Classic & Vintage - Are Paramounts overrated?

I've been reading everything i can find on Schwinn Paramounts. While they were well made bikes, it seems they were quite heavy for a road/racing bike at 26lbs. The Paramount is frequently touted as the top American racing bike of its time, but does that really say much? Bike racing in America during the 60s and 70s was not exactly world class. I even read somewhere that in 1979, the new head of Schwinn ordered the paramount program shut down because the bike was so antiquated. any thoughts?

I've been reading everything i can find on Schwinn Paramounts. While they were well made bikes, it seems they were quite heavy for a road/racing bike at 26lbs. The Paramount is frequently touted as the top American racing bike of its time, but does that really say much? Bike racing in America during the 60s and 70s was not exactly world class. I even read somewhere that in 1979, the new head of Schwinn ordered the paramount program shut down because the bike was so antiquated. any thoughts?

having owned a 1964 paramount i would say that they are difinently over rated! but you have to understand that the usa did not have a racing bike mentality in the 60's& early 70's. this was the best bike the usa had to offer. think about huffy's and columbia's. i give schwinn credit for their noble effort. i am sure this was done by their love of bikes and not by a bottom line mentality. i think it is tradgic that the auto workers union destoryed schwinn. this was an old line company that contributed a lasting legesity to america bicyling history. at least we can be thankful that waterford survived. but it just isn't the same!!!!! schwinn was a great company. shame on america!!!

I've been reading everything i can find on Schwinn Paramounts. While they were well made bikes, it seems they were quite heavy for a road/racing bike at 26lbs. The Paramount is frequently touted as the top American racing bike of its time, but does that really say much? Bike racing in America during the 60s and 70s was not exactly world class. I even read somewhere that in 1979, the new head of Schwinn ordered the paramount program shut down because the bike was so antiquated. any thoughts?

Paramounts were at the top in the 60s and early 70s. Not just of american bikes, but of bikes from anywhere. 26lbs at that time was quite respectable. There were no 16 lb CF or titanium bikes then. As far as the demise of the Paramounts, Schwinn didn't really update the bike much in the mid 70s, so by 79 it was pretty outdated. Schwinn also made the same mistake on every line of their bicycles and as a company was having trouble by the late 70s. Shutting down the Paramount program made sense to them. I don't see it. You probably won't ever see Chevy dump the Corvette even though it's barely on their gross profit radar.

SS

P13 Road Racing Paramounts of the 1970s weighed 23 pounds, not 26 pounds. The P14 track bikes weighed 18 pounds, and the P15 Deluxe Paramounts (triple chainrings) weighed 25 pounds.

When Edward Schwinn took over as president of the company in 1979, he shut down the Paramount "cage" in the Chicago factory because the Paramounts had become non-competitive. Marc Muller was tasked with redesigning the Paramount with newer tubesets and componentry, and with building a new facility in Waterford, WI, for Paramount production. The new facility opened in 1981, and new Paramounts were built there until after the bankruptcy in 1993. After the bankruptcy, Marc Muller and Richard Schwinn (Edward's younger brother) bought the Waterford facility and have continued to build world class bicycles there under the Waterford and Gunnar brands (the use of Paramount name went to Zell-Chilmark as part of the bankruptcy).

Are Paramounts overrated? Some folks think so, but I do not.

The Schwinn history book helps explain. Paramounts were not that antiquated, but probably not a money maker, New technology, investment cast lugs and such had not been adopted, but for a struggling company, a loss leader, or break-even product was more stuff to manage than was useful.

Overrated? depends on what you lusted over as a kid. Don't forget they came in road race and touring geometries, and one could custom order the design within reason for no upcharge. Could not do that easily from Europe in general.

Actually, I think they're UNDERrated. Typically they sell too cheap. Remember, Paramounts started in 1939 with their own Schwinn made parts. Originally track bikes, they evolved into road bikes as well, but much later. Certainly in the 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s they were comparable to anything else available in the world, handmade using the finest materials and components available. Plus they could be built to order, for little extra cost, purchased through the local dealer.

I think the better know Italian names receive more respect and awe, but honestly, I've owned 3-4 vintage Cinellis and didn't find them especially superior in anyway except the WOW factor.

Paramounts were riden to numerous Olympic wins over the years. I thnk they're fine bikes, and deserve more appreciation.

If they only came with bottom shelf components, boring lugs, and crappy steel...then yes. But they don't.

Chrome Nevex lugs...steel frame...Campy and other high-end components. Certainly doesn't sound over-rated to me!

