Re: [CR] Stronglight Timeline - Redux

(Example: Framebuilders:Chris Pauley)

From: "R.S. Broderick" <rsb000@hotmail.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 14:50:34 -0500
In-Reply-To: <8CBE4E4B3CB4A03-1090-D9C@mblk-d10.sysops.aol.com>
thread-index: AcoWzaSngv1Y8vN8ToW1IKBnXx9/JgAAIh/Q
Subject: Re: [CR] Stronglight Timeline - Redux


Chas,

Realizing that it is all a matter of one's own subjective perspective, the "economy" model reference with regard to the model 99 crankset was lifted straight from one of Stronglight's own publications. As such, it was incorporated within my own missive without my having passed judgment on it, one way or the other.

Regards,

Robert "judge not lest ye be judged" Broderick ...the "Frozen Flatlands" of South Dakota Sioux Falls, USA

-----Original Message----- From: verktyg@aol.com [mailto:verktyg@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 2:39 PM To: rsb000@hotmail.com; Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: Re: [CR] Stronglight Timeline - Redux

Robert,

Kudos once again, great job.

In reference to the 99 cranks being "economy" modesl, I first encountered these on some better quality French bikes we received in the mid 70's. The early version model 99 cranks were every bit as well made and finished as the model 93s.

If I remember correctly they came on a few Bertins and maybe a Stella or two. The bikes were spec'd with model 93 cranks When we first saw the 99s we were dismayed because the 86mm BCD and narrower upper crankarms didn't look like they would be very flexible. I guess that never became an issue.

Perhaps the model 99 cranks were substituted by the bike makers because of delivery problems in the period between the end of production of the model 93 cranks and the release of the model 105 cranks.

The 1st generation model 99 cranks with their polished chainrings looked very elegant on black bikes. As discussed in several other posts, the later version model 99 looked like an economy model crankset.

One other thing, all three of the 37T chainrings that I have were acquired thinking that they were 38T rings. Since they were unmarked I didn't discover the difference until I counted the teeth. So count your teeth, there may be more of them out there.

Chas. Colerich Oakland, CA USA

-----Original Message----- From: R.S. Broderick Sent: Thu, Aug 6, 2009 10:17 am Subject: [CR] Stronglight Timeline - Redux

Prompted by a question that I received from Peter Underwood, I undertook a bit of a "touch up" to the pseudo Stronglight timeline posted to the CR List the other day so as to add a couple of other worthy points (...for example, the differentiation between the chain ring bolts between the models 57 SC and 63 SC that Harvey Sachs contributed - something which I had overlooked completely, and mention of those 37 tooth 122 mm BCD chain rings that Chas Colerich noted - of which I was well aware, but omitted because I consider them to be an anomaly much like their Campag 41 tooth 144 BCD counterpart, as well as the inclusion of those 86 mm BCD models 80 and 100 cranksets that Charlie Young inquired about along with a few others which did not debut until after 1983, and which therefore, I chose to omit from my original dissertation due to them being "out of timeline" with respect to the CR List).

This second time around, not only did I incorporate several of those kind comments offered by other knowledgeable CR List members, but I also took the time the dredge out my stack of Stronglight catalogs and mine them for yet further details including more precise dates of manufacture.

PLEASE NOTE: As before, this summary does NOT address any of Stronglight's three-arm cranksets or their cottered steel offerings.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---