Jim, I agree that the Chicago era Paramount touring models were not ideal by modern standards (we're talking about bicycles that were built at least 30 years ago). The Campy components were what most riders lusted for during that period (I think many modern riders can't really have an appreciation of the degree to which Campagnolo dominated the prestige component market during most of the 1970s).
The models that were built with the standard Weinman center-pull brakes would, however, quite readily accommodate a set of wide fenders (they were available from Schwinn with their standard steel fenders). I fitted my 1977 Paramount up with a set of Lefol fenders that I acquired from the Taylor Brothers, these were quite wide fenders (probably at least 45mm) and they fit well on my P15 Paramount with a 27 1 1/4" size tire. The problem obviously arises when the touring models were fitted up with the Campagnolo sidepull caliper brakes. These definitely restricted the installation of wider fenders, but Campy brakes were highly desired at the time (even some custom touring models built by Bruce Gordon used the Campy sidepulls, as did many custom touring bikes built by others). One additional comment in regard to the lack of rack mounts. Schwinn, as many other frame builders of the time, had a strict policy of eschewing braze-on's for the Paramount. I've read (in an older Bike World magazine article) that this design philosophy proceeded from the top Italian framebuilders - Cino Cinelli and Sante Pogliaghi. There was some justification that the use of braze-on's weakened the tubing, especially in the center non-butted areas of the tubing (by the way I don't necessarily believe this was something that truly weakened the tubing, but this was commonly accepted wisdom at the time). This lack of braze-on's, even for water bottle bosses, is also found on most of the upper level bikes of the era (other than some made in England and the artisan French touring bike builders). Jim On Jul 24, 10:05 am, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <[email protected]> wrote: > Now the Stumpjumper is one earlier bike that, imo, actually had > something in common (aside from the obvious fact that it is also a > bike) with some of the Rivendells (special-order skinny-tire bikes w/o > eyelets notwithstanding). My 83/84 Stump has lotsa clearance, braze- > ons for racks and fenders, relaxed geometry (maybe too relaxed), long > chainstays and I think it was even made by Toyo. Like my Atlantis, > it's a tough, versatile bike that I have configured in many different > ways. Despite being 25 years old, it feels modern and the opposite of > quaint. > > I think it makes sense to differentiate between bikes that came before > and bikes that came during/after MTBs hit the mainstream. All except > the roadiest of Rivendells show lots of early-MTB influence: long > chainstays, wide-range gearing, lots of clearance, etc. The Schwinn > Paramount touring model, while marketed as a touring bike, had a lot > of features that most Atlantis riders wouldn't accept. We had chrome > one at the shop for awhile, which was ultimately purchased by one of > my employees - a cool bike, but with plenty of antiquey quirks that I > would consider disadvantages by modern standards. Even with its Campy > triple crank it had a low gear of something like 36x28, no rack braze- > ons, and fit a 27x1-1/8 (28 mm) with a fender. Also the cheesy Campy > friction shifters and Campy Rally derailleur were less than ideal. > Frankly, a stock Rambouillet (the complete bike that Riv sold) with > its 26x27(later 26x32) low gear, rear rack eyelets on the seatstays, > and slightly better clearance (32 mm w/ fenders) would have made a > better touring bike. > > On Jul 24, 11:26 am, JoelMatthews <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I mentioned the Schwinns as I had a Continental my first two years in > > college in the mid-80s. While certainly not as lovely as my Hilsen > > was, the bike was a very faithful all rounder for me until its > > untimely demise in a garage fire (neighboring frat house let a grill > > burn out of control). > > > I used the bike for day to day transit around school, to work and out > > on the town and on many short to mid-length tours. I set it up with > > Pletscher racks fore and aft, and an elaborate but not all that bright > > bottle generator lighing system. I could not afford panniers, so I > > just lashed my back packs to the racks. Now this was in Ironing board > > central Illinois. Perhaps the bike would have been too heavy even for > > a light weight college kid in more rugged terrain. > > > After the fire, my favorite aunt bought me a Specialized mountain bike > > (I think it was a Stump Jumper but cannot recall - whatever the basic > > model was in '85). I rode hard tail mountain bikes (After the > > Specialized I had a Trek 830 for a while then various Cannondales) > > only until I got the Hilsen a couple of years ago. I now have three > > road bikes and no mountain bike. Perhaps my memory is clouded by the > > years and the general fun of being in college dulls problems I may > > have had with the Continental. But in my memory at least, it was the > > best bike I had until the Hilsen. > > > On Jul 24, 10:43 am, Jim Cloud <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I totally agree with Patrick. The older flash-welded Schwinn consumer > > > bicycles are not comparable to any of the bikes made by Rivendell. > > > These were bikes that Schwinn offered to people eager to purchase an > > > inexpensive durable bike (backed by a Lifetime Warranty for the > > > original owner) that was represented as a "Ten-Speed" model for those > > > ready to get into the "Bike Boom" of the early 1970s. They were not > > > lugged frames and they were equipped with entry quality components, > > > including cottered cranks with gearing that