spring [see rons photo].The spring will rub on the bottom of the stem when the weight is of the front wheel but I have never seen it rub the top before.

email (option): smarwick@iprimus.com.au

email (option): tmuir12@gmail.com

A friend of mine has four sets of girders that have been welded up at sometime in their life. BSA girders aren't particularly strong compared to webb types.

Possibly...However, it is very easy to draw the wrong conclusions based on superficial evidence...It may be the case the BSA forks just saw more and harder use and in greater numbers on military M20s.
The percentage of failures (as opposed to the number) are determined by design, build quality, and operating conditions and are subject to a 'percentage failure rate' which can be calculated statistically after testing...
So, if you have more of one design than another in use, even if all the design and use parameters are identical, the percentage failure rate will be the same but a higher number (as opposed to percentage)will fail in the larger group..
Equally, if you put one group of components to much harder use than an equal number of completely identical components the results will be similar. There will be a difference in failure rate..
In both those circumstances the difference in failure rate is not due to one being a weaker design than the other but to the relative numbers involved or the differences in operating conditions...
In the case of Indian replica forks the worry isn't about the design at all...In that case the design of any particular type is the same as the originals. Here the concerns regarding potential failures under varying conditions are exclusively focused on doubts about build quality and material specifications.

Finally, consider this... if you were to have a very high number of forks in use that were actually a stronger design than another group being used in smaller numbers but similar conditions, you could actually get more failures of the stronger design, not measured as a percentage of the total, but purely measured in numbers..In that circumstance a conclusion drawn about the relative strength of the two designs on the basis of the number of failures would be completely wrong....Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Whilst I do not Claim to be an expert on Girder forks if I was conducting a failure analysis I would be concerned about several things.

1. In the posted Photo rub marks on the steering head casting/Forging indicating perhaps that under certain conditions there significant interference & contact between the fork spring and this casting/Forging

2. In the same Photo The lateral displacement of the fractured parts of the tube

3. In a photo of the fork off of the bike (not posted ) the top spring spacer appears to not sitting parallel to the top spring mount


Ron FTLDU

email (option): grumpy.moran@gmail.com

I av been thinking more about what is different from my bike to other m20s. I used sealed bearings and at first i had poor bush on the steering, so this made the bike difficult to steer and would av put side stress on the top of the fork blades. As well the sealed bearinstop me having to use bearing cups and dust cover. This changed tglength of the head stem length causing the spring to distort more and rub the frame at the top

Hi Bryce...The sealed bearing kits are the same overall dimensions when fitted as cups, cones and loose ball bearings, so there would be no difference there. The top dust cover should still be used with the bearing kit.
However, leaving the top dust cover off would have little or no effect regarding the spring position.
It is more likely the incorrect top links are a different distance between centres than the correct M20 ones (too short), that there is another fault, or both of those things...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Hi Bryce, I've just been looking at your before and after pictures when you finished the bike. Did you use the forks that came with the bike as they look to be ok in the picture or did you change something (apart from the bearings)?
They certainly don't look like Indian repros here.

email (option): horror@blueyonder.co.uk

Yes the forks are different. The one pictured are perhaps Empire stars 1936-37. I could not use them as they are narrow to m20 forks. So i bought
the nos m20 forkz. Which had a weak spot. I have put o. Yet another set of used forks, hopefully these will not snap.

email (option): vinver-at-ns.sympatico.ca

I always put washers there. To lock the spindle,and save the paintwork.

email (option): Fuzzyempire@hotmail.com

Likewise as Hamish. I use thin stainless washers under both ends of the spindle bolts to save the paint being screwed off. Ron

email (option): ronpier@talk21.com

It varies.
I was refering more to the nuts /bolts around the rest of the bike.
Any bolt/nut on a bike should generally have a washer under it.

On the question of field condition you are dead right but thats not the case here; we are dealing with a bike alleged to have been 'restored' someone has spent a lot of time being overly fastidious on the tank, its over restored to my mind, yet it seems as if the rest has been assembled then painted, the person who built couldn't make up their mind? If you restore a bike to say, a showpiece condition, then do it right with cadmium fittings.
Or do the field workshop thing and slap it on all over and the numbers with the proverbial chewed stick brush [why do people take so much trouble over the numbers?]
This was a bike built to be sold not ridden is my idea, seen too much of it.

