Re: [CR]E-Bay outing Really gorgeous '66 tall Paramount frame

Example: Framebuilding:Tubing
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 04:53:30 -0800 (PST)
From: "Peter Jourdain" <>
Subject: Re: [CR]E-Bay outing Really gorgeous '66 tall Paramount frame
In-Reply-To: <>

Hi, Bob & All---

One of the really nice things about the Paramounts of this era is something which Peter Weigle pointed out in regard to a 1968 Ladies Deluxe I was lucky enough to find for my wife----the lug lining. Peter noted that the lining, rather than butting up against the lugs themselves, skirts the outside edge and in so doing really makes the lugs "pop." And the lining has no wiggle to it---it's dead-on straight and perfect. A masterful job. I wish all my machines had such wonderful lining, and I'm wondering why other painters don't apply the same type of treatment.

As I recall Peter saying, the lug lining of that era was the responsibility of one person, and that at a social event (Cirque?) Richard Schwinn recalled the name of the person. The detail of the Paramounts built both before and after that artist's tenure at Schwinn were never quite the same.

Here's the link to the auction, if you haven't seen the frameset yet....<blah>


Peter Jourdain
Whitewater, Wisconsin US of A

--- wrote:



\r?\n> In a message dated 11/17/2007 5:56:26 PM Pacific

\r?\n> Standard Time,

\r?\n> writes:


\r?\n> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 17:28:25 -0500

\r?\n> From: "Tom Sanders" <>

\r?\n> To: <>

\r?\n> Subject: [CR]E-Bay outing Really gorgeous '66 tall

\r?\n> Paramount frame

\r?\n> Message-ID: <001b01c82969$2bd76360$83862a20$@net>

\r?\n> Content-Type: text/plain;charset="us-ascii"

\r?\n> MIME-Version: 1.0

\r?\n> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

\r?\n> Precedence: list

\r?\n> Message: 9


\r?\n> This is one of the nicest Paramount frames to go

\r?\n> through E-Bay in a while,

\r?\n> in my opinion. It seems to be a 24" and may not be

\r?\n> a P-10 as the seller

\r?\n> this date, a P-13 deluxe road racer would

\r?\n> have eyelets, too, as Ed

\r?\n> Granger slyly pointed out to me this morning.



\r?\n> There was not a P-10 in 1966, according to the

\r?\n> catalog pictured in the

\r?\n> Schwinn Lightweight Data book online. There was

\r?\n> the standard road racing

\r?\n> Paramount P-12 and the Deluxe road racing Paramount

\r?\n> P-13. Looking at the catalog

\r?\n> specs though, it is hard to discern any differences.

\r?\n> All I can see is the

\r?\n> crank, Stronglight steel vs. Campy record alloy.

\r?\n> That for a $51 difference in

\r?\n> price. The geometry and frame specs appear to be

\r?\n> the same, clear up through

\r?\n> about 1972, when you can see the P-13 frame

\r?\n> pictured with campy top tube cable

\r?\n> clips instead of braze-ons. Can anyone shed any

\r?\n> light on other differences?

\r?\n> The chainstays in the one on ebay look to be about

\r?\n> 45 cm, and the ones on

\r?\n> both bikes in the catalog seem to be 43 cm. That's

\r?\n> just measuring off the

\r?\n> picture and calculating. The margin of error could

\r?\n> mean they are the same. My

\r?\n> 1962 P-12 (which has no chrome by the way) has 43

\r?\n> cm chainstays. Seems the

\r?\n> specs and models remained unchanged until 1969 when

\r?\n> they no longer offered the

\r?\n> P-12. The P-10 doesn't show up until 1973 by the

\r?\n> way, along with the P-60

\r?\n> and P-65 ladies models. The P-15 first appears as

\r?\n> the Diamond Jubilee

\r?\n> Paramount in 1970. And the first mention I see of

\r?\n> the P-13 as coming stock with

\r?\n> sewups is 1970, although it was probably an option

\r?\n> before then. My 1972 P-13

\r?\n> has no eyelets and has shorter chainstays, closer

\r?\n> rear brake reach, and top

\r?\n> tube cable clips. Maybe that was the first year of

\r?\n> the real racing spec P-13?



\r?\n> Bob Freeman

\r?\n> Elliott Bay Bicycles

\r?\n> 2116 Western Ave

\r?\n> Seattle, WA 98121

\r?\n> 206-441-8144

\r?\n> Home of Davidson Handbuilt Bicycles




\r?\n> ************************************** See what's

\r?\n> new at