The Paramounts built from around 1960 to 1970 were among the best bikes ever made in America. During the "bike boom" of 1971 to 1975, Schwinn doubled and tripled production by hiring new staff, running extra shifts, and by "out-sourcing" much of the Paramount program. Top components were in short supply, and some Paramounts were sold with less than "Pro" level components. The result was that most of the 1971 to 1975 Paramounts were superb, but some might had some minor issues relating to the "boom" in production. And, they were very traditional road bikes.

The Paramount of 1978 was very similar to the Paramount of 1968. And that was a GOOD thing for the folks who buy and ride traditional road bikes. But, almost "criminal" behavior, according to "marketing" types, who claim that each year's model should be "new and improved"...or at least have a speckled purple paint job.

Ed Schwinn was a guy who knew little about bikes, and less about building bikes. He was a "marketing" guy who wanted flashier bikes that could be built cheaper, and sold for larger profit margins. The "clue" to Ed's ethical judgment was his decision to buy some upper/mid-level Panasonics, some equipped with mid-level components, and sell them as "Paramounts". Because of Ed's decisions, from 1984 to 1991, the "Paramount" line included some fine "Made In USA" bikes, some rather nice Japanese bikes, and some very mediocre Japanese bikes. By 1991, this business "genius" had driven the largest bike maker in America into bankruptcy. Today, the company that PRETENDS to be Schwinn does not make even one single bike in the USA...just slaps a Schwinn decal on bikes Pacific imports from Asia. Thanks much, Ed!

If you ever saw the automated frame brazing carousel at the Colnago factory in the '70s ('80s?) you'd wonder how they kept their mojo. Give me the ladies in the Paramount cage (or Don Mainland in Wisconsin) anytime. In the '70s the Paramounts didn't have to overcome any quality issues (they were Schwinns of course). It was getting past that image that a Schwinn was a 40 or 50 pound kid's bike that was hard to do for a generation that had grown up on Schwinn marketing. The lure of exotic French and Italian marques was hard to resist. Especially then with my friends "experimenting" with them. What was a boy to do -- I gave in and bought a Peugeot PX-10. :(

With the price freeze of the early '70s, Paramounts were incredible bargains. I should have listened to my heart. I'm older and wiser and now ride a Paramount.

Bob Hufford
Springfield, MO

... i think it is tradgic that the auto workers union destoryed schwinn. this was an old line company that contributed a lasting legesity to america bicyling history. at least we can be thankful that waterford survived. but it just isn't the same!!!!! schwinn was a great company. shame on america!!!

That is 100% false. Schwinn workers in Chicago had never had a union between 1900 and 1980. By 1980, some of the folks building Schwinns in Chicago had been building bikes for twenty, thirty, and forty years. Many of them had parents and grand-parents who built bikes for Schwinn.

Then, the "Boy Wonder", Edward Schwinn took control of the company. He made it known that Schwinn wanted to move production to a "low cost" third world country, or a southern "slave labor" zone in the USA. The company looked at Arkansas, and paid for plans for an Arkansas plant. But, it then bought land in Mississippi, with the goal of moving Chicago production there. Ed also bought a bike plant in what was then communist Hungary and also bought a large share of a bike plant in communist China. Ed thought that using "cheap" communist slave labor was going to be a "bargain" for the Schwinn family.

Ed then refused to discuss any agreement with the workers in Chicago that would assure them of a future with Schwinn. He was disrespectful to the folks who had worked for Schwinn long before he was born. In 1980, Schwinn sold over ten million bikes, in large part due to the high quality Chicago workforce.

After it was clear that Edward intended to move production out of Chicago, the workers turned to the UAW for help. By the time that the contract with the UAW came into effect, Schwinn had already begun building the plant in Mississippi, and was planning to begin phasing out the Chicago factories.

The factories in Mississippi and Hungary were major money losers. Cheap workers are cheap for a reason. The 2,000 workers in Chicago had about 40,000 years of bike building experience. Ed threw that all of that ability and experence away. At that exact same time, both Trek and Cannondale were using American workers to go from being small "custom" shops, to becoming the two largest bike makers in the USA.

Within seven years after the final bike was built in Chicago, the Schwinn family lost the company in bankrupcy court. The Mississippi plant and the plant in Hungary were gone. The Schwinn name was just a decal on a communist-Chinese bike.

It continues to stun me and amaze me that when the owners of American companies run the company into the ground, that SOMEONE will take a slap at the workers and at unions. I guess when a plane crashes, it could never be the pilot's fault. Gotta be the fault of the union guy who vacuums the carpets.