As for the nuts on the links; as above I put washers under any nut that bears on paint, its common sense, but I would also want to see washers between the link and the forks itself, this makes for a bearing surface and stops the forks from locking up when the links are adjusted.
I have hard steel thrust washers made up for here on my '38 Matchless.



Do not place over reliance on the parts books, they are not infallible.

I personally would have looked very hard at that bike before buying it,several small things in the photo, nothing important but a sum of them all and gut feeling would have made me cautious; your broken forks would confirm.

Its easy to let your heart rule your head when you really want the bike.

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

I think that's a bit harsh and over critical of Bryce's work. Not everyone is a professional bike restorer and I think he's done a great job from the before picture. Whether he's plated the nuts and bolts or painted them has nothing to do with why the forks have snapped and as he says, they are not the forks that came with the bike.
If you still have the forks that came with the bike, Bryce, maybe you could put them on while you examine the broken ones. The only way you're going to know what's happened here is to strip the paint off and look for signs of a bad repair etc.

email (option): horror@blueyonder.co.uk

Hi folks,
How can you form such an opinion Ken, just from photo`s?? I am sure Bryce has done a good job. I too don`t have washers on my NOS links and spindle bolts, or I would not have a full nut thread on the lock nuts. I have the nuts painted also, are my forks going to snap?? Give him some credit for his work. Give him some time to investigate what the problem is first before jumping to conclusions!!

Dave. J.

email (option): jamfam@dragnet.com.au

I was under the impression this was a bought in from someone else bike.

I was in no way intending to criticise Bryce.
sincere apologies to Bryce if I gave that impression.

Hopefully though some of it is constructive.

I cannot remove the post to remedy it.

But Dave James, if you cannot get a full thread on a locknut then all you need to do is reduce the thickness of that nut?

I am sorry if I come over as overly picky, but as I was taught, there is only one way to do a job, and that's the right way. As an apprentice I would have gotten a slap on the wrist for the washer omission.

But I would have had a right old rollocking for the front brake cable set up.Thats not safe.

However you have both missed the point about the painted fixtures.

No intention to upset anyone, although it appears the test scores may be to some extent responsible down there?

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

Washers between the link & fork on the BSA M20 forks is not part of the design & is not needed.
If the bearing surface at a joint is worn badly or pocketed its OK for a quick/cheap way to shim out wear with a washer if you don't want to do a full refurb & "build up" & machine back the offending area i suppose
but not as a recommended practice to "improve" the forks because for a start your giving the grease two options & that means one side of that washer may not get "cleaned" when you grease the forks.
the bearing design on them is good & works well if regularly greased, i do mine after taking the weight off the front end.

We are so naff aren't we Ken ?
In what we wear, and how we restore or look after our bikes.
You set the highest standards of sartorial elegance and mechanical engineering that us mere mortals can only begin to aspire to.

I take it I have offended you then?
It wasn't intentional, I have a thicker skin I suppose.

I do not attempt to set any standards, I am a mechanic not an engineer,theree's big difference, but I still believe that if you are going to do a job do it properly. That includes washers under nuts or bolt heads, correct thread forms, shakeproof washers where needed, easy starting, no nylon cable ties, correct routing of cables and so on.

As a winner of many concours awards at high level events over the years (I did it for money not glory] I often had people who had spent a fortune on their bikes asking why they never won anything....I learnt to commiserate not advise as they invariably got upset when I pointed out the little details that lost them points.

Sorry if attempting to pass on advice gained over the years has upset you.

Sometime around 1975 I was at Blackbushe for one of the huge military airshows they had back then. I won a second place for my G3L; first place was taken by a Jeep in USA markings, a super set up, all the kit. Prizes were awarded by an officer of the Army Apprentices school, band box smart he was; I have never forgotten the embarassment on his face as he had to shake the hand of the jeep owner, dressed in full USA GI kit shoulder-length pony tail, a tramps beard and a walloping fat beer gut.
Now that is Naff.
I've been back only once after that to such an event, at Thruxton, same sad types wearing misbegotton bits of uniform they were never qualified to wear. Usually of some elite unit mostly with rank stripes and badges. Never the pay corps.Kids and girlfriends dressed in GI gear.
Yes you are right to say its their business, I just dont want to associate with them.

