This is an archive of Vintage Bicycle Information.
For current Discussions, go to our main site: OldRoads.com

If you are trying to determine the genealogy of your bicycle by it's features, go to our Vintage Bicycle Price Guide
which details bicycle features, wheel sizes, brake types, etc., as well as showing a price estimate for your old bicycle.

If you are trying to determine the make and model of your bicycle, go to our Vintage Bicycle Picture Database
which details bicycle features, wheel sizes, etc., as well as showing a price estimate for your vintage bicycle.

Archived: Vintage Lightweights

AGE / VALUE:   Batavus Champion posted by: Krister on 6/21/2004 at 3:11:32 AM
I just aquired a Batavus Champion, but I don't know anything about it. It looks like it is from the late 60's, and it is in great shape. Any ideas?

AGE / VALUE:   Paramount 3PDG posted by: Douglas on 6/20/2004 at 3:02:04 PM
I'm looking at this on ebay, any idea what year it would be or if it's a waterford or japanese made bike? I contacted the seller, and he's not really sure. Thanks!



   RE:AGE / VALUE:   Paramount 3PDG posted by T-Mar on 6/20/2004 at 8:36:01 PM
Why don't you just ask the owner for the serial number? That will tell you the year and whether it is Waterford manufacture, or not. The info for decoding the serial number is available at http://www.waterfordbikes.com/2004/data/culture/paramount/sn/over.php .

However, if he can't/won't supply the serial number, I'd guess 1991. The OS Parmount came out in 1988 or 1989 depending on the source material referenced, but none of my references indicate series numbers until 1991. Shimano 6oo had gone 8 speed by 1992. Of course, this assumes my references are accurate and the 7 speed, 600 components are original. Good luck!

MISC:   D-114 / Made in Japan, IT'S A WHAT? posted by: dent on 6/20/2004 at 3:38:30 AM
Does anyone out there have another Japan made "D-114" bicycle? I brought one home from our local Police bicycle auction( 20 bike's, 3 bidder's in attendence) it's a 3 spd from what looks to be '70's-early '80's. It's in excellent garage kept condition only needing a sponge bath.
I needed another bike like I need a "hole in the head" but the nice spring seat was worth the $2 I paid for the bike. I Also picked up an '80's chrome Schwinn Predator and a 1973 Panasonic Sport Deluxe with chrome half fork, Araya 27x1/4 rims with quick release front/back, aluminum SR handlebar and stem plus entry level Titalist components including aluminum Titalist crankset and "Ti" centerpulls, I like the Panasonic the best even if it's a size to small. All three bikes cost me $5.00,.

Any info on the D-114 bicycle would be great! dent

   RE:MISC:   D-114 / Made in Japan, IT'S A WHAT? posted by dent on 6/22/2004 at 2:46:17 AM
Did I type Titalist? How about Titlist parts on the Panasonic.

VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Dunelt Ladies three speed posted by: Bob on 6/19/2004 at 2:01:07 PM
I just acquired a 26" Dunelt and was wondering what year it was. The name plate on front Says" Dunelt Birmingham 40"
Is this the year of production? And does anybody know if these bikes came with a chainguard? There is no bracket to attache one. I am cleaning it up and the fenders have some dings and scratches but they shine like new after being cleaned.

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Dunelt Ladies three speed posted by JONathan on 6/19/2004 at 9:31:55 PM
Nice find. I have a Dunelt 3-speed (lady's frame) which has a hockey-stick chainguard. I'd guess this bike is from the '60's/early '70's perhaps. The wheels are off and I have not cataloged this bike, yet. I took a close look at the CG attachment. The stick has a couple of slots about 1/2 long near the front. A moveable clamp is on the seat-tube between the pulley and second down-tube. The clamp has notches that fit inside those slots. When the screw is turned in, the notches fasten down inside the slots. The rear has a clamp on the right seat-stay that attches via a screw and nut with washers onto the back end of the guard.
Pretty ingenious. THe Raleigh "sports" that is my wife's ride has brazed on brackets to mount the chainguard. IMHO, the Dunelt is better built. I know it is considered a medium grade, below the "sports" model, but I could not be convinced of that by what is observable in direct comparison. Both are exact same color, too. The Dunelt has a bigger BB shell and heavier lugwork on the down-tubes. The head-tube lugs look the same shape or "cut", except the Dunelt has thicker lugs. Brazing is especially nice. The forks are thimble-type crown with forks that are nicely tapered. There is no pressure to fix it up, so it will be a while, but the decals and paint are in fine shape. No rust. Itr cost $30 at thrift store about two years ago. I thought it was unique, so the price was OK, considering how nice it looked. I put some rare Weinmann alloy roadster rims on the "sports". It made a big difference in ride, both in performance (such as you could expect) and braking is 50% better.
I dig the Raleighs and,of course, the Dunelt. Raleigh absorbed Dunelt sometime ago, but Dunelt seemed to ahve kept a bit of their pride and "spin" on the product bearing their name. There is a decal that reads: "Ride Awheel of Sheffield Steel" which is on the down-tube (upper). Pretty cool.
Good luck, JONathan

VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Schwinn Approved "World Tourist" posted by: Jim on 6/19/2004 at 11:44:25 AM
A friend gave me a Schwinn approved World Tourist-does anyone have info about this bike? Looks like its from the 70's, lower line, 5 speed. Any info appreciated. THANKS

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Schwinn Approved posted by Dick in FL on 6/20/2004 at 6:24:32 AM
Your World Tourist was probably made for Schwinn by Panasonic. They came in either 5 or 10 speeds, and the later Tourists shared the Shimano Positron shifting with the domestically-built Suburbans. Had it been available, this is the bike I would have purchased in 1973 instead of the World Voyager to which I was compelled to add a sidestand and fenders. The Tourist also came with 27 x 1-3/8 tires and upright handlebars. The Voyager might have made sense for someone who might commute to work in a Formula 1 race car; the World Tourist was more practical. Worst complaint .... chromed steel wheels.

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Schwinn Approved posted by Eric Amlie on 6/21/2004 at 2:12:32 AM
The World Tourist is more likely made by Giant in Taiwan. The World Voyageur was made by Panasonic/Matsushita/National in Japan and already has much more collector value than the World Tourist is likely to ever have IMHO.

   RE:RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Schwinn Approved posted by JONathan on 6/21/2004 at 3:57:35 AM
You might check the left rear dropout for a "G" stamped with serial numbers indicating year. Something like; "Gxxx80"; would be 1980.
Or it might be; "G80xxx", I can't remember, offhand. My Schwinn "Traveler" is Taiewan built by Merida, I think, because the serial number is on the headbadge and nothing on the dropout.
My "World Sport" is a step belwo the "traveler" in the frame steel. If your "World Tourist" has 4130 main tubes it will be a great riding bike. The "traveler" is a sport bike that works well in commuter service. There is no room for fenders on the rear as the 40" wheelbase compresses the triangle quite a bit leaving little clearance from the barke bridge. However, running 700C wheels would give you 4mm (8mm/2) more room.
I run it without fenders. Rainy weather I use a Giant "nutra" with Zefal plastic fenders. The 700-38C tires are way better for traction in the wet. The "World Tourist" sounds like it may have better frame design for racks and fenders. If you place alloy Araya wheels (27's), or a similar high quality wheel, like Weinmanns, you'll probably be surprised at how well things go. The only Panasonic Schwinn that I have is a "Le Tour II" ('77).
The '80 "Traveler" is better riding in all respects, from my singular experience, of course. Funny that the "Le Tour II" might have more collectability. But that is a totally different thing than rideability in many cases, IMHO.
Nice find,

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Schwinn Approved posted by Don on 6/22/2004 at 5:08:23 AM
I had a World Tourist for a few years. Picked it up from one of my Father in Law's neighbors in Sun City, AZ. It had the positron 10 spd system which had some novelty interest. Bike was well made with good quality maroon paint, lugged Hi Ten frame with steel rims, steel bars & painted steel fenders. Weighted close to 40 pounds & was ok for trundeling around town. I gave it to a friend who still rides it regularly. Don

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Schwinn Approved posted by Don on 6/22/2004 at 5:09:00 AM
I had a World Tourist for a few years. Picked it up from one of my Father in Law's neighbors in Sun City, AZ. It had the positron 10 spd system which had some novelty interest. Bike was well made with good quality maroon paint, lugged Hi Ten frame with steel rims, steel bars & painted steel fenders. Weighted close to 40 pounds & was ok for trundeling around town. I gave it to a friend who still rides it regularly. Don

