[CR]Still confused about Cinellis

(Example: Framebuilders:Alex Singer)

To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
From: <marcus.e.helman@gm.com>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 09:41:11 -0400
Subject: [CR]Still confused about Cinellis

Certainly Fred is right about General Motors, trust me.

I received an offlist note from Ken Denny, who informed me that it was fairly well-established that 1970 is the beginning of the holes in the lugs era.

I pointed out this website http://www.petry.org/markp/lastoria.htm

which contains the passage

"The key to dating a Cinelli is the lugs (3 holes or no hole) and the bottom bracket oil port. The presence or absence of these features will help to establish the manufacturing date of a Cinelli frame. The BB port disappeared in about 1965. The 3 holes in the lugs appeared in about 1968." Ken said no, that's wrong, and that the real experts have always known it. As evidence he sent a photo of a bike with an undrilled headlug that he said he bought new in 1968. That could mean that there was a change in 1970, as Ken asserts. Or it could mean that, as Fred suggests, that in an environment of contract builders there was a transitional period, when some builders built with drilled lugs, and some built without. Ditto the drilled fork tangs. Presence or absence of eyelets seems less tied to date. Steven Maasland had that correspondence with Andrea Cinelli regarding whether SC stood for Super Corsa or Speciale Corsa. I wonder if Andrea or someone else at Cinelli could shed some light on the subject. Steven, do you still have any contacts at Cinelli?

Best regards, Marcus Helman Huntington Woods, MI

Fred Rednor wrote: I thought Cinelli bicycles were built by various frame builders - even when built in house - and some were built by outside contract builders. Plus, couldn't you special order all sorts of deviations from the standard bikes. If so, I'm not surprised that we're seeing all these anomalies.

No matter what, these things weren't mass produced in the same manner as a General Motors car, so I don't find these deviations so surprising. Then again, I'm not trying to establish the production date of a frame in my collection...

Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia (USA)


--- marcus.e.helman@gm.com wrote:


> Jeff Pyzyk wote (in part)

\r?\n>

\r?\n> My later bike [Cinelli SC] I have figured for a '68 or '69.

\r?\n> It has the

\r?\n> drilled lugs, but with fender mounting bosses and loops,

\r?\n> four digit serial

\r?\n> number. But here is the part that makes me think it's an

\r?\n> early drilled

\r?\n> lug frame; the fork lug tangs are not drilled. Any comments

\r?\n> from the Cinelli Cognoscenti?

\r?\n>

\r?\n>

\r?\n> My Cinelli SC, number 4874, has drilled lugs and undrilled

\r?\n> fork tangs. It

\r?\n> has no provisions for fenders. I have figured mine to be '68

\r?\n> or 69 too, based on lack of braze-ons

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Best regards,

\r?\n> Marcus Helman

\r?\n> Huntington Woods, MI