Apologies to the rest of the board, I didn't resurrect the subject of Naff. I did make my apologies to you back then and have forgotten it.Obviously you haven't.




As for the washers between the links and the forks, no they are not necessary, but I find on my non M20 bike they give an easier smoother action, grease seem to come out both sides regardless.

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

Don't get me started on uniform..I get sick to death of people moralising on the subject.
Private is a 'rank' as well as Sergeant so if anyone doesn't believe in displaying rank they shouldn't wear uniform of any type.
Entitlement or qualification?..Medals require entitlement in law if worn on the left..and relatives medals can be worn on the right as a mark of respect.
In wartime Sergeants, corporals etc. usually got awarded that rank because the last holder was unfortunate enough to get shot...They were generally NOT awards for conspicuous action etc....In peace time it is length of service that dictates promotion through the ranks as much as anything and the British Army lays down average periods of service for eligibility to each (and every) rank...There is no defined legal or moral imperative to be satisfied in displaying the badges of those ranks..
Any uniform can be worn in law...the offence is not the wearing of the uniform but specifically the intent to impersonate a serving soldier...
I guess that would be difficult in a WW2 uniform unless you had a time machine as well, and any 'offence' is purely the interpretation at a personal level of anyone who happens to see it...
We all have a view..and our own prejudices no doubt...
Best not to confuse those with the question of 'entitlement' though, which is a 'red herring' except in the case of medals and therefore doesn't justify the taking of a high moral stance...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

oh dear.
I was not taking any "high moral stance" its my opinion which I don't force on anyone though I expect to be able express an opinion to a mature forum without anyone taking offence.

If you are going to wear a uniform to fit with the bike fine, but at least do some research into what riders realy wore in the field.

Let's say, GS beret, BD trousers, gaiters and ammo boots, denison smock and jerkin with a belt?

stick a para knife down the boot for effect; or how about a tank suit?, best bit of kit ever for riding any old bike in the cold. Wish I stil had mine.

shorts, shirt and forage cap in this heat.

I'll have to dig some period photos out of my files. Also for real authenticity the paint on the rear of tank should be worn back to the bare metal.Get rid of those footrest rubber too, don't you know theres a war on?

[stick tongue firmly in cheek when reading the above]

Is that Sarcasm or humour Fred? Easy to be misunderstood sometimes.

Lots of girder bikes used thrust washers in that place, so not unnecessary at all. On those that didnt it can often make a surprising difference, maybe you should try it?

If you want a prize I'll give you one, one big reason I got out of pro bike restoration was the increasing silly obsession with prize winning. It got stupidly out of hand. Owners nearly coming to blows at some places.


Cable ties are ok, so are nylon zip ones, but stay out of any judging event.

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

Yes it was Sarcasm, if you are putting them in to stop the forks locking up as you originally said then it can only mean the forks were badly worn out & hadn't been restored properly...its a bodge that a good judge wouldn't miss.



Its all good fun though & the fact we all like these old things enough to argue about crap like this is not a bad thing is it ..
; )

Good I can handle sarcasm

I've not made myself clear or you've misunderstood the washer bit all through though Fred, the hardedned washers are NOT to stop the fork locking up but act as a bearing surface; On some girders they have knurled edges the better to be able to check the forks have not been set too tight.
I think Triumphs were one example, as is my non WD Matchless.

its worth trying, but the washers must be hardened not just normal stock.

Where shall I send your prize to?

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

Give the prize to charity: )
yes i did get a bit confused as you haven't been very consistent one post you agreed they weren't necessary then next post you said they are not unnecessary at all... :D .. only having a bit of fun.
I'm not considering putting washers there myself as i don't want the risk of them (particularly hardened ones) putting groves in the cylindrical part of the link which needs to be strong.