...
The factories in Mississippi and Hungary were major money losers. Cheap workers are cheap for a reason.
...

I understand what you are saying and concur with most of your comments, but the workmanship of my Schwinn, built in June 1988 in Greenville MS, rivals that of any Chicago Schwinn I have seen.

In the glory days of the Paramounts, I was a teenager and not able to afford one. I probably saw one or two and that is about it. I worked in a Gitane shop, and had some contact with Super Corsas.

As an adult, I have acquired a Raleigh International and a Pro, as well as a Paramount.

Looking at the frames today, the workmanship on the Paramount is far superior. Brazing is neat and finishing is superb. Not so on the Raleighs, which were being built with the same quality of an MG made in the same era.

It may not be the best, the lightest or whatever. Today I see the Paramount as a symbol of Schwinn quality at its best and a beautiful reminder of an era that has sadly passed. Is it as good as a Masi, a Colnago, etc.? I don't know and don't care. My lust for the Paramount is still as strong as it ever was.

To answer the question which launched the thread, I do NOT agree that Paramounts are overrated, but I place a higher value on design, beauty, and craftsmanship than on a frame's precise weight. I just finished reassembling the 1959 Capo with Campag. Veloce cranks and sealed BB (db Reynolds 531 main triangle; about 24lbs/12kg, total), and it is an absolute joy to ride, smooth, resilient, stable, and responsive to smoothly applied torque at the pedals. I can sprint and climb faster and more efficiently on the Bianchi, which is a nice-looking, fast bike, but the Capo is one class act, with its ornate lugwork. Older Paramounts fall into the same category.

... Looking at the frames today, the workmanship on the Paramount is far superior. Brazing is neat and finishing is superb. ... Today I see the Paramount as a symbol of Schwinn quality at its best and a beautiful reminder of an era that has sadly passed. Is it as good as a Masi, a Colnago, etc.? I don't know and don't care. My lust for the Paramount is still as strong as it ever was.

Good points. I would add that the Schwinn Paramount is one of the most durable high-end road frames, an important trait for those of us who actually RIDE our vintage bikes. One of my gripes with today's road bikes is that durability has been sacrificed on the altar of weight minimization.

Depends on what your rating compares it to. If you had a Peugeot, Raleigh and Paramount from 1972, all Campy NR, and in equal condition and put them all on eBay the Paramount might sell for slightly higher mostly because there are more people who lusted after Paramounts as a kid in the US then other the other bike brands. I don't think it's because anyone thinks they were superior to the other high end bikes of the time, it's just their preference.

If you were to buy a Paramount in pristine condition off eBay today for, let's say an inflated price of $1,500, and wheel that baby into a high end bike shop today and start comparing it to new name-brand $1,500 bicycles, then $2,000 bicycles, then $5,000 bicycles then the Paramount is going to look terribly underrated and underpriced.

Fact is, everything bicycle on eBay right now is overrated. Driven by speculators and the astronomical purchases of a few very lofty Japanese collectors, the prices for a lot stuff are becoming way more than the market will sustain, I think. That is just the way things go, I think, and it'll be good in the long run, because the inflation will lead a few more people to restore and actually ride vintage bicycles (btw, my 1973 Paramount was moderately hotrodded by the original owner, and the weight is around 21 lb. Just about what equivalent Italian steel would weigh.)

If its the top of the market now... Its time to sell. Then buy that and more back after the collapse. Feeling lucky toiday?

My view is to buy with a strategy, mistitled items, overlooked sizes, such as a 24" Paramount, while we are on the subject, a '68 with the Prugnaut lugs that are less popular, upon inspection it had all great condition 1963 parts including the wheels with Weinmann Weltmeister rims... I guessed a warranty replacement frame, a great component donor for my friend's recreation of his 1963 Paramount race bike. Saved him lots over buying a la carte, or even an example same condition correctly described.

The market is healthy at the moment, as it is with vintage cars, check the Barrett Jackson auction take!

To the original poster - since you brought up the weight, are you suggesting/saying that a bike that weighs more is automatically overrated? I'm just wondering, not attacking.

Weight has NEVER meant anything to me. I'm 6'4", 220-230#. A few pounds on a bike? C'mon, that ain't nothing! :)

"Fact is, everything bicycle on eBay right now is overrated. Driven by speculators and the astronomical purchases of a few very lofty Japanese collectors, the prices for a lot stuff are becoming way more than the market will sustain, I think. That is just the way things go, I think, and it'll be good in the long run, because the inflation will lead a few more people to restore and actually ride vintage bicycles (btw, my 1973 Paramount was moderately hotrodded by the original owner, and the weight is around 21 lb. Just about what equivalent Italian steel would weigh.)"

