Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-08-04, 12:37 PM   #1
JeStOnE
Its already fixed
Thread Starter
 
JeStOnE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago (Rogers & Sheridan)
Bikes: 1990 Ciocc Pista, 1972 Schwinn Paramount P10, Fuji Track, KHS Flite 100, Cannondale M400, Raleigh Twenty, 2004 Bianchi Pista, 2005 Bianchi Pista
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Need Paramount serial number help

I bought a schwinn paramount recently and wanted to find out when it was made exactly. But I cant figure it out? The serial number is L72262. Can anyone give me some assistance? Thanks.
JeStOnE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-04, 02:34 PM   #2
T-Mar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 12,455
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Hmm, I see what you mean. It appears to have one too many digits! I'd assume November 1972, based on the info at http://www.waterfordbikes.com/2004/d...nt/sn/over.php
T-Mar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-04, 04:15 PM   #3
JeStOnE
Its already fixed
Thread Starter
 
JeStOnE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago (Rogers & Sheridan)
Bikes: 1990 Ciocc Pista, 1972 Schwinn Paramount P10, Fuji Track, KHS Flite 100, Cannondale M400, Raleigh Twenty, 2004 Bianchi Pista, 2005 Bianchi Pista
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I checked that first, thats what confused me in the first place. Thanks anyway.
JeStOnE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-04, 06:37 PM   #4
T-Mar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 12,455
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Well, you should be able to corroborate this using components date codes, providing the components are original. Campagnolo Record hubs were standard and the backside of the locknuts will be stamped with the last two digits of the year of manufacture. If it's a road racing Parmount then the Nuovo Record rear derailleur will have a Patent date, stamped next to cable housing recess, that indicates the year of manufacture. Campagnolo normally stamps the backside of the crankarms too, but this practice started in 1973, so yours should have no date codes. The crankarm code for the 1970s consisted of a diamond with a single number that represented the last digit of the year of manufacture.

If the crankarms have no date code and the hubs and derailleurs indicate 1972, then you should have a high degree of confidence in the frame being November 1972. Even if one of the codes were 1971, I wouldn't be suspicious. Good luck!
T-Mar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-04, 09:44 PM   #5
Keith Courage
Skim or die
 
Keith Courage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
T-Mar, if EVERYTHING I knew was half of what you know about just bicycles, I feel that I would be a genius.
Keith Courage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-04, 10:20 PM   #6
John E
feros ferio
 
John E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Bikes: 1959 Capo; 1980 Peugeot PKN-10; 1981 Bianchi; 1988 Schwinn KOM-10;
Posts: 17,299
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
T-Mar and I are still trying to figure out Bianchi's serial numbering system.
__________________
"Early to bed, early to rise. Work like hell, and advertise." -- George Stahlman
Capo [dschaw'-poe]: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger, S/N 42624
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1981 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
John E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-04, 10:46 PM   #7
TheOtherGuy
Knows Bigfoot's Momma
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: SoCal
Bikes: yeah; got a couple...
Posts: 1,544
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John E
T-Mar and I are still trying to figure out Bianchi's serial numbering system.
What era Bianchi are you trying to figure out?
The early '60s Specialissima serials seem to start with 16x.... with the "x" being the year date. I have one starting with 164.... that I'm quite certain is a '64 model. Other than those early '60s #s, I know nothing more about how Bianchi went about it.
TheOtherGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-04, 08:31 AM   #8
Sierra
Uff Da!
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Bikes:
Posts: 1,038
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Why does it have too many digits? Looks to me like the 262nd Pmount frame made in November of 1972. That is a high frame count for a month, but this was the bike boom era.
Sierra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-04, 11:34 AM   #9
T-Mar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 12,455
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierra
Why does it have too many digits? Looks to me like the 262nd Pmount frame made in November of 1972. That is a high frame count for a month, but this was the bike boom era.
What you say is a logical assumption. It's just that the Waterford and other Paramount websites indcate that the sequence number was only two digits. This implies that less than 99 framesets were typically manufactured in a month. A jump to at least 262 is a BIG Christmas rush. If there were months where over 100 were prodiced you would think that the websites would indicate that the sequence number was "two or three digits'.

However, your point does have merit. Prior to 1970, the serial number format was MYxx, where M is month indicator, Y is year indicator and xx is sequence number. In 1970, the fomat was changed to MYYxx, reportedly because of "added capacity for the boom years". Normally, I would associate added capacity with more frames being manufactured, but in the this case the sequence number is still two digits and does not allow for any increase! One would assume that an increase in capacity would have necessitated a three digit sequence number, but the only change to the serial number is to add a digit to the year indicator, so that the decade is included. Hmm, all these websites would appear to be wrong, or at least incomplete. The boom and added capacity should have necessitated a sequence number of up to three digits, unless pre-1970 production had been very small, like 30 frames a month. If a two digit sequence number is correct, then the change in fomat was not to accomodate increased capacity, but to add decade resolution.
T-Mar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-04, 02:12 PM   #10
Sierra
Uff Da!
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Bikes:
Posts: 1,038
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
[QUOTE]Prior to 1970, the serial number format was MYxx, where M is month indicator, Y is year indicator and xx is sequence number.

Thanks for that info. Didn't realize that. I've seen that scheme on the early Schwinn Super Sports and Superiors with the forged Huret rear dropouts, but haven't run across it on the Paramounts(I don't see many early Paramounts!).
Sierra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-04, 03:44 PM   #11
T-Mar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 12,455
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
[QUOTE=Sierra]
Quote:
Prior to 1970, the serial number format was MYxx, where M is month indicator, Y is year indicator and xx is sequence number.