certainly would not > > > qualify as suitable for touring (the Continental for example had a > > > 39-52 crank and a 14-28 cog). > > > > They were also quite heavy - the Continental was advertised as > > > weighing 35-38 lbs. "depending on frame size", the Varsity Sport model > > > weight ranged from 38-41 lbs.. These bikes were consumer oriented > > > models that fulfilled a need and were quite popular in their intended > > > market. The only flash welded model that Schwinn offered that could > > > be considered a more sophisticated model was the Schwinn Superior (28 > > > lbs.). Starting in 1975, Schwinn began to import Japanese > > > manufactured bikes (e.g. Schwinn Approved Vogageur II) that were > > > intended to compete with the flood of imports coming in to meet the > > > demands of more knowledgeable biking enthusiasts (this was also just > > > before the Bikecentennial sponsored transcontinental events of 1976). > > > > Jim > > > On Jul 23, 5:33 pm, PATRICK MOORE <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:05 PM, JoelMatthews <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > current RBW designs have little in common with > > > > > > racing bikes from the past. Rather than some sort of nostalgic > > > > > > throwback, I tend to think of my Riv and Riv-ish bikes as thoroughly > > > > > > modern and uncompromising for the kinds of multi-use riding I like > > > > > > to > > > > > > do. I don't see many parallels between, say, my Atlantis and any > > > > > > bike > > > > > > that was even remotely racy from the 1970s. > > > > > > Yeah, seems the 1970s bikes that have the most in common with Riv were > > > > > some of the practical Raleighs, Motebecanes and arguably even the > > > > > Schwinn lightweights such as the Continental and Varsity (the lugged > > > > > Paramount was usually a racing bike - although I seem to recall there > > > > > was a year or two when Schwinn made a touring Paramount). > > > > > I disagree, at least about the Varsity -- don't know the Continental, > > > > but if > > > > it is like the Varsity or Collegiate, no way, no how. Those were mass > > > > produced to be cheap and, admittedly, strong, which meant heavy and > > > > dead, > > > > with cheap components. That's not true of any Riv I've heard of, and > > > > certainly not true of my customs, which are very much like old stage > > > > racers: > > > > ~45 cm chainstays, just like my '73 Motobecane Grand Record, and able to > > > > carry heavy rear loads (well, not the gofast, since it can't accept a > > > > rack). > > > > I assume that the Ram and the Rom and so on aren't that much different > > > > in > > > > fit and feel from my Rivs. > > > > > Anyway, to consolidate my point: far from being like low end Schwinns > > > > back > > > > in the day, at least many Rivs are indeed like older road racing bikes, > > > > based on my admittedly limited experience. > > > > > > On Jul 23, 11:24 am, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > A fun idea, but why suggest it on the RBW group? I ask not to accuse > > > > > > the OP of being OT, but to raise a broader philosophical issue. RBW > > > > > > tends to focus on non-racing bicycles and equipment with > > > > > > "all-rounder" > > > > > > versatility being the foremost consideration, and aside from being > > > > > > lugged steel (for cosmetics and durability and market > > > > > > differentiation), current RBW designs have little in common with > > > > > > racing bikes from the past. Rather than some sort of nostalgic > > > > > > throwback, I tend to think of my Riv and Riv-ish bikes as thoroughly > > > > > > modern and uncompromising for the kinds of multi-use riding I like > > > > > > to > > > > > > do. I don't see many parallels between, say, my Atlantis and any > > > > > > bike > > > > > > that was even remotely racy from the 1970s. > > > > > > > On Jul 23, 5:35 am, Marty <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I've been keeping up with the TDF as always this time of year. > > > > > > > Seems > > > > > > > bike makers often roll out "specials" for certain stages etc. > > > > > > > (like > > > > > > > today's TT) and it occurred to me that the race could use another > > > > > > > crowd-pleasing and playing-field-leveler gimmick: why not a > > > > > > > turn-the- > > > > > > > clock-back stage using vintage-style bikes? (Other sports do this > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > time to time) Maybe the stage would not even have to count in the > > > > > > > overall standings, but it would be a blast to watch today's riders > > > > > > > "suffer" with non-aero levers, down-tube shifters, pre-index > > > > > > > drivetrains, five-speed clusters, toe-clips and leather saddles. > > > > > > > They > > > > > > > could auction off the bikes after the stage too, just like they > > > > > > > do now > > > > > > > for various charities. I can see it now: Wool jerseys, Citroen > > > > > > > team > > > > > > > cars, corked water bottles, sew-ups wrapped around their > > > > > > > shoulders, > > > > > > > and maybe even fenders if it's raining that day. A guy can dream > > > > > > > right? > > > > > > > > Marty- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > -- > > > > Patrick Moore > > > > Albuquerque, NM > > > > Professional Resumes. Contact [email protected] > > > > > Oh, I have been to Ludlow fair > > > > And left my necktie God knows where > > > > And carried halfway home or near > > > > Pints and quarts of Ludlow beer. > > > > And then in lovely muck I've lain > > > > Happy 'til I woke again. > > > > But when the sun rose in the sky, > > > > High ho! The tale was all a lie: > > > > The world, it was the old world yet; > > > > I was I, my things were wet, > > > > And nothing more remained to do > > > > But to begin the game anew .... > > > > > A Shropshire Lad, Houseman- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