MISC:   Raleigh "mixte" 10-sp. posted by: JONathan on 6/19/2004 at 3:29:51 AM
I swung by my favorite charity store on the way back home. It has been pretty lean, but what luck. A bikeboom Raleigh "mixte" for $15 was waiting for me. It has those fantastic SunTour stem mount "power shifters", so that was all the push I needed. The rest could be junk history. I had to pedal home in a hurry and get my truck; got it picked up and started wirking it down to the frame. Everything was going great until I started on the drive crank. THe nut was missing. OK, no problem. I threaded the puller on the SR crank and the tool pulled itself out of the crank stripping the crank treads. What to do? I needed the crank for a fixed gear. 165mm reach and real fine 52T main ring with a 40T that unscrews so I'd have a nice single driver with good cornering clearance. Is there a secret to removing one that has stripped threads? The guy used some kind of expoxy to hold the crank onto the spindle which had a buggered thread, too. That would explain the missing nut. I removed the lockring and backed the adjustable cup out a ways to gibve some clearance for the spindle to move. I started with a nut threaded a bit reversed banging on it with a ballpean hammer. Bad idea. I had to cut the nut off with a dremel wheel, with the crank still stuck in place. I removed the adjustable cup and and then got my blunt 3/8" cold chisel and dug around for my my bigger ballpean hammer...the kind that is good for knocking out clevis pins on tractor attachments. I realized the small chain-ring was going to bottom on the chain-stay, so I placed a couple of flat steel bars on the flats of the fixed cup between it and the inside of the crank. On about the forth clang the pin went flying across the yard, missing a porcelain planter by mm's and bounced off a redwood planter box, leaving a big dent. The chainring simply dropped to the deck. It worked, but there has to be a less neaderthal method. Does anyone have one? I donnot recommend this method. Keep all people, pets and breakable objects behind the hammer! The cranks were ready to go. The rest was a big happy surprise. A SunTour "perfect" FW with 14-34T cogs that is hardly worn. The rear derailer is a Raleigh branded SunTour "7" that is in good shape. The Raleigh branded Weinmann "Vainqueurs" are in excellent shape. Araya steel 27's with QR front and nutted rear. Good shape, too. Rust had not discovered the hideout of this bike, probably near a dryer from all the lint on the gears. Decals state "made in Japan"; :Hi tensile steel tubes" (gas pipe); "Super Record" on twin-tubes and "Raleigh" on the down-tube. The usual pipe crusher kickstand, only this one has a rubber boot; quilted plastic seat; really nice SR bars and stem. Has the lazy-levers on the brake controls which spell bikeboom. The frame is better than a couple of bikeboom "Made in England" Raleighs that are in my collection. Anybody know what to do about the stripped threads on the crankarm? I can get it on to another spindle, but the next time it has to come off, the same problem will be waiting. The hammer and chisel method is not something I look forward to repeating.
THanks, gents.
The frame is in a bag and the parts are boxed for projects ahead. I would have to go $25 just for a pristine set of "power shifters", I think.

VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   I expected this to do better posted by: Walter on 6/18/2004 at 5:41:42 PM

The picture of the Lusitania alone makes this old catalog fascinating. I watched but didn't bid. If the winner is on this site: Congrats! I think you got a neat piece of history.

VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   bottle cage mount posted by: John E on 6/18/2004 at 4:41:45 PM
I am soliciting advice from anyone who cares to respond to this thread. As I finish reassembling the refinished 1959 (1958?) Capo Modell Campagnolo, I have several choices regarding water bottles: 1) none (short rides) or Camelback (longer rides); 2) clamp on the downtube (risks scratching the new paint or obscuring the custom-reproduced drop-shadowed CAPO downtube decals; therefore probably unacceptable); 3) handlebar mount (nice retro touch, but it does hide that distinctive, beautiful nickel-plated scripted CAPO head badge (reproduced on http://capo.at/, although the a and the p should lie on the big underscore, with the bottom of the C wrapping down over it); and 4) under/behind-saddle (my current thought, but it may look a little too anachronistic, even for me).

Comments invited!

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   bottle cage mount posted by Elvis on 6/18/2004 at 5:28:46 PM
Try mounting the water bottle to the handlebars, but to one side, clamped around the bar. The sell a little gadget for this if you don't have anything that'll work. The headtube and Badge should remain mostly visible.

Sound like a sweet bike!

P.S. - avoid clamp on downtube anything! if you must, wrap the tube with something to protect the paint from most damage, but definately not that bike!

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   bottle cage mount posted by Walter on 6/18/2004 at 5:31:29 PM
With my new and nicely preserved Moto I'm in a similar position as it also has no braze on cage mounts. My (unexecuted) plan is the handlebar mount. Probably a Minoura from Harris. I do own a Camelbak and like them but sometimes I don't want to carry backpack. Not only are seatmounts "anachronistic" but they're not easy to find.

1 thing about the Camelbak is that it gives you another area to pack tools, food, etc.

