- This topic is empty.
-
@Mark wrote:
No testimony from former employees needed.
This bike did not come out of the Barracuda Bicycle Company of Durango, Colorado, USA. No if’s, and’s or but’s about it. First inclination is that we have catalogs from Barracuda and their 1994 line. Second, is that the dates in the story here don’t match up.
This is why documentation is a MUST, everyone. Memory might have said 1994 to our friend here, but in reality, after a little digging, it was likely 1996. And the contact numbers on the brochure aren’t USA numbers; they’re european. Despite this company having a “friendly” name of Barracuda, the company name is actually “Moore Lorge & Co Ltd”.
Gosh, I feel like I’m breaking bad news to a guest on the Antiques Roadshow.
I won’t go out on a limb and take a stab at guessing the history on THIS company and it’s bikes – because I just don’t need to and I’ll likely be incorrect and I’d rather state the facts as I know them.
Mark,
Moore Large and Co Ltd, are just distributors and the sales catalogue is just that and is designed for the UK, the thing I find strange is the bike came with the instruction manual as posted?? The years I gave originally were from memory and weren’t meant to be any sort of claim, I was just trying to find out the history of the bike that was all.
Oh, please don’t take my comments in a negative way; not intended as such and I’m certain you weren’t making absolute claims. No harm, no foul.The perplexing items in this discussion are (in my opinion):
– The use of dihedral top tube.
– The fact that you received a manual from the BBC of Durango.We’re talking 1996 here, so it’s possible (we’d have to do a lot of digging) that Ross licensed out the name Barracuda for use. I don’t believe that there were any patents held regarding dihedral tubing, so I’m sure anyone could have produced a bike with that type of tube easily without much fuss at all. But if Ross licensed out the name, why wouldn’t they also allow for the brand (decals, paint scheme, etc) go with that? Seems odd to allow others to call their bikes “Barracudas” and let them come up with something completely different regarding the look and feel of the bike. After all, Ross made a Barracuda line in 1996, so why would they allow for competition to use the same name? Doesn’t seem to fit in my head.
It’s my belief that the retailer you bought your bike from, simply tossed in a manual from the “other” Barracuda. This fits, because I believe the stems used (and I think they’re referenced in the manual) were the flip-flop kind which could be reversed for a lower (or higher) rise. Your stem is not likely one of this type. Kind of proves that the two items (the bike and the manual) don’t belong with each other.
So I’m 99% positive the two companies and their bikes are completely unrelated, but there is always a nagging 1% which won’t go away.. I’m game to keep looking at this if someone wants to pick this one up..
@Mark wrote:Oh, please don’t take my comments in a negative way; not intended as such and I’m certain you weren’t making absolute claims. No harm, no foul.
The perplexing items in this discussion are (in my opinion):
– The use of dihedral top tube.
– The fact that you received a manual from the BBC of Durango.We’re talking 1996 here, so it’s possible (we’d have to do a lot of digging) that Ross licensed out the name Barracuda for use. I don’t believe that there were any patents held regarding dihedral tubing, so I’m sure anyone could have produced a bike with that type of tube easily without much fuss at all. But if Ross licensed out the name, why wouldn’t they also allow for the brand (decals, paint scheme, etc) go with that? Seems odd to allow others to call their bikes “Barracudas” and let them come up with something completely different regarding the look and feel of the bike. After all, Ross made a Barracuda line in 1996, so why would they allow for competition to use the same name? Doesn’t seem to fit in my head.
It’s my belief that the retailer you bought your bike from, simply tossed in a manual from the “other” Barracuda. This fits, because I believe the stems used (and I think they’re referenced in the manual) were the flip-flop kind which could be reversed for a lower (or higher) rise. Your stem is not likely one of this type. Kind of proves that the two items (the bike and the manual) don’t belong with each other.
So I’m 99% positive the two companies and their bikes are completely unrelated, but there is always a nagging 1% which won’t go away.. I’m game to keep looking at this if someone wants to pick this one up..
Mark, That all makes a lot of sense, i’ll post some more photos of the bike for Vinnie.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.