Re: [CR] Two B-17 Competitions and Special Campy Seatpost

(Example: Framebuilders:Mario Confente)

From: "Greg Reiche" <shop@cyclart.com>
To: Jerome & Elizabeth Moos <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net>, "classicrendezvous@bikelist.org" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:23:06 -0500
Thread-Topic: [CR] Two B-17 Competitions and Special Campy Seatpost
Thread-Index: AcppLhrGCw5jBm5xQiKzmSSDCAwooQAGqEzw
References: <4B055567.70900@blueyonder.co.uk> <452722.50494.qm@web82207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <452722.50494.qm@web82207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Subject: Re: [CR] Two B-17 Competitions and Special Campy Seatpost


Jerry, <<So what was this Campagnolo post that required narrow-spaced rails? Anyone have a photo of one? Was this some special version, or did all the first generation Campy seatposts have narrow spacing? If a special version, what was the idea behind it? If just the first Campy post, why would they use what seems a very nonstandard design, limiting the choice of saddles?>>

AFAIK they appeared in the catalog the same year, so I assume they were concurrently available. I haven't seen one in steel, but (as noted already) the rail support hardware is interchangeable, so one could be easily retrofitted.

The idea behind the narrow rails is to allow a wider range of fore-aft adjustment. Standard rails and clamps of the 1044 post allow for about 1.5" (40mm) of adjustment. The narrow rails and shorter clamps of the 1045 post double that range. The catalog illustration diagrams this.

Unfortunately, the narrow rail spacing also makes the saddle frame less stable side-to side, which would put more stress on the rear of the rails and the cantle. I'm guessing many of the saddles broke under hard use.

Greg Reiche
CyclArt
Vista, CA USA