   RE:RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   bottle cage mount posted by JONathan on 6/18/2004 at 8:16:52 PM
Exquisite restoration on your Capo, especially the paint job. I would stay clear of that down-tube choice, IMHO. Mostly for the reasons you stated. It is the prefered location in my travels where one is required. I cannot cotton up to those "camel" whatevers, not that they are not good things. Very logical, I must admit. I like things lean and unemcumbered, low center of gravity, etc. and I'm not racing off-road...where I think the camel units would be very useful devices to provide water. Maybe the next generation will use reverse osmosis of perspiration to generate recylced water,...joking, of course).
The under the seat setup would work, but for the reasons you stated. The Capo you have needs to maintain that sleek look, right? OK, now thgere's the
"no bottle" state. Default mode, perhaps. Which brings me to one suggestion that works for me...after a fashion. That's mounted on the seat-tube. Was that the retro-lokk referenced in the post above? Probably your best choice. Drawback is that it bugs me to not be able to look down and see what's going on with the rear derailer and rear wheel at the chainstays while pushing hard. Slow, is no problem, I just flex out an have a look/see on each side, but that's not a good thing in traffic or tight running. I just admit, having water available is a plus that sometimes makes up for the setup. You could always remove the bottle and stick it in a back pocket when necessary for esthetic reasons.
I use a pair of cut-offs made from surplus fatigues. A lot of gear can get stowed in those roomy pockets, too. I was wondering about a plastic tube that could be inserted in the seat-tube with a 1/4" hose for "hydration". If it broke, though, there would be water all over the BB. Scratch that one.
Bottom line, for this putzer; go with seat-tube mount...maybe a custom construct. I
've made them before with off-the-shelf hardware.
Just a couple c's.
BTW, that really is a fine bike you have running. Worth the effort and expense, IMHO.

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   bottle cage mount posted by Don on 6/18/2004 at 11:54:21 PM
I have an old handlebar mount holder on my restored Raleigh SuperCourse & it doesn't obscure the head badge that much. The bottom is even with the top of the headset. Not sure there is any perfect solution for such a beautiful bike as yours unless you do short rides only with no bottle...My Grand Jubile came with an original downtube clamp on holder & I was able to purchase a NOS "Moto" water bottle for it at the Seattle swapmeet this year.

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   bottle cage mount posted by Pat Lavery on 6/19/2004 at 2:08:53 AM
Why not just carry your water bottle in your back jersey
pocket like they use to do in the old days. Whenever I
ride my old Gitane with no cage mounts, that 's how I carry it.

   RE:RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   bottle cage mount posted by JB on 6/19/2004 at 10:02:19 AM
I concur with Jonathan about wearing camo cut-offs...those bellow pockets can hold all the water, tools etc...this spring I found wild asparagus in abundance riding the country....filled those pockets up!...same for some other bulbs I dug in abandoned farmhouse yards...very handy

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   bottle cage mount posted by John S on 6/21/2004 at 3:41:30 AM
Since you've lovingly restored this bike, perhaps sourcing a vintage single or double bar-mounted cage holder (as I've seen in many vintage TdF photos) would "cap" off your mount (pun intended?). If you have center pull brakes, the cable obscures the head badge already, though I think the bottle mounts are high enough so to not obscure the badge.

   :   bottle cage mount posted by John E on 6/21/2004 at 3:38:47 PM
Thank you, everyone, for your thoughtful responses. I am leaning toward a double handlebar-mounted cage, which was still very popular in the early 1960s. (It is also consistent with the photo of Walter Cap, Max Bulla, and Otto Cap (i.e., Cap, O. -- hence the company name, which is also a nice Italianate pun), in the "about" portion of the capo.at website.)

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   bottle cage mount posted by Joel on 6/27/2004 at 1:00:23 AM
how can I found out what a raleigh supercourse 1972 is worth

VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   eBay outing (nice one) posted by: Walter on 6/18/2004 at 1:10:03 PM
Check out http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=7298&item=3680197311&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW

Too rich for me and I just got a Moto Grand Jubile but this Raleigh is very nice.

No relation etc., etc.

   eBay Raleigh Pro posted by John E on 6/18/2004 at 4:32:41 PM
Very nice bike, indeed, but I had forgotten about some of the CPSC horrors of the 1970s, such as that chain guard on the Campag. crankset and "spoke protector" on the rear wheel.

VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   C. ITOH posted by: Jim on 6/18/2004 at 11:40:26 AM
Picked up a C. ITOH 10 speed,but have never seen that name before. Seems to be from the 70's and is made in Japan. Has a generator for the lights and looks like it may have been a lower priced bike. Any info out there on this bike/company who mde it? "Thaks" jm

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   C. ITOH posted by T-Mar on 6/18/2004 at 12:53:47 PM
During the 1970's bicycle boom, C. Itoh was the importer for the Kabuki line of bicycles, made by Bridgestone. This was the same period that the C. Itoh and Itoh brand of bicycles were appearing on the market, so common thought is that these brands were manufactured by Bridgestone.

Sheldon Brown pans the marque on his website, but from what I've seen, they were comparable other Japanese bicycle boom models, with a quite nice high end model. They may later have descended to descended to department store status, like some other lines, but the boom models appeared respectable.

