Well, to get back to the original question about the Colnago Super, I think it would be just about impossible for a Colnago Super to have been designed for 27" wheels. While 27" was common in UK and US, AFAIK the Continental European manufacturers only made 27" rims and tires and frames designed for them to export to USA or to the British Empire. And even those bikes with 27" wheels for export were usually lower end models. Can't imagine a top model Continental European racing bike coming with anything but 700c, and usually they had tubulars. I suppose some European builders might have been willing to build for 27" wheels on special orders, but many would probably have refused. Colnago would have been more likely to build frames for smaller wheels, on a custom job for a child or a short woman or for a TT bike.
Regards,
Jerry Moos
Big Spring, Texas, USA
> From: Ken Freeman <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] Long brakes,Short brakes and 700c...TIMELINE?
> To: "Bob Freitas" <freitas1@pacbell.net>, "kevin sayles" <kevinsayles@tiscali.co.uk>
> Cc: "CLASSIC RENDEZVOUS" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Date: Friday, December 25, 2009, 2:23 PM
> Bob,
>
> No, I think they were not really obsolete. Woodrup
> produced bikes made for
> 27's in the early '80s. A local 'Lister (I'll allow
> him to out himself if
> he chooses) and I each own a Woodrup of the early
> '80s. He knows exactly
> how old his is, and mine, by inference based on the Woodrup
> Registry on the
> CR site, is perhaps a year older than his. His bike
> came with 27 inch
> wheels. Mine was unbuilt but a bit shopworn when I
> got it, but it looks
> like it is intended for 27s: 700c tubulars look too small
> and delicate, and
> tubular wheels with fat 32 mm cross tires look about right,
> especially the
> way they fill out the fender line. The handling is a
> bit more natural with
> diameter that gets close to a 27 inch wheel. Kevin
> Sayles' comment might be
> enlightening, if he's on-line soon. These are both
> full Reynolds 531 butted
> frames with good dropouts and lugwork, very nice thin and
> smooth paint, and
> at least in my case, a cushy, refined ride. They're
> not leaving the 630
> technology to the lower cost bikes, as was done in the '60s
> and '70s.
>
> I've never known just how much of an outlier Woodrups was
> then, but if Ron
> Coopers were also doing this in those days, perhaps it was
> still normal for
> a more mixed-surface or rough riding bike. Perhaps
> these were designed for
> bombing up and down in the more mountainous regions of the
> UK, Wales coming
> prominently to mind. That would tend to explain the
> slow handling and cushy
> feel of my Woodrup. If I'm going to ride all day on
> roads of unknown
> condition with my survival in my Karrimor, let it be in a
> Cadillac or a
> Bentley, rather than a Ferrari. Better to be lost and
> comfortable than lost
> and bone-weary.
>
> On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Bob Freitas <freitas1@pacbell.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> This is an interesting question as a
> recent Ron Cooper came to
> > me with 27'' wheels even though I figure the bike to
> be 1980. I had figured
> > 27''s were obsolete by then specially with custom
> builders.
> >
> Are there general dates we can attach to
> the swing away from
> > 27'' wheels to 700c ? I know it might be different
> between European and
> > Japanese/Asian makers.
> > With the base
> line and midrange bikes, when did they or did they
> > ever switch? I left the business in 1980 and 27'' were
> still common but
> > since I slumbered for the rest of the 1980s I missed
> the transition if there
> > was one.
> >
> >
>
> BOB FREITAS
> >
> gloriously Sunny in MILL VALLEY, CA
> USA
> >
> >
> Best of Holidays to
> Everyone...............................
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Ken Freeman
> Ann Arbor, MI USA