Methinks once the speculators truly move in, the prices will become truly warped. You'll start seeing printed price guides, probably based on ebay sales, and giving info about spotting the good stuff. I'm still able to find nice bikes relatively cheaply.That's because the auctions I attend, while full of ebay sellers and speculators, are attended by no one who knows the first thing about bikes. So they leave them alone, or bid on the bling, leaving me with a rustbucket paramount or whatever... once the price guides move in, these guys will start picking up on what I've been doing. Right now they treat me like a mildly retarted relation. I think if the speculators really move in, prices will move up.

To some extent, I think we're seeing some of this already. Some pedestrian older bikes (UO8s and other low end Pugs) are ebaying for more than they were a year ago, and though I haven't bought much in the last six months (edit: on ebuy. I by plenty locally), it seems like some of the higher end vintage stuff has gone upwards too.

Also, once you get a more formal guide, the folks will start to think they have something special and be less likely to part with it unless they score some cash in return.

I've had a couple of P-monts in my hands the last couple years, later waterford models, and had they been a bit bigger, I might have kept 'em. Very nice bikes.

The first part of a reasonable price guide is here, note the disclaimer about current prices.

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/vrbn-a-f.html

the whole article provides a reasonable overview of the vintage makers.

I think ebay represents a world price. Understand, in some areas these things are just not available. Someone who has no access to something they want might be willing to pay a price higher than you might. Sometimes I find things cheap, sometimes I pay the price its worth on ebay.

There is no price guide. If someone is willing to pay more than you, that's the value, not your bid!

Sales are driven by lots of factors, some of them emotional, for whatever reason.

I've at times paid too much, but in that moment, I was happy to get the item.

Ebay is the ultimate price guide.

I think the Schwinns of all levels are underrated. If your criteria is weight and weight alone, you end up with a very skewed sense of a bike's value. Once durability and versatility, along with overall price, enter the calculations, older Schwinns, I think, stand out as one of the best overall values around. I don't want to restart the CF issue over here in Classic and Vintage, but I really wonder about the durability of these very light weight bikes. We're talking about schwinns that are 30-40-50 years old and her and there even older being restored and still useful and fun to ride day in and day out...will you be able to say that about some of the newer bikes?

Overated? Definitely not!

Overpriced? Maybe.

Quite a few willing knowledgable buyers chasing too few nice examples of a fine vintage bicycle. Add the desire by many Americans to own one of these bikes from the most well known American manufacturer, and you see the problem.

Tyson
Cushing, Oklahoma

Paramounts were at the top in the 60s and early 70s. Not just of american bikes, but of bikes from anywhere. 26lbs at that time was quite respectable. There were no 16 lb CF or titanium bikes then. As far as the demise of the Paramounts, Schwinn didn't really update the bike much in the mid 70s, so by 79 it was pretty outdated. Schwinn also made the same mistake on every line of their bicycles and as a company was having trouble by the late 70s. Shutting down the Paramount program made sense to them. I don't see it. You probably won't ever see Chevy dump the Corvette even though it's barely on their gross profit radar.

SS
I don't see how a 26lbs racing bike was top of the line even 35 years ago considering the Peugeot PX10 weighed 21 lbs. A paramount is only 3 lbs lighter than my dad's bottom of the line Peugeot UO8. And of course you have to consider that when Nixon was president, a Paramount cost around $800 while a PX10 could be gotten for 1/4 of that price. Both had Reynolds 531 with Nervex lugs. I can't see how Schwinn could justify the price premium- even with Campagnolo.

Generally speaking, I am not a fan of Schwinn's, but Paramounts are very nicely made. Up until the bike boom, they were an excellent value too. Peugeot and Raleigh were both able to offer lighter, top quality bicycles (PX-10 and Professional), in quantity, and for less than the Paramount - starting in earnest in the early '70's. This changed the marketplace, and spelled trouble for Schwinn. Obviously, this didn't make the Paramount any less nice of a bicycle, but it's relative value was somewhat diminished.

Today, I think it is fair to say that a Paramount is a very fine bicycle - arguably the best mass-produced, lugged steel bicycle ever made in America. However, I think that people who insist on saying that it is more than that are guilty of overrating it.