I have some boom period C.Itoh specs, and the only one that mentions an OEM generator is the 100SC model. It sounds like a competitor to the Peugeot UE8/18 as it came with front and rear racks, and fenders. Other notable features mentioned are an aluminum cotterless crank and 26" x 1-3/8" tires. The derailleur appears to have been SunTour, and if so, you can determine the year using the component date code information on the Vintage Trek website. If this description matches your bicycle, it was 4th in a line-up of 6 bicycles and retailed for $150.00 US around 1973.

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   C. ITOH posted by Jim on 6/18/2004 at 5:46:50 PM
Thank You for the info.

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   C. ITOH posted by Jim on 6/18/2004 at 5:47:26 PM
Thank You for the info.

   RE:RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   C. ITOH posted by Dagwood on 6/19/2004 at 2:33:35 PM
Are you stalking, rape molesting again? can't speak of rape???

   RE:RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   C. ITOH posted by Dagwood on 6/19/2004 at 2:33:37 PM
Are you stalking, rape molesting again? can't speak of rape???

   RE:RE:RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   C. ITOH posted by Dagwood on 6/19/2004 at 2:39:31 PM
rape side, mind telling all your stalking to the police??

remember, with every wct, this tripe commits, they are cowards to even show their faces, like the terrorists in the middle east who cut people's heads off, and discriminate people out of their rights to life, where ever they can, genocidal pigs!!!

   RE:RE:RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   C. ITOH posted by Dagwood on 6/19/2004 at 2:39:38 PM
rape side, mind telling all your stalking to the police??

remember, with every wct, this tripe commits, they are cowards to even show their faces, like the terrorists in the middle east who cut people's heads off, and discriminate people out of their rights to life, where ever they can, genocidal pigs!!!

VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Early Schwinn Race Bike posted by: Tom on 6/18/2004 at 5:44:58 AM
I met a guy a month back that collects rare motorcycles. He told me about a few bicycles he had. I got to see his bikes last week. 1 of the bikes he had is a Schwinn Admiral Racer. The serial number is E4445. The bike is in a 9 out of 10 shape. The bike is all original except new red tires are on the wood rims. The bike is all black, original transfers are perfect and clear. I could not find a flaw in this bike. He got this bike in the 70's and has been in a show room since then. Before that it was stored for many years. Somehow back in 1985 the Schwinn company heard about this bike. He has 2 letters from the customer relations office aking for the bike to be put in their museum. The bike never went. What I would like to know is what is this bike. How old is it. Is it very rare. I asked the guy if he would part with it and he said for a large sum he would sell it. No numbers came up. I have 2 pictures of it. Is thee a museum this bike should be in. If anyone could help me please email me offline.

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Early Schwinn Race Bike posted by Walter on 6/18/2004 at 5:40:00 PM
I remember awhile back a beautiful Oscar Wastyn racer on eBay. Wastyn was one of the early Schwinn builders. I was sorely tempted but didn't and the bike went, surprisingly to me, unbid upon with a starting bid of $1500.

Most early US racers, like that one and probably the one you saw were meant for velodrome racing. Track events and from the turn of the 20th C. thru the 1930s 6 Day Racing was popular. Madison Square Gardens was a major venue.

Value is hard to determine. The one I saw looked beautiful but didn't draw a $1500 bid. However, I think this was around 9/11/2001 and that might've depressed collector interest. Still though I haven't seen a 1930's vintage racer draw big money on eBay.

   RE:RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Early Schwinn Race Bike posted by JONathan on 6/18/2004 at 7:50:26 PM
WOW! and a 1/2! That velodrome stuff was great. There was a famous one, I believe in San Jose. Lots of clubs back at the turn of 20th C.
I have a poster with a few guys hanging with their bikes in front of some barn or something like it. Look fixed gear all the way, too. I would find a cool spot for one of those bikes.
The tires looked big, probably for the rough riding roads. Someone way back in my family used to coach/train those racers...they listen better than horses! Just kidding, horses listen pretty good, too. Well, the enthusiasm and large contigent body for that sport would likely have left more artifacts, but those bikes are scarce. Why is that?
Nice post, thanks,

MISC:   I FINALLY DID IT-- posted by: Elvis on 6/17/2004 at 11:29:20 PM
-- I converted my 3-speed to a "club" bike!

I found a pair of old, narrow steel drop bars. I just switched everything over to them; it wasn't much, just the grips, shift lever and front brake lever [the Collegiate has a coaster rear brake]. I didn't ride it much cause it's about to start pouring here, thunderclouds -- rode maybe a mile, it was so much fun and much faster.
It rides great, wierd feel but I can just picture how a "real" club bike would look, back in the 1940's -- I think I was born half a century too late!
Took me a bit to get used to the old road bars -- I think they were originally from a late 50's or early 60's road bike which had wing nuts, now long gone to the junk heap.

