Josh, Jim, and list, I'll throw in my tuppence before this query gets too old. I certainly won't speculate on Signore Cinelli's intent, but the early 60s Cinelli catalog lists both the Super Corsa and Model B as "Road Racing Frame Sets."
The SC features full Columbus tubing (SL/SP) or "at request with 3 triangle-tubes Reynold 531," with no mention of tubing for rear stays or fork tubing. Fork ends are "Campagnolo Gran Sport."
The "type B" features triangle-tubes Columbus, fork blades and rear stays tubing FALCK with fork ends Campagnolo Gran Sport or forged standard fork ends."
I've recently acquired both an SC and a Mod. B. I believe that both are in the '62-'63 range and are the same size. I haven't fully dismantled both yet, so can't provide any info. regarding relative weight. Both frames appear to have similar head and seat tube angles (relaxed). Being a former English Major that loathed geometry, I haven't seen a protractor in years. But, maybe I'll take a trip to Walgreen's one of these days and pick up a plastic cheapo model and give it a whirl.
As my Mod. B is an Altenburger model with Altenburger rear dropouts, exact comparison of wheelbases is a bit of a guess, but it appears that the Mod. B's wheelbase is almost 2 cm longer, with most of the extra length coming from the rear stays.
I managed to get the SC cobbled together for a couple rides before winter set in on Chicago, but have only taken a very gentle roll around the Mod. B (spokes were on verge of rusty collapse), so I can't really comment on comparative ride quality (other than to say that both were very well behaved and left big smiles on my face). Both bikes feature braze-ons for fenders, but I wouldn't guess that either was intended to tour. Was the Mod. B a sport-tourer in comparison to the SC? Might be. But, I'm betting that both are pretty comfortable for longer rides, particularly when compared to later Cinellis.
As usual, I have too many projects in the basement and far too little time to work on them. But, with any luck (and a little help from some local list members), I should have the Mod. B ready to roll in time for Spring. Once they're both broken in, I'll be sure to snap some photos and give a full ride report.
Any builders or persons with first-hand experience want to weigh in here? I'm definitelyy just making guesses here, and there are at least a few list members who have both models.
If anyone has more interest in the Cinelli tubing or components, I'd highly recommend picking up the repro from Velo Retro. It's well worth the price of admission (for the great handlebar info. alone).
Sorry that $.02 doesn't buy what it used to.
Hope that we all get some decent riding weather soon,
Bob Troy Chicago, IL
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 09:24:37 -0800
> From: Jim Merz <jameshmerz@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] Was the Cinelli Model B intended for touring? (Josh
> Berger)
> To: Cino1947@aol.com
> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTimaOoqqiPRoGaDz24Q7hGnEwJWOnaLD1U4od=kP@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> As far as I know the Italians disdain anything to do with bicycle touring. I
> think the B was just a lower price point. No reason either model could not
> be used for touring though.
>
> Jim Merz
> Big Sur CA
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:18 AM, <Cino1947@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > The Cinelli Model B was a lower priced model than the Supercorsa- probably
> > because of the use of lower end components.But was the B also intended more
> > for touring than the SC- slacker angles, flat fork crown allowing for
> > better shock absorption than a sloping crown, etc.? Or was the B also
> > considered a racing bike?
> > This would make it a situation similar to the Raleigh Pro vs. their
> > International. The International had slacker angles and longer wheelbase.
> > l
> > Josh Berger
> > Bronx, NY
> > USA
> > _cino1947@aol.com_ (mailto:cino1947@aol.com)
> > _______________________________________________
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> End of Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 97, Issue 44
> *************************************************