The retail price of a Paramount P13 in 1972, near the end of the Nixon administraition, was $350. I don't know how Schwinn measured the weight of their bikes but it must have included the tool set and the owner's manual on their largest frame because they were never 26 lbs in real life. 22 lbs for a 23" P13 is more like it. European and Japanese bike manufacturers were shrewder marketeers as their advertised weights were 1 or 2 pounds less than reality.

So if you were a teenager and walked into the right bike shop in 1972 with $350 in your hand you were (pretty damn rich to start with) faced with some pretty tasty choices. If a PX10 cost $200 at that time it would be a great deal and I would agree that were paying a premium for the Paramount.

More common were the choices that faced your dad: what would $100 buy. In that case the Peugeots, Raleighs, Gitanes and Falcons all offered a pretty sweet bike at around 29 lbs versus closer to 35 lbs for a Schwinn Varsity. As a teenager buying a new bike he also didn't worry about long term parts availability because it would be destroyed or stolen before anything wore out.

Fast forward to today. If you show up on a big ride with a nice shiney Peugeot PX10 with constrasting Nervex lugs and a Stronglight Mod 93 crankset you will receive a warm welcome from the other two classic bike aficionados there. No under or over rating allowed. Wear a wool checkerboard Peugeot jersey and black leather bike shoes.

I don't see how a 26lbs racing bike was top of the line even 35 years ago considering the Peugeot PX10 weighed 21 lbs. A paramount is only 3 lbs lighter than my dad's bottom of the line Peugeot UO8. And of course you have to consider that when Nixon was president, a Paramount cost around $800 while a PX10 could be gotten for 1/4 of that price. Both had Reynolds 531 with Nervex lugs. I can't see how Schwinn could justify the price premium- even with Campagnolo.

When I started riding in 1974 a Paramount weighed in at about 23 pounds, not 26. A Paramount cost $350 with Weinman brakes and $375 with Campy brakes. A PX10 cost $275.

That is 100% false. Schwinn workers in Chicago had never had a union between 1900 and 1980. By 1980, some of the folks building Schwinns in Chicago had been building bikes for twenty, thirty, and forty years. Many of them had parents and grand-parents who built bikes for Schwinn.

Then, the "Boy Wonder", Edward Schwinn took control of the company. He made it known that Schwinn wanted to move production to a "low cost" third world country, or a southern "slave labor" zone in the USA. ...

It continues to stun me and amaze me that when the owners of American companies run the company into the ground, that SOMEONE will take a slap at the workers and at unions.

Well said!

Thanks.

Generally speaking, I am not a fan of Schwinn's, but Paramounts are very nicely made. Up until the bike boom, they were an excellent value too. Peugeot and Raleigh were both able to offer lighter, top quality bicycles (PX-10 and Professional), in quantity, and for less than the Paramount - starting in earnest in the early '70's. This changed the marketplace, and spelled trouble for Schwinn. Obviously, this didn't make the Paramount any less nice of a bicycle, but it's relative value was somewhat diminished.

Today, I think it is fair to say that a Paramount is a very fine bicycle - arguably the best mass-produced, lugged steel bicycle ever made in America. However, I think that people who insist on saying that it is more than that are guilty of overrating it.
Agreed.

My dad was 17 years old when bought a brand new PX10 in the fall of 1972 for less than $200. Whether the paramount was 23 lbs or 26 lbs, it was an inflated american bike.

Nixon departed office in August of '74. Schwinn Paramounts were much less than $800., more like $650. with Campagnolo brakes. And that was for new orders, if you had placed an order prior, schwinn, sold the bike for the price at the time of order, not when delivered. Some dealers squeezed some extra profit there, but the mark up was very low for all Schwinns back then.

That is 100% false. Schwinn workers in Chicago had never had a union between 1900 and 1980. By 1980, some of the folks building Schwinns in Chicago had been building bikes for twenty, thirty, and forty years. Many of them had parents and grand-parents who built bikes for Schwinn.

Then, the "Boy Wonder", Edward Schwinn took control of the company. He made it known that Schwinn wanted to move production to a "low cost" third world country, or a southern "slave labor" zone in the USA. The company looked at Arkansas, and paid for plans for an Arkansas plant. But, it then bought land in Mississippi, with the goal of moving Chicago production there. Ed also bought a bike plant in what was then communist Hungary and also bought a large share of a bike plant in communist China. Ed thought that using "cheap" communist slave labor was going to be a "bargain" for the Schwinn family.

Ed then refused to discuss any agreement with the workers in Chicago that would assure them of a future with Schwinn. He was disrespectful to the folks who had worked for Schwinn long before he was born. In 1980, Schwinn sold over ten million bikes, in large part due to the high quality Chicago workforce.