Thanks to Marc, whose post 'bout his traveler convinced me to take the jump to the conversion! I didn't want to do it cause I loved the "roadster" bars too, but I convincewd myself it would be worth it - and since I'm saving the bars, I could always convert it back. Except I don't want to!
As soon as I replacing a balding front tire, and throw on a handlebar-mounted bottle cage, I'm taking it over the hill to Madison [20 miles, a couple climbs]. I can't wait, I guess I'm just a retro freak.

Come on, does anyone else have a "club" style bike to talk about? These things are so cool!

P.S. -- I actually saw a Rudge Pathfinder on municipal cleanup week, but the frame would have had to be totally refurbished and I didn't have the time. Plus it was too tall fer me. I guess this conversion is my consolation prize.

   :   I FINALLY DID IT-- posted by John E on 6/18/2004 at 4:41:37 PM
In my opinion, the drop bars are a big improvement. Did you replace the rubber pedals with steel rat-traps plus toeclips? (You should be able to find replacement 1/2" pedals designed for Varsinentals. It is easy to adapt these to accept toeclips; just punch out one of the reflectors on each.) Lighter-weight rims and tyres (650 series) would make a huge difference, as would a proper Brooks Professional, Competition, or B-17 saddle. Your frame will always be considerably heavier than that of an authentic English club racer, but the lighter wheels and tyres are far more critical in determining performance and ride feel.

To go "all the way," consider a narrower-range fixed-gear (if you can find and afford it!) or freewheeling Sturmey Archer 3-speed (or even 4-speed) hub, but this is likely to run into real money.

   RE::  I FINALLY DID IT-- posted by Elvis on 6/18/2004 at 5:38:42 PM
Thanks! Because the bike is a lugged version, of later vintage, it came with aluminum cranks and bar stem [though the chainring is steel]. The aluminum pedals form one of my many parts bikes of late 60s-70s road vintage worked fine, and they are made for toe clips [i just have to find a clean pair w/ no rust!]

I have a fixed gear, but not one with variable internal gears. i have heard that such a thing was [or is?] made, but i know only that it is rare and, thereby, probably expensive. All told I converted this one for nothing.

I will probably change the saddle and throw on a bar-mounted bottle cage, but aside from that I'm keeping it as is, fenders and all. Only thing i might change is the front wheel.... for now!

   3 speed fixed gear posted by Walter on 6/19/2004 at 3:27:38 AM
EXTREMELY expensive. Last one I saw on eBay was somewhere around $500 or more, I don't remember exact amount.

Sheldon Brown talks about converting a standard 3 speed S-A to a 2 speed fixed but his article is theoretical and untried. There is (or was) somebody on the net selling such hubs. I don't have the link and never heard input from a customer.

MISC:    "tourer" with no rack mounts? posted by: Elvis on 6/17/2004 at 4:40:28 PM
just restored a red Specialized. lugged frame, Shimano 105 but has biopace double. Smal rear cassette gear, but in the 42 ring i can get up hills okay [maybe thank the biopace?] My question is, the newer [and current] Sirrus is either a "touring" style bike or a hybrid type, depending on the model one gets, and it has mounts for a rack, fenders, etc. My lugges steel Specialized [1980s, judging by the parts] has no eyelets on either the front fork or the rar triangle. What gives? Was yesterday's Sirrus a racing bike? [before you ask, this seems the original condition, nothing was cut off]. All it has is bottle mounts and a pump peg. Y no rack mounts? I plan to use mine for longer rides, maybe i can just get a really big seat bag and a decent sized handlebar pouch?

   RE:MISC:    posted by JONathan on 6/17/2004 at 7:10:31 PM
That sounds like a road-racer, Elvis. I have a Specialized "allez SE" (nice design) that is free of any attachment fixings for anything. I saw a "Sonoma" (Specialized) that had everything hooked onto it. Real nice bike, I must admit. I think someone really knew how to design superior bikes. There was a post earlier on the "Lighthouse" bikes. If I get south a bit, I can maybe find out some info. Specialized started in Morgan Hill, Ca.. A great place to ride MTB's and road bikes, too.
I'll e-mail if I find out anything.
Good luck. My "allez" is good day runner. You know, "structure determines function" type of thing. Models have a way of changing significant in form. My Schwinn "traveler" from early '80's is completely different from the earlier decades. Although in your case the timeline is much narrower.

   RE:MISC:    posted by Walter on 6/17/2004 at 11:01:33 PM
I'm pretty sure the early Sirrus was designed as a racer. However, it should have fairly relaxed geometry and be a real nice long-ride bike.

