Motoscrubs.com

What frame is this?

Hi Jim

The closest I could find was in Falloon's standard catalog. On page 33 is a picture of the 1958 175cc Motocross. The under engine cradle seems to be the same and the extra gusseting at the fork mount looks right too. It also appears to have showing, that structure that loops up from the rear shock mounts and looks like a seat mount. Thought it might be home brewed on yours, but it seems to be on the Motocross. The picture does not have that passenger peg boss on the tube that goes from the bottom rear of the engine to the rear of the frame loop. Also the rear frame loop upwars tilt seems to be more pronounced on the Motocross. On page 31 is a picture of what is described as one of the more mundane models of the 50's. The 175 Due Selle. It has a cradle under the engine, but it looks different in that it seems to loop out further in front of the engine than yours and the motocross does. Also it does not have the fork mount gusseting.
My guess is that it is a Motocross model. The book says they were released in 58 and produced though the 60s. Supposed to have extra bracing in the rear sub frame and a reinforced swing arm.

Duc Singles Admin wrote:What frame is this?

____ I'd like to know for sure myself, Jim.
I've never owned any such Ducati-frame much like that one. _ If it's all completely Ducati-stock (except for it's color, of course), then it must be from a time before any DUCATIs were sold in the areas where I lived. _ And certainly (as is obvious), from a time back before Ducati was much criticized for low ground-clearance and excess dry-weight. _ (Unless it was some kind of military Duke-model, I never knew of.)
__ Concerning it's color -(multi-colors!), by only looking at the posted-pix, I certainly can't tell absolutely for sure what it's original paint-color might have been, since it sorta seems that it's had multiple paint-jobs (or perhaps somebody has become content for that frame to look somewhat camouflaged-styled), as I believe I see (mixed with a bit of possible rust), all of the following colors,, dark-blue and/or glossy-black, gold, gray, red, (besides light gray & brown primers).
It may be helpful for someone (who's even older than myself) to be further enabled to tell which model it must have been, by reviewing whatever it's original-color had actually been... So Jim, can you personally tell for sure what color it ORIGINALLY was, underneath all those added coat-spots of colored-paints ?
__ For any others who may also have a bit of trouble viewing Jim's presented pix (as directly-displayed from this w.site), I've included some altered versions of them, reshowing his three whole Duke-frame view-shots.
For anyone more interested in old DUCATI-frames, I suggest that ya download all the (6 +3) posted pictures (of this one frame), and then use your PC to expand them and have a closer look-see at any areas of the frame which you're interested in seeing better.
(Also, I'd appreciate comments from anyone as to whether the 3-pix I've added here, are at all any easier [than Jim's] to see very well over your home-monitor,, as I've shrunk & brightened them for intended improved viewing from this w.site.)


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

UPDATE: - I've finally now shrunk-down these much altered pix, so as to be easier fully-viewed.

There are some good pictures of a 200MX here
http://www.bevelheaven.com/bikes4sale/200MX/index.htm

You can see the differences MotoMike was mentioning.

Pete

____ So far one helpful buddy has responded (by PM) to my plea for an opinion about my altered versions of Jim's posted pictures...
Here follows what he had to say:

PM wrote:Jim's pictures show up very well on my laptop monitor as well as my big crt, when I left click them, they expand to give a full view (on firefox). All I can detect for paint color is black and a bit of grey primer (and rust).
Yours are lower resolution and look pixel-ated when expanded, are very over exposed and have a slight blue cast. Time for a new monitor...

__ It now concerns me that I may be the only one who's seeing the many colors which I've reported to be seen on that frame ! _ Can't anyone else see any of those various paint-colors?? _ (I would think so.)
If ya can, then please mention which you're most able to see those colors with/in,, my posted brightened-versions, or Jim's original posted-pictures.
And I mean WHILE the pictures are viewed at this w.site, (not AFTER being downloaded).
____ I had been hoping that Jim himself would've posted-in on this, by now. _ Hopefully he will soon (at least)- confirm that that frame does indeed have multiple-colors of added paint, (if not list each one of all it's various colors) !
__ On the other hand, it's still fairly likely that it's all merely that which I had originally assumed it to be, back before I had tried to brighten-up Jim's (dark appearing) pictures...
In which case, the "red" & "gold" & "brown-primer", would be just shades of varying degrees of rust-stages, and all the "dark-blue" areas are actually just some remaining original black-gloss paint, with the "light-gray primer" being some remaining original primer-coating.
I've now re-adjusted my monitor, and this likely-hood now seems to (once again) be the presumed case. _ (But I'll still wait for Jim's confirmation, before shopping for a new monitor.)


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

When I look at them in Firefox, I see black, gray primer and rust. The colors show up better in Jim's original posting of the pictures.

Pete

Pete wrote:When I look at them in Firefox, I see black, gray primer and rust. The colors show up better in Jim's original posting of the pictures.
Pete

____ Another vote for me to get a new monitor, it seems...
Cuz with MY monitor, (& ONLY when connected to PCs loaded with XP-Pro !), Jim's pix are so dark (as I see them), that there's absolutely no sign at all of the shadow (from the frame) cast upon the pavement ! _ And also, MY posted-versions (of Jim's pix) look just*about perfect, as seen on MY monitor ! _ (* Except for the 'blued' pavement.)
__ I really need to learn about this picture-viewing issue, as I surely don't wish to post any pictures which do-not appear properly on OTHERs' PC-displays !


Thankful-Cheers,
-Bob

____ I've received a second PM from a member-buddy who seems to have the answer concerning my issue...
Here follows what his PM had included:

PM2 wrote:I think you may be experiencing a Gamma Shift on your monitor. The photos looked correct before you "altered" them in the browser. There is only Black, Primer, and rust on the frame. I'm 95% sure. I make my living looking at digital images. When you push the images as you have you tend to skew the colors as well, revealing lots of fringing and false coloration.
Your PC may be viewing the images at gamma 1.
I'm a mac guy, so I can't be of much help on you settings, except to check the display settings.

__ What he's reviewed here seems to make the case for what just I-myself am actually having to deal with. _ So since I did-not post my added/altered pix just merely so that they could be better seen on only just MY PC-monitor, alone,, I'll soon next replace my currently posted inferior versions of Jim's (likely perfect) pictures, with (another set of 3) alternate (& hopefully much improved) altered-versions. _ As I still think that I might be able to come-up with altered versions which are at least somewhat easier viewed on some others' PC/browser combos.
I'll then add a note here, when I've finished replacing my currently posted rejects.

-UPDATE: I've now replaced my previous pix with only slightly brightened* versions -(* only lightened merely just enough so that the sun-cast frame-shadows are just barely visible, as seen on MY [questionable!] monitor).
I still have yet to shrink them back-down to a size small enough to fit within the normal posting-borders. _ When I finally do that, I'll then add a corresponding note within THAT post (with the 3 altered-pix).


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

It's not the same frame as the 200MX on the BevelHeaven site.

Rick wrote:It's not the same frame as the 200MX on the BevelHeaven site.

comp.jpg

definately different. those gussets look home brew. pretty lousy welding job. there are more differences than that, but Falloon says they produced it for several years, so thought it was possibly an iteration that was not pictured.