After it was clear that Edward intended to move production out of Chicago, the workers turned to the UAW for help. By the time that the contract with the UAW came into effect, Schwinn had already begun building the plant in Mississippi, and was planning to begin phasing out the Chicago factories.

The factories in Mississippi and Hungary were major money losers. Cheap workers are cheap for a reason. The 2,000 workers in Chicago had about 40,000 years of bike building experience. Ed threw that all of that ability and experence away. At that exact same time, both Trek and Cannondale were using American workers to go from being small "custom" shops, to becoming the two largest bike makers in the USA.

Within seven years after the final bike was built in Chicago, the Schwinn family lost the company in bankrupcy court. The Mississippi plant and the plant in Hungary were gone. The Schwinn name was just a decal on a communist-Chinese bike.

It continues to stun me and amaze me that when the owners of American companies run the company into the ground, that SOMEONE will take a slap at the workers and at unions. I guess when a plane crashes, it could never be the pilot's fault. Gotta be the fault of the union guy who vacuums the carpets.
i apologize if i got it wrong. possibly i was duped by the schwinn website. if you have the facts right, then shame on ed schwinn for destroying a once great company! then i am really annoyed as i have also stood up for schwinn. ):

My dad was 17 years old when bought a brand new PX10 in the fall of 1972 for less than $200. Whether the paramount was 23 lbs or 26 lbs, it was an inflated american bike.

At first, it seemed one of your main points was that the Paramount weighed 26 lbs., and therefore was overrated. Based on what people have said who actually own Paramounts and have posted on this thread, the bike was 23 lbs. That's pretty significant, if one of your main criteria is weight, which it seems to be...........I'm thinking your mind was already made up when you asked the question "Are Paramounts overrated?," and there was no real reason for you to post this question other than to criticize Paramounts and praise Peugeots. To each his own-

My dad was 17 years old when bought a brand new PX10 in the fall of 1972 for less than $200. Whether the paramount was 23 lbs or 26 lbs, it was an inflated american bike.

Let's see if I can remember this right (someone correct me if I'm wrong) ... frames, both full Reynolds 531 with Nervex lugs, but the Paramounts were chromed (and I think the Peugeot's were plain Nervex -- no curlys -- that year).

Derailluers: Peugeot / Simplex (Delrin plastic) vs. Paramount / Campagnolo
Cranks: Peugeot / Stronglight vs. Paramount / Campagnolo
Pedals: Peugeot / Lyotard vs. Paramount / Campagnolo
Hubs: Peugeot / Normandy vs. Paramount / Campagnolo
Brakes: Peugeot / Mafac Racer vs. Paramount / Campagnolo (or Weinmann)
Freewheel: Peugeot / Atom vs. Paramount / Regina
Seatpost: Peugeot / Simplex? vs. Paramount / Campagnolo
Bars/Stem: Peugeot / AVA vs. Paramount / Cinelli

The PX-10s were great, out-of-the-box budget racers. I bought one new in '74 and loved it for 10 years, but I wouldn't compare it directly to a Paramount and call the Paramount inflated.

Bob Hufford
Springfield, MO

Just to clarify the price issue. The suggested retail price for a P13 in 1972 was $352, in 1973 it was $425 and 1974 it was $495. The $800 level was reached in 1978. I took these prices straight off scans in Bob’s Lightweight Data Book.

This graphically illustrates one reason that European bikes were so popular in the U.S. in the 1970’s; runaway inflation.

Alan

My dad was 17 years old when bought a brand new PX10 in the fall of 1972 for less than $200. Whether the paramount was 23 lbs or 26 lbs, it was an inflated american bike.

During the 1968 to 1974 "early" stages of the road bike boom, there were a lot of games in the bike industry. One of the games that Peugeot played was listing phony weights for its bikes (as did most bike companies). The second game that French bike companies played was the phony list price game. They would advertise a very low list price. However, when the customer came to pick up the bike, he was told that the customer also must pay for shipping, assembly, and tune-up of the bike. So, a bike advertised as being "20 pounds and $200" turned out to really weigh 24 pounds and to cost $250.

Schwinn did the opposite during the 1970's. The advertised weight was the actual true weight for the most popular size (usually around size 23, or size 58, which was around 23 pounds for the racing model and around 26 pounds for the touring model. Schwinn deliberately added a pound or two of weight to the Paramount by using a "custom" Reynolds 531 tubeset with a stronger, heavier tubing to eliminate the "flex" that powerful riders experienced on the ultra-light 531 frames. Reynolds made a 531 top tube especially for Schwinn that resisted flex at the head tube better than the standard 531 top tube. Schwinn used a straight gauge, rather than butted, downtube on larger sizes of Paramounts, for the purpose of "tuning" the ride for a powerful 200 pound or 240 pound rider. Schwinn wanted the "best" road bike, which is not necessary the lightest road bike.