   Thanks! posted by Elvis on 6/17/2004 at 11:28:39 PM
Thanks! The Sirrus has a great ride, and like the old [early 1980s] Specialized [and Trek] mountainbikes [remember when mountainbikes were steel and some had lugs?] the frame is a dream to ride. I rode it thru the Watchung Res here in NJ up over the mountain [i think I posted 'bout that down the page somewheres] but am kinda miffed its got no rack mounts! Why? I don't race! Oh well. I can't complain just cause my bike is too nice for the way I ride, I guess... ;)

   RE:MISC:    posted by T-Mar on 6/18/2004 at 2:51:35 PM
Trying to categorize most bicycles is an exercise in frustation. Pure racing and touring bicycles are relatively easy, but most models fall somewhere in between. Depending on the manufacturer and era they can go by various common terms; sports, recreational, sports/touring, recreational/touring, etc.

Shimano classfies their gruppos based on intended use; pro racer (Dura Ace), hard core cyclist (Ultegra), enthusiast cyclist (105), etc. Things get even more confusing when you start considering all the specialty bicycles that have developed in the last few years; cruisers, comfort, lifestyle, hybrid, triathlon, etc.

Late '80s catalogues show the Sirrus classified as both a "sport" and "racing" model. Interestingly, they both have the same geometry according to the charts and the same features based on the pictures. The difference is soley the components. For 2003, the Sirrus has morphed into something called a "road fun" model, whatever that is! I'd call it a hybrid.

To get rack eyelets you pretty much have to go to a pure touring bicycle, or maybe a hybrid. Those eyelets we used to see on all the bicycles were actually fender eyelets. True touring bicycles have double eyelets on the dropouts (one for fenders and one for a rack)and eyelets or bosses for the rack at the top of the seat stays and mid-way up the forks, so that you don't mar the paint with a clamp and the racks won't slip when loaded. At one time even the pure racing bicycles came with fender eyelets, for training in that dismal off-season European weather. However, these were eventually phased out and the trend followed on down the line-ups.

For me, the Allez models were always the Specialized racing bicycles. The Sirrus was one notch below, call it what you will. It had slightly relaxed angles (73 versus 74) and a little more fork rake (1.575 vs, 1.5) according to the late '80s catalogues and should be representative of your bicycle.

You can make you own judgement, but for me all this variation in terminology indicates that catalogue classes are solely the whim of the marketing departments. I wouldn't get hung up on trying to clasify your Sirrus. If it suits your needs, then great. If not, get something that does and sell the Sirrus, or use it for type of riding that you feel it does well.

   RE:RE:MISC:    posted by Elvis on 6/18/2004 at 2:59:29 PM
Where can you view vintage Specialized catalogs? Are they online?

   RE:MISC:    posted by T-Mar on 6/19/2004 at 2:35:39 AM
The catalogues that I'm referencing are from my personal collection. I haven't stumbled across any Specialized catalogues online.

   catalogues posted by Elvis on 6/19/2004 at 4:35:21 PM
If you have a page or two from them scanned, and would not mind email it, I'd greatly appreciate it. If not, that's okay too, they are your catalogs, but it would be cool. I had wanted to find out a little more about the bike , which is really fun to ride.

My email is rbc5br@comcast.net

Thank you for all the info in your post, I appreciate it, also really like this site, learn something new every time I visit.

VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Tire Size changes ? posted by: Bob on 6/17/2004 at 11:56:25 AM
Can someone help me understnad tire size changes since the '70s ? My bike has "27" tubulars... at least that what we called them back then. Now I see sizes such as "700c" - which if I convert mm to inches is larger than 27". 27" comes out to 686. Yet someone told me that 700c's were smaller than 27"... that makes no sense.

Please, clear my thinking for me. Thanks,

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Tire Size changes ? posted by Gralyn on 6/17/2004 at 12:10:49 PM
If you think that's something......
how about this: 28" tires and rims are actually smaller than 27" tires and rims. (I have an old bike with "28 inch" wheels. I was slightly worried that it would be difficult to find tires. But, as I have heard of other people having bikes with 28" tires - I suspected you could probably find them somewhere........but then, I learn that regular 700C tires fit 28" rims. So, it was no problem at all.

Yes, 700C are smaller than 27" . So far as tubulars.....I suppose that's the sew-up kind....I'm not experienced with those.

      Tire Size changes ? posted by John E on 6/17/2004 at 2:28:49 PM
Sheldon's tyre and rim size chart is one of the best I have seen. 27" tyres have (VERY) roughly 27" outer diameters (this increases with increasing nominal width, such that 27x1.25" tyres can have up to a .25" greater radius than 27x1") and always sit on 630mm diameter rim flanges. Typical 700C tyres have slightly smaller outer diameters and sit on 622mm diameter rim flanges, essentially the same diameter as the rims designed for tubular/sewup tyres. Traditional fat 700C tyres had nominal 28" diameters (28" = 711.2mm), 1-5/8" tall sidewalls, and 622mm rims. (622mm + 2*25.4*1.625 = 705mm; this is where the 622 rim diameter arose.)

   RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   Tire Size changes ? posted by RobA on 6/17/2004 at 4:40:29 PM
Without a lot of experience, this is an impossible area to keep straight...the first thing is to recognize that the 'advertised' tire sizes are for the most part nominal. As for tubulars, my understanding is there are a couple of sizes that were, by fa,r the most common (one is the 622mm and the other...I'm not even going to guess...:)) ...and the so-called 27" tubular was the same size as one of these....the 622??? T-Mar has a good grasp on this stuff, if he's around he may provide some feedback...also we went through this a few months ago...so a search in the 'OldRoads' archive might be useful... I generally try to stick to the common sizes in rims...but I do have a Peugeot folder bike that badly needs tires...550mmm apparently...that's what the rotted old tires say...eventually I guess I'll find such a thing...

Gosh, and we haven't even gotten into the difference between 'hook-bead' clinchers and whatever you call the straight-sided rims...unfortunately, almost everyone calls anything that isn't a tubular, a clincher...:)

   Tires... Aren't they all... posted by Elvis on 6/17/2004 at 4:57:39 PM
...hooked bead rims now? Least most of my vintage bikes are.
's funny, almost all my vintage roadies 'cept fer my 1950s Rudge have 700c rims. I narrowed my fleet: Specialized 1980s Shimano 105, Panasonic DX1000, my Ross Griffin being converted to a tourer [just needs a chain and tires/tubes, my Rudge, and my "new" bikes, a 2000 Trek 100 converted to fixed gear, and a Trek x01 cyclcross with road [radial spoked]rims and tires, from 2001 [last 2 obviously not vintage but not "new" either. Both were NOS when I got em a few years after date of manufacture. I'm not counting the half-dozen bikes I have dismantled, such as my Bianchi or Puch, nor my non-roadies. All these seem to take the same 700c tires.
Take same size tubes, too, as 27"ers, but I'll be damned if the tires for 27" rims are too big! And try getting a 700c tire over the edge of a 27" rim!
The tubes are usually good for either size, and sometimes are marked it, only exception is if you're trying to put a schraeder valve tube into a presta rim -- hole is too narrow. But a presta valve will fit in a schraeder hole.
Tires ARE funky, ain't they?

   RE:Tires... Aren't they all... posted by JONathan on 6/17/2004 at 6:54:13 PM
The book by Frank J. Berto; "Upgrading Your Bike" explains away about as much of mystery as is possible. The salient component of his discussion for my perspective centered around the "tire section width" and the "measured tire width" (mounted) are nearly equal, or equal in theory, when the tire and rim are correctly matched up. That is the bottom line, IMHO. T-Mat did a great service with his post a few counts back. Relics of the past seem to haunt us, today, when looking at tire sizes. One reason I get so many flats due to snake bites or torn up stems is mirrored in his tire tables. I guess the big dogs need the big tires, or we pay a premium for runnin' light. Still, there are a few tricks to reduce the frequency of flats. The primordial "clincher" had flaps that go under the tube and bulges that fit into grooves on the rim. The modern "clincher" is really two types; one is "straight-sided" that takes wired-on tires and the other is "hooked-edge" which takes "hooked-bead" tires. The latter are similar to the primordial clincher in that tire pressure holds the bead in the groove.
It amazes me to have had relatively few tire mounting disasters, despite my bungling along in ignorant bliss placing tires on as I plaease. Whatever works...works.
Good luck,

AGE / VALUE:   Age / Value of Schwinn Premis posted by: Peter on 6/17/2004 at 12:49:56 AM
I am currently enjoying my Schwinn Premis, that I was lucky
enough to find at a garage sale ... but I am curious to know
what they sold for originally, and if anyone can tell me
how you might be able to tell what year it was made ...
the serial # starts with an "A" located under the crank ...the frame is silver and white in color ... the guy I bought it from said he thought it was about 8 years old ... Does this make sense to anyone ???
( I am not selling this bike so if you are interested in buying ... you need not ask ... sorry )
thanks to all who replied to my last questions about this bike ...
happy riding to all !!!

   RE:AGE / VALUE:   Age / Value of Schwinn Premis posted by Henry on 7/3/2004 at 3:53:59 AM
I paid $550 for mine in 1986, it's blue, violet?, & purple. I'm not sure they made them as recently as 8 yrs ago, but you could certainly e-mail schwinn and ask them. Let me know when you find out.