This has gotten complicated . Here is the link to the article :
And I don't see how anyone could claim these ideas were new in 1981 . But I certainly agree that if all they are claiming is this was one of the very first triple chainring cranksets to be used in international-caliber World-class bicycle racing , well , maybe so , might be , could be !
However , please , could you help me out here please , Mr. Chuck Schmidt ??? !!!
Back in the 1970's ( plus a few years each of the 1960's & 1980's ) there were TWO ways to have a top-of-the-line Campagnolo triple crankset .
a.) You could simply add a third chainring , using longer bolts . All three chainrings would have exactly the same limitations concerning the numbers of teeth . This type of crankset was identical to the classic cyclocross crankset . In the case of the cyclocross style crankset , only the middle ring had teeth , the inner and outer rings were smooth , toothless , guard rings .
b.) Or you could buy the special crankset with the special 36-tooth inner chainring . The right crank for this crankset was subtly different . It was NOT a standard crank with extra holes drilled in it . It featured slightly shorter flutes in the five "spider" arms , to allow room for the special holes to be drilled and tapped .
o.k. , so far it's fairly easy to understand .
The Campagnolo Timeline lists 1967 , catalog # 15 , as the appearance of , " . . . the triple chainring crank and cyclocross flanged-chainring crank . . . "
Since the official Campagnolo factory production change from 151mm ( 44 tooth minimum ) chainrings , to 144mm ( 41 tooth minimum ) chainrings , took place in 1968 . . . There must have been a very few rare 44-tooth minimum TRIPLE chainring cranksets made by Campagnolo .
Here are my questions :
When was the first public release for sale , of the 36-tooth-inner-chainring triple crankset ???
Did the triple crankset with the 36-tooth-inner-ring appear at exactly the same time as the just-add-longer-bolts type of triple ???
Were there ever any cranksets with 36-tooth inner rings , and 44-tooth minimums on the other two rings ??? ( 1967 only ??? ) Or did the 36-tooth inner ring crankset appear safely AFTER Campagnolo had switched to the 144mm ( 41 tooth minimum ) standard ???
Could the Campagnolo timeline be changed to clarify exactly when the 36-tooth-inner-ring crankset made its very first appearance ???
I've really wondered about this for some few years !!!
Thanks everybody & thanks Chuck !!!
P.S. , my 1970 Deluxe Paramount , a "Diamond Jubilee Paramount" , came factory stock with its Campagnolo crankset having a 36-tooth inner chainring . The factory stock chainrings are 36 - 49 - 54 , just as listed in the Schwinn catalogs . And the cranks have NO date-codes on their inner-sides . So we know they were made before 1973 . ( I just re-read those sentences , let me clarify , I'm not the original owner , I'm the third owner , but it came with its original owner's manual , a low mileage bicycle ! )
P.P.S. , it really irritates me when people talk about "Super Record crank arms" . According to the Campagnolo Timeline , the regular-production cranks withOUT the flutes were introduced in 1986 . Of course this same idea had also appeared in 1983 , as part of the 50th Anniversary Group . But in 1986 the smooth cranks replaced the fluted cranks , as regular production units . These cranks without flutes can be called "Super Record cranks" . No problem . However , prior to 1986 , all of those cranks WITH flutes are just simply RECORD cranks ! From 1958 through 1985 , the cranks themselves were NOT "Nuovo Record" . They were NOT "Super Record" . Those "crank arms" were just plain "Record" . Sure , there were "Super Record" CHAINRINGS ! But the arms themselves ? The cranks themselves ? From 1958 - 1985 just simply "Record" . Thanks for letting me vent .
Marysville Kansas U.S.A.
> In a message dated 6/18/2004 11:25:02 AM PST, email@example.com writes:
> >For those who hate this thread and rue me for bringing
> >it up, there is also an interesting article on the
> >history of pinarello:
> >Including nice '57 and '81 pro bikes and the dubious
> >claim of the "first modern triple".
> I remember that bike. It hung at Il Vecchio's for a few years before
> the distributor wanted it back. Nice bike indeed. First triple? Makes
> me smile.
> I don't know why F.Pinarello would make that claim about the first modern
> triple, and i won't venture a guess. However, I though that this Battaglin
> Pinarello in question was made out of KL tubing and Not SL as F.P. is claiming.
> Somebody's memory is not quite what it could be, but it might even be mine.
> Dave Anderson
> Cut Bank MT