The advertised price included shipping, assembly, and a tune-up upon delivery, and another free tune-up in thirty days. And, depending on the dealer, and the time of the year, a customer might be able to buy a Paramount for a little UNDER list price. And, the Paramount was "hand made", with one person doing all of the work of putting the frame together.

The typical Peugeot sold in the USA was a "mass production" bike, made in batches of 10,000 or 20,000 on a factory assembly line. Most arrived in the USA with French components of such poor quality that some dealers would substitute lower end Campy or Japanese components before selling the bikes. An average Peugeot was basically a lighter European version of bikes such as the Schwinn Continental, but with a light, whippy frame, and fragile wheels, equipped with shoddy components. I don't know of anyone who owned a Paramount who said "Golly, I'd like to trade this in for a Peugeot.

What made a Peugeot exciting for a young rider was the enormous "upgrade" from a Schwinn Varsity (which also was burdened by French components around 1970). A Peugeot was not a "tough" as a Varsity (my friends with Peugeots thought of wheel truing as being a daily activity...their bikes were bing "fixed" more than being ridden) but Peugeots were certainly lighter than a Varsity. But, compare a typical Peugeot to a Paramount? That would be like comparing a Fiat with a Mercedes.

But, compare a typical Peugeot to a Paramount? That would be like comparing a Fiat with a Mercedes.

No, that would still be like comparing a Peugeot to a Mercedes -- just the automobile version. ;)

Now what do you truly think of Masis? (a bike who's mojo I don't really understand and, though it's been explained to me a million times, I probably never will ...)

Bob Hufford
Springfield, MO

Now what do you truly think of Masis? (a bike who's mojo I don't really understand and, though it's been explained to me a million times, I probably never will ...)

Bob Hufford
Springfield, MOGotta agree. The Italian Masi is no doubt cool, but a CA Masi could have been built by any number of builders, many who were still learning their trade, among other not so obvious drawbacks. ;) Confente's work was pristine, but a CA Masi is no Confente. I will never get the California Masi attraction myself.

No, that would still be like comparing a Peugeot to a Mercedes -- just the automobile version. ;)

Now what do you truly think of Masis? (a bike who's mojo I don't really understand and, though it's been explained to me a million times, I probably never will ...)

Bob Hufford
Springfield, MO
Oh jeez lookout. . .
Bob just conjured up the big kahuna of the cranky&vintage clan, I'm expecting
R. Brian Baylis, Chuck S. , Joe Starck and Jim Allen to join in here.
and we can expect a word or two from MasiTim. . .

What do I think of Masi? California or Italy?
California was the breeding ground for some of the best silverbraze slingers
the west has ever seen (Brian, Joe, Jim, and a whole lot more). I think
a lot of that has to do with Mario's influence and a pride of workmanship
that was lacking back in the old country. Don't get me wrong I think Faliero's
bikes were the bees knees but when did he last pick up a torch? then there's
the issue of contract builders. The US builders had something to prove and
a passion for what they were doing. The California Masis appear cleaner than the
old country (shorelines, brazing, filemarks etc.). That's the mojo imho, and
breaking away didn't hurt, nor did the Mario legend.

next a head to head shootout DeRosa, Colnago, Masi, Tommasini in a cage match.

Marty

Carlsbad Masi Serial number M6 is a Confente. Even has the decals.

Oh jeez lookout. . .
Bob just conjured up the big kahuna of the cranky&vintage clan, I'm expecting
R. Brian Baylis, Chuck S. , Joe Starck and Jim Allen to join in here.
and we can expect a word or two from MasiTim. . .

I like to poke the California bear. ;)

I've no doubt that the CaliMasis are great bikes. It's just that I don't get how they are so much greater than other marques. Their mojo seems to be a bit beyond the bikes to me. Just a not so well informed opinion I'm sure ... (I bet it will be better informed soon -- though I've spent years on the CR list, so I've heard it all before).

Bob Hufford
Springfield, MO

I've no doubt that the CaliMasis are great bikes.

Lets start there. If one lives in California (especially born in)...

Its California, please.

There are California Masi's. There are also Carlsbad Masi's, Rancho Santa Fe Masi's, and San Marcos Masi's. All subsets, but Cali just does not work.

