Re: [CR]Paramount quality vs. customs

(Example: Events:Eroica)

From: "David Feldman" <feldmans1@earthlink.net>
To: <rocklube@adnc.com>, <rodk3d@attbi.com>
References: <CATFOODSIeSOm3WsTia00000ef7@catfood.nt.phred.org> <3E918E57.7A50@adnc.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]Paramount quality vs. customs
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:52:53 -0500
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

Brian, The dead ride of a small Paramount might be a corollary to what some people feel is excessively fast steering and perceived whippiness of large sized older Italian bikes. Just as Schwinn might have carried heavy tubes down to too-small bikes, Colnago and others maybe went too light for big ones, as well as krazy-steep head angles on those large frames. A friend of mine has a Gianni Motta Personal that I did a major frame repair on (replaced head tube and lugs) and the head angle was 75.5 degrees for a 63cm frame! He likes the handling, but I have heard more complaints of hairy steering large Italian bikes than dead-heavy small Paramounts. The perils of blanket spec regardless of size, I guess.
David Feldman
Vancouver, WA


----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Baylis
To: rodk3d@attbi.com
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: [CR]Paramount quality vs. customs



> rod,
>
> We sort of went around on this subject a while back, and we couldn't
> come to a deffinite conclusion; because we actually do not know the
> answer. In the case of Schwinn Paramount, if I were to replicate one
> exactly, I suspect there may be a slight difference that one would
> notice if the Paramount in question was severly out of alignment or
> something (I suspect the poor miter at the seat tube is something that
> would not come out in the way the bike rides); but as far as I know,
> having never checked one, is that they ride well for those who like that
> kind of ride and steering geometry. In my case, being so small, I only
> get to personally experience what compromises they made to build such a
> small frame. In many cases the larger frames from any given company
> steer better than the smaller frames. Also in the case of Schwinn, they
> used the heavy Reynolds tubing even in the small frames, which really
> didn't feel good to me when I rode them. A small frame can use lighter
> tubing and most certainly benifit from it. But if I had to build a frame
> with the same poor choice of materials and the same compromised
> geometry, the bike would probably ride simularly, in theory. Why would
> it not? But if you think in terms of owning a bike that was made from
> carefully selected tubing combinations, built to fit perfectly and to
> standards of construction that Schwinn never approached, that displays
> individuality and creativity in a tasteful manner and rides even better
> than you expected plus will last many lifetimes; then one may begin to
> see the reasoning and value in a custom frame. Some people couldn't care
> less about such things, which is fine with me. Others find that some
> good basic stuff and one or two exceptional bikes is the way to go. The
> extreme end is one who insists on having nothing but high end and exotic
> toys. It's all good. I like to seek varity, but one who has never had
> the experience of owning the work of a "master" that was built to order
> for them (as many won't) can not really know what it is all about. As
> with most everything else in life, it isn't neccessary to have a custom
> built in order to enjoy bicycles and cycling; it's just a different part
> of it. One can get to point "B" driving a Yugo or a Bentley. Both will
> arrive, both can be fun to drive (imagine getting that Yugo up on two
> wheels?) but there is a rather large difference between them. Bikes are
> simular.
>
> As I recall, I was going to build an exact replica of a Colnago super
> for a "blind test" as the result of our last trip through this subject.
> Still don't have time for that now, but perhaps someday. I honestly
> wouldn't want to build a Schwinn replica my size, who needs a lead bike
> when I could build a Colnago super from Columbus SL. Maybe someday we
> can conduct this experiment.
>
> Brian Baylis
> La Mesa, CA
>
>
> >
> > Hi gang,
> > I'm a little curious about all this banter regarding quality. I would hope that
> > a frame built by a Baylis, Sachs or Moon is going to be A LOT better made than
> > a Paramount, Peugeot, etc. That's why these frames cost the big bucks.
> >
> > But........if you took two basically identical frames, same tubing, angles and
> > all, one built by a current "master", and one built 30 years ago by Schwinn,
> > could one tell the difference in the ride if they were (tongue in cheek)
> > blindfolded? If you put Baylis decals on the Schwinn would it be the hands down
> > winner?
> >
> > Rod Kronenberg (who has only ridden and owned one "custom")
> > Fort Collins, CO
> > > David Novoselsky wrote:
> > >
> > > ><snip>
> > > >It would seem that there is little middle ground here, with those that disdain
> > > Paramounts as second rate on one side and those who avidly collect them on the
> > > other side of this debate.
> > > >
> > > ><snip>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > David,
> > >
> > > I hope you don't mistakenly include Steve Barner in the group who
> > > "disdain" Paramounts. I suspect their lack of perfection does not
> > > prevent him from lusting after them. Steve -- how many did Paramounts
> > > have you owned over the years and how many do you have now? I seem to
> > > recall something about a matched his and hers set -- or am I confused as
> > > usual?
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > David -- I can't help myself, I drool every time I see a bike with
> > > chrome Nervex Pro lugs -- White
> > > Burlington, VT