Raleigh Chiltern. Your thoughts please

[paul-kent]

Picked up a chiltern last night for a few quid, 91 on the hub. It's probably the newest Raleigh I have ever owned and I was quite disappointed to see the poor quality of the components. The frame set appears okay but the rest is not up to the Raleigh standards I was bought up with.
I intend to use as my commuter bike for a while to see how I get on with it. It now sports a brooks saddle and a rear carrier.
Id like to hear others thoughts on the model

 

[raleighnut]

I like it although I'd change a lot of the steel components for aluminium ones (crank, pedals, brakes and handlebars for a start and probably the stem and seatpost as well)

 

[bigjim]

I had one for a while. Thought it was the most comfortable bike I'd ever ridden. It was great for around town. Sorry I sold it now. I'd buy another at the right price and would not change anything.

 

[mjr]

I understand it's not one of their best but there are quite a lot still around and in happy use.

 

[paul-kent]

I'll be changing the brakes as they just shout cheap quality
I ran mine out briefly last night and like the riding position . Surprised how high the gearing is

 

[mjr]

Ah, yes. That sort of bike was typically supplied as 54/72/96" gearing or thereabouts. I don't know if people rode them like that or if it was a ploy to sell larger sprockets for the back but I lowered mine to 45/60/80" which I think is plenty high enough on the flat but gives me a little chance of riding up most inclines around here! (10% is as bad as most get)

 

[tyred]

I read somewhere that the reason they geared them so high was because the smaller sprocket needed less chain links thus reducing the production costs. A few chain links might mean nothing to us buying an occasional chain here or there but when you consider Raleigh were building in excess of 1 million bikes per annum in their heyday, that adds up to a hell of a lot of chain links saved.

 

[mjr]

I read somewhere that the reason they geared them so high was because the smaller sprocket needed less chain links thus reducing the production costs.

I'm not convinced as then why not make the chainring smaller too, needing less metal, a slightly smaller chainguard and even fewer links?

 

[Chris S]

I've owned a Chiltern since 2010, I've never owned an old Raleigh so I can't compare the quality of it's components.
My main complaint is it's chrome-plated wheels, the braking is almost non-existent in the wet.
I think mine has a 44 tooth chain ring with an 18 tooth sprocket on the back, this gives a 63 inch middle gear.
Long slight inclines are a problem because I don't notice them until the pedalling becomes heavy going. Then it's just a case of standing on the pedals rather than dropping down a gear. A slightly bigger sprocket might help.

 

[Chris S]

I read somewhere that the reason they geared them so high was because the smaller sprocket needed less chain links thus reducing the production costs. A few chain links might mean nothing to us buying an occasional chain here or there but when you consider Raleigh were building in excess of 1 million bikes per annum in their heyday, that adds up to a hell of a lot of chain links saved.

I heard a similar thing about the motor industry - apparently it's referred to as 'bean counting'.

 

[tyred]

I'm not convinced as then why not make the chainring smaller too, needing less metal, a slightly smaller chainguard and even fewer links?

Could be but people had a preference for larger chainrings then as they last longer.

 

[paul-kent]

I think I'll get myself a 22 tooth rear cog

 

[mjr]

I think I'll get myself a 22 tooth rear cog

And a new longer chain unless you have loads of slack spare!

 

[paul-kent]

I have plenty of chain

 

[paul-kent]

Had a play with it today
It's actually not too bad, cheap chrome on the rims but apart from that not too sad.

Since the pics I binned the grips and levers and replaced them with 60s levers and some leather grips
Plan to ride it to work at least once this week, just hope the tyres hold