There are other great brands, thankfully not everyone is chasing the same one or the prices would really be nuts.

Lets start there. If one lives in California (especially born in)...

Its California, please.

"Bob, you ignorant **** ..."

My apologies. I'm just trying to stir things up a bit all in the name of fun. I didn't mean to offend.

Some of my favorite bikes were built in California. :D

I'll go home now ...

Bob

When I actualy raced in the SF Valley in the early/mid-70's I raced one of those heavy U08's. A lot of those Italian/French/British bikes and a fair share of Paramounts got a view of my backside on every climb because I was a superior climber - the fact my bike weighed a few pounds more mattered less than I only weighed 125 and most of them went at least 135 and averaged 140-155.

In those days, I would do fun rec rides with a group called the Westlake Wheelmen up at Ventura/LA County line. Several of them had beautiful chrome Paramounts. At that time - around 1974-75, a chrome Paramount was to die for!!!! But they cost a lot more than my yellow U08. Man, they were just works of art - the chrome Paramounts.

Now - can someone answer this - why is every darn nice looking 1970's vintage Paramount on eBay size 63 or bigger :) Did only extremely large tall men buy these bikes? I have honestly not yet seen a 56cm-58cm sized chrome Paramount from that era on eBay ! : )


I don't see how a 26lbs racing bike was top of the line even 35 years ago considering the Peugeot PX10 weighed 21 lbs. A paramount is only 3 lbs lighter than my dad's bottom of the line Peugeot UO8. And of course you have to consider that when Nixon was president, a Paramount cost around $800 while a PX10 could be gotten for 1/4 of that price. Both had Reynolds 531 with Nervex lugs. I can't see how Schwinn could justify the price premium- even with Campagnolo.

Now - can someone answer this - why is every darn nice looking 1970's vintage Paramount on eBay size 63 or bigger :) Did only extremely large tall men buy these bikes? I have honestly not yet seen a 56cm-58cm sized chrome Paramount from that era on eBay !
Actually, I've sorta wondered the same thing. I think the chrome Paramounts were relatively rare since they weighed more than painted ones and there were weight weenies even back then. Another reason I think they don't show up as often on eBay is that the chrome ones in the more popular sizes stay in the family since they're more likely to fit someone in the family than the larger frames.

My apologies.

Bob

Apology accepted.

I've been reading everything i can find on Schwinn Paramounts. While they were well made bikes, it seems they were quite heavy for a road/racing bike at 26lbs. The Paramount is frequently touted as the top American racing bike of its time, but does that really say much? Bike racing in America during the 60s and 70s was not exactly world class. I even read somewhere that in 1979, the new head of Schwinn ordered the paramount program shut down because the bike was so antiquated. any thoughts?

Any smack talk of the Paramount is bicycle blasphemy !
Todays boutique industry today makes its livelihood reproducing thier versions
of Paramounts ! Not being a racing bike has nothing to do with the classicity
of the Reynolds UberTuber ! :D
Lets see how many specialty company's are producing boutique repro's of Cervelo's
and Foodji Alohas in 2100 !!! :D

what bob meant was Kali Masi's. The Masi of the Hindu Destroyer.

I have a Carlsbad Masi, and a '73 Paramount. Both weigh about the same, both fit about the same, both are limited edition, hand-built (not production!) bicycles. I like 'em both, but I ride the Masi more...

Peugeots are a dime a dozen. I see them in thrift and junk stores frequently. Paramounts I don't. Hmmm. Would that have anything to do with values? I have a 1979 Peugeot, And a 1978 Paramount. Comaring these two bikes is laughable.

My dad was 17 years old when bought a brand new PX10 in the fall of 1972 for less than $200. Whether the paramount was 23 lbs or 26 lbs, it was an inflated american bike.
mr. peugeot,

Your dad got a heckuva deal.

Here's the 1973 PX10 catalog page in Dutch.

The weight is shown as 10.2 kg, which equals 22.5 pounds

The price is shown as f. 828-, which at the 1973 exchange rate of 2.78 f. per US$ would be $297.84.

The 1973 P13-9 Professional Road Racing Paramount weighed 23 pounds and retailed for $350.00.

Personally, I'd have gladly paid the $52.16 premium just to get the chromed Nervex lugs and the Campagnolo components. The weight is essentially the same for both bikes.

BTW, the 1972 PX10 price was f. 748- and the 1972 exchange rate was f. 3.21 per US$, so the U.S. price for a 1972 PX10 would have been $233.00.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d7/k4drd/Bicycles/1973PeugeotPX10.jpg