Re: [CR]Still confused about Cinellis

(Example: Framebuilding:Restoration)

Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 07:53:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Fred Rednor" <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]Still confused about Cinellis
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <OF7D63B822.0F5E1653-ON852572D6.004925A0-852572D6.004B2E80@gm.com>


Marcus,
     The other night, I was shown an article in which Cino Cinelli asserts that all their frames were built in-house. Still, he did not claim to have built all of those frames, just that they were built in his facility.
     So I still have to suspect that in such an environment (i.e. one in which a couple of frame builders tried to express some individuality within the limits of the shop's well known design signatures); and also considering the shelf life of the various components; and also considering that many (if not most) of the bikes were specially ordered, there just have to be all sorts of anomalies during the "transitional years" of the 1960s and early '70s.
     I love the Italian bikes, but it seems as though all the famous purveyors have so much invested towards maintaining their mystique...
     Ciao,
     Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia (USA)


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


> 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)
> >
> > My later bike [Cinelli SC] I have figured for a '68 or '69.
>
> > It has the
> > drilled lugs, but with fender mounting bosses and loops,
> > four digit serial
> > number. But here is the part that makes me think it's an
> > early drilled
> > lug frame; the fork lug tangs are not drilled. Any
> comments
> > from the Cinelli Cognoscenti?
> >
> >
> > My Cinelli SC, number 4874, has drilled lugs and undrilled
> > fork tangs. It
> > has no provisions for fenders. I have figured mine to be
> '68
> > or 69 too, based on lack of braze-ons
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Marcus Helman
> > Huntington Woods, MI
>
> _______________________________________________
>

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com