[CR]Re: ID-ing my Seatpost

(Example: Production Builders:Cinelli)

In-Reply-To: <019601c60d6b$4b47db60$6401a8c0@Velostuf>
References: <004501c60d66$e9fd3a70$eff1d045@ts>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 11:19:01 -0800
To: "john barron- velostuf" <jb@velostuf.com>, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
From: "Jan Heine" <heine93@earthlink.net>
Subject: [CR]Re: ID-ing my Seatpost


The biggest Campy-dealing pro shop in Bonn, Germany, sold non-fluted posts like yours in 1990 as Campy SR, together with non-fluted cranks. I have no idea where the logos were or whether the head was polished entirely, as I didn't care much about that at the time.
>On one hand it just doesn't make sense that the SR post would change
>fundamentally, right? (deletion of flutes).

Deleting flutes is easy and not a fundamental change - the flutes are machined after the main post is done. Delete that step, and you have a non-fluted post.
>Then again, the earliest C-Record was all extremely aero, at least much
>more so than its predecessor, Super Record. In that scenario, it just
>doesn't make sense that they would make a post that didn't look/perform
>at a technologically advanced state.

Could it be that Campy offered for the C-Record group both an aero post (for modern cyclists concerned about aerodynamics) and a round one (for old-school riders concerned about weight - the round one was lighter!). Shimano did at the time with their Dura Ace group. This is just speculation, so don't flame me, please.

However, didn't C-Record use an Allen-head bolt from the beginning? And yours has a standard bolt... unless that was changed.

Finally, all that stuff is OT, as it post-dates 1984. So my apologies to the listmaster.

Good luck,
--
Jan Heine, Seattle
Editor/Publisher
Vintage Bicycle Quarterly
c/o Il Vecchio Bicycles
140 Lakeside Ave, Ste. C
Seattle WA 98122
http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com