Our little debate got me thinking more about the break this thread is all about, i have been quietly on the lookout for some M24 girder blades which offer lower unsprung weight & higher strength being made from Reynolds 531 & couldn't help thinking that alot of them may have suffered fractures over time because the 531 M24 frames can crack like that when old. one chap here has a cracked M24 frame. I'm just wondering if those could be a set of the elusive BSA M24 manganese molybdenum steel tubed blades.
Weighing the blades would give a clue.

sorry Fred I drunk your prize


as for the necessary/ unnecessary rest pay attention at the back.

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

Yes, it's so complicated I might not be able to work it out.. ...

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Doh.

Look.

If there isn't meant to be a thrust washer there, don't fit one.

If there is meant to be one there, fit one.

even if there isnt meant to be a thrust washer in that place, try it and see.

Simples.

On a serious note I have had my '38 Matchless for 45+ years and have always used thrust washers between the fork and the link; howevr as these are I section forged links on a quality bike and not some bashed out old bit of BSA tat there is no sign of wear on either the link or the fork.


Or of course it could be down to my supremely superior mechanical skills.?

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

Well, I have read the various posting with interest. I have a very simple view. If your forks have snapped then regardless of whether they are original or repro they are no use for anything other than reinforcement rods for a new driveway. Don't use them again. The next time they snap in a different place they could kill you. If nothing else they could make you swerve into the on coming traffic. JT

Well, I have read the various posting with interest. I have a very simple view. If your forks have snapped then regardless of whether they are original or repro they are no use for anything other than reinforcement rods for a new driveway. Don't use them again. The next time they snap in a different place they could kill you. If nothing else they could make you swerve into the on coming traffic. JT

Sensible view in my opinion John...
I think Ken actually thought my last post was serious.. ...In a previous post he said..'I'm not an Engineer I'm a mechanic'....Well I'm just an Engineer ...and I can guess how clever someone is by how stupid they think I am....Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Nope.

"I think Ken actually thought my last post was serious.. ."

I take neither old bikes nor myself seriously and nor should anyone else.

Any one who rides any obselete motorcycle these days and in modern conditions needs their head examined.

I know I do.

Actually I would love to be able to call myself an engineer, but someone such as myself who is acutely number dyslexic has trouble with all kinds of jobs that need numerical accuracy. Not least micrometers.

I regard myself merely as a tidy and methodical mechanic, which is far removed from proper engineering.

email (option): deadsheds@yahoo.com

(I'm just wondering if those could be a set of the elusive BSA M24 manganese molybdenum steel tubed blades.)

Fred you have got something. As I am. First time restorer I took the broken blades to an expert restorer for inspection. He was confused that the forks seemed genuine BSA blades the fracture it's self had crystallisation, it looks like a casting or perhaps I am now thinking manganese molybdenum. If they are M24 blades as you describe can they be repaired? And are they unsuitable for my WDM20.

PS for Ken. I have fitted another set of blades with correct M20 links and put washers under the nuts. The spring now sits straighter. I took the bike for a test run today, so far so good.

Well.. IF ...they are the 531 forks the wall thickness will be thin & the blades will be noticeably lighter if you compare them to standard M20 although the forgings on both must make up alot of the weight.
I had the direct comparison with 2 later unit single frames & the 531 version was considerably lighter.

M24 forks as far as i know are the same dimenions as M20 the different part number i think was just the material, so should be fine on M20, the M24 did use a 20" wheel but no need for more fork length as the overall diameter was the same as it had only a 3.00 tyre fitted.
having said that, M20 Girders came in 2 lengths anyway & my personal view is that they lengthened them to accept more aggressive tread for off road conditions where required but that's only a guess.
I'm not a specialist on metals but I'm fairly sure TIG is best for 531 although if (most likely) the brake is due to past accident & straightening activity i would be a bit hesitant to use them unless they were retubed.
If you do decide to shelve the blades rather than collecting dust i would be interested in having a go at identifying them or even retubing them, my late father had a cycle shop in London & specialized in lightweight racers & hand built frames himself using 531 but i was too young & motorcycle crazy to take an interest back then.

... oh just saw i typed "brake" but i meant "break" :D

Rather ironic that everyone has put shit on Indian forks and an original pair break!