FLYTE 8 - 1937 TO 39

Submitted by Wayne.Gillies on Wed, 08/12/2015 - 21:50

FLYTE 8, the serial # is hard to read, its between 1937 to 1939.  I am posting this for Don Farmer in Montreal.

Don has decided to part with another of his gems.   It has  a professionally repainted frame (I will provide free correct down tube and seat tube decals to the buyer)  Take a look at the pix, and, if interested contact Don at (514))457 6537.

http://s917.photobucket.com/user/dobie45/library/DONs%20FLYTE%208

Cheers, Wayne Gillies

18 Comments

Submitted by Wayne.Gillies on Thu, 08/13/2015 - 02:34.

The price is $800.

Submitted by locomotion on Thu, 08/13/2015 - 12:45.

good looking bike, unfortunately the front fork makes the bike IMO

Submitted by Dave Brown on Thu, 08/13/2015 - 16:21.

What might i ask does IMO stand for?

Submitted by Lawrence Ruskin on Thu, 08/13/2015 - 17:12.

It means the bike is made up from the wrong parts, and it will cost you a bundle before you have a flyte.

 

So what happened to the front fork and seat???

Submitted by Brian R. on Thu, 08/13/2015 - 19:34.

IMO means "in my opinion" I believe. Didn't CCM sell a model like this new? Either as a lower cost Flyte or after they realized the front fork could break? I don't know, but I have a vague recollection of seeing something about that years ago.

Submitted by locomotion on Thu, 08/13/2015 - 20:45.

yes IMO means in my opinion

 

I bet not too many people bought the Flyte 8s when new, but it's pretty easy to make one these days, if you have a broken fork

Submitted by Lawrence Ruskin on Fri, 08/14/2015 - 09:35.

So the flyte 8 is just a flyte that CCM changed out the front forks and seat? Why did they do that, if that's true?

Submitted by Dave Brown on Fri, 08/14/2015 - 10:19.

It is true its in there Catalogue.

Submitted by John on Fri, 08/14/2015 - 10:43.

Submitted by roadworthy on Fri, 08/14/2015 - 19:32.

CCM did that to produce another less "expensive" ($2.50 less) and more conventional model thereby creating a larger market apart from the controvesial curved fork. Was this a good move? I have seen very few "8"s.

Submitted by Lawrence Ruskin on Sat, 08/15/2015 - 12:43.

Thanks for the info, guys...Yep'I would have kept the curved fork...

Submitted by portdalhousie on Sat, 08/15/2015 - 14:20.

Hi,  It might be good to post the frame size--either 20 or 22 inch.  Thanks!  --David

Submitted by Wayne.Gillies on Sat, 08/15/2015 - 16:31.

Hi David:  Have you come across any other Larouche Pouchois rims?  You will have to give Don a call for the frame height; I was not provided that info

 

Cheers, Wayne

Submitted by portdalhousie on Sat, 08/15/2015 - 17:18.

Hi Wayne,  Thanks for that!  I will contact Don and post the information.  I have not come across any track rims recently. --David

Submitted by T-Mar on Sat, 08/15/2015 - 18:30.

Based on the length of the head tube, it is the smaller 22/20" version and not the 24/22" version. When you look at the surviving Flytes there are very few 24/22" frames relative to the 22/20" versions. Given the reported issues with fork reliability, it makes one wonder if the lower survival rate of the larger frame size is due to the forks being overstressed by the heavier riders that would normally ride this size.

Submitted by portdalhousie on Sun, 08/16/2015 - 20:46.

Hi,  The forks would also react poorly to loaded CCM newspaper front racks, double riding and curb jumping.  --David

Submitted by jdwillia on Sun, 08/16/2015 - 22:03.

There was a fellow named Gilles in Quebec City who had a number of Flytes. He weighed 300 lbs. and rode around Quebec City on his Flyte with the front fork flexing as he encountered poor road surfaces. The fork held together.

John Williamson

Submitted by portdalhousie on Thu, 08/20/2015 - 12:20.

Hi,  I spoke with Don Farmer today and he confirmed that the frame size is the regular, 22/20" size.  --David