I'm getting some interesting posts on this subject, thanks for your enthusiasm. If you post observations on the aforementioned Colnago to the list, please cc me privately also, so I can keep track of who said what. In a day or two I'll post my own observations, and you can argue about them, and I'll determine a winner at that time also.
There are at least three frame details (and maybe more; surprise me!) that are anomalous...I've had two of the three pointed out so far. The fork crown was a fourth detail, but as Steve Sheffield said, the fork seems to be a replacement (although, that said, that fork crown looks a lot like the ones that came on Colnagos from the late 60s...maybe the owner got the fork from Colnago? They had an old one lying around? Of course, forks that look like that one are very common, too..so, the fork-crown detail doesn't count. It'd be nice to see the original fork, that's for sure. Some detail pics of that fork would tell us more..)
As for the parts, who the heck knows? It's impossible for me to say what came with the bike originally, and what was added later: us Colnago nuts are notorious for adding panto'd bits later...those who care try to get the right ones for the vintage of the frame (a challenge in itself), but others don't seem to care and just lash on whatever they can find...
I was interested in the frame anomalies specifically. Or, shall we say, in the dissonance between the graphics as shown and some frame details..
Best,
Charles Andrews
Los Angeles