Thanks for that info. Didn't realize that. I've seen that scheme on the early Schwinn Super Sports and Superiors with the forged Huret rear dropouts, but haven't run across it on the Paramounts(I don't see many early Paramounts!).
While MYxx was the previous format , it was short lived (on Parmounts it was in use from only 1966 to 1969). The short life span undoubtedly contributes to the scarcity of samples.
T-Mar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-04, 06:34 PM   #12
JeStOnE
Its already fixed
Thread Starter
 
JeStOnE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago (Rogers & Sheridan)
Bikes: 1990 Ciocc Pista, 1972 Schwinn Paramount P10, Fuji Track, KHS Flite 100, Cannondale M400, Raleigh Twenty, 2004 Bianchi Pista, 2005 Bianchi Pista
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Tmar thanks for the info I'll check the campy gear tonight, and if you could keep me updated on your bianchi numbers I'm going to be buying a Bianchi from the 60's or 70's at a local shop.
JeStOnE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-15, 08:33 AM   #13
Joe_Steel
Junior Member
 
Joe_Steel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Bikes:
Posts: 22
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Digging up an old thread.

While researching and restoring my 1972 P15-9

I stumbled upon this information at the Waterford website:

"During the 70’s, Paramount sales rose to 1,200 units annually. Schwinn supplemented Paramount production with contract-built frames by Don Mainland and Roger Nelson. Don and Roger, both riders from the 40’s and 50’s, had built up a successful tooling business in Racine, Wisconsin. He already supplied tooling to Schwinn. At Paramount’s peak in the mid-70’s, 10 frames per week came from Wisconsin and 15 from Chicago. There is no obvious way to distinguish the Wisconsin-built Paramounts from those built at the Schwinn factory. Serial numbers were issued after the bikes were built."

Doing the math, ("at the peak") WI and Chicago combined would produce 25 frames per week (10 +15 = 25). 25 frames x 4.3 weeks per month = 107 to 108 frames per month. This equals approximately 1300 frames per year (at the "peak").

Looking at this registry there are numerous entries in the 200's and even 300's for 1970's production. That's quite a bit more than the 25 frames per week claimed by Waterford.

Do any of the experts have an explanation?
Joe_Steel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-15, 11:13 AM   #14
Scooper
Decrepit Member
 
Scooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco California
Bikes: Waterford 953 RS-22
Posts: 10,259
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_Steel View Post
Digging up an old thread.

While researching and restoring my 1972 P15-9

I stumbled upon this information at the Waterford website:

"During the 70ís, Paramount sales rose to 1,200 units annually. Schwinn supplemented Paramount production with contract-built frames by Don Mainland and Roger Nelson. Don and Roger, both riders from the 40ís and 50ís, had built up a successful tooling business in Racine, Wisconsin. He already supplied tooling to Schwinn. At Paramountís peak in the mid-70ís, 10 frames per week came from Wisconsin and 15 from Chicago. There is no obvious way to distinguish the Wisconsin-built Paramounts from those built at the Schwinn factory. Serial numbers were issued after the bikes were built."

Doing the math, ("at the peak") WI and Chicago combined would produce 25 frames per week (10 +15 = 25). 25 frames x 4.3 weeks per month = 107 to 108 frames per month. This equals approximately 1300 frames per year (at the "peak").

Looking at this registry there are numerous entries in the 200's and even 300's for 1970's production. That's quite a bit more than the 25 frames per week claimed by Waterford.

Do any of the experts have an explanation?
Waterford estimates 1972 Paramount production to have been 3,300. It was the year of highest production, and monthly output varied so I would discount attempts to average. 200 or 300 Paramounts per month is high, but not unreasonable in the middle of the bike boom.
__________________
- Stan
Scooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-15, 04:36 PM   #15
Metacortex
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Bikes: Fillet-brazed Schwinns
Posts: 1,909
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_Steel View Post
...Doing the math, ("at the peak") WI and Chicago combined would produce 25 frames per week (10 +15 = 25). 25 frames x 4.3 weeks per month = 107 to 108 frames per month. This equals approximately 1300 frames per year (at the "peak").

Looking at this registry there are numerous entries in the 200's and even 300's for 1970's production. That's quite a bit more than the 25 frames per week claimed by Waterford.

Do any of the experts have an explanation?
The paragraph you quoted from the Waterford site significantly underestimated peak Paramount production. As @Scooper mentioned they do list some additional production estimates here, but even that is missing the true peak years of '73 and '74.

Fortunately I can add to that information. A Schwinn Dealer bulletin I have dated 8/30/72 concerning Paramount production states:
The demand for these top of the line models has increased dramatically as more and more adults are becoming interested in cycling and we therefore plan to increase production from 3,400 units this year to 5,200 units in 1973. This represents a 52.9% increase over 1972 and there should be enough bikes for all dealers without the necessity for allocation if discretion is used in ordering.
Another internal company letter from Jack Smith (Schwinn Sales Manager) dated 11/14/73 states:
As outlined in the last Newsflash, Paramounts will be allocated on a quarterly basis and our production schedule for 1974 is 19 units per day, but we are allocating 18 per day based on each Sales Company's past purchasing history.
Now armed with that additional information let's do the math. Note that during those years the Schwinn factory closed for the first two weeks of January and July, taking a full month off the table right there. Add to that other holidays and closings it meant that there were only up to 46/47 weeks (230/235 days) of full production.

For 1972 this meant that daily Paramount production was about 15 units and for '73 it was about 22 units, and for '74 we have the stated figure of 19 units a day. This means that for a month where 20 full production days were available there could have been as many as 300 ('72), 440 ('73) or 380 ('74) Paramounts built in a month during those peak production years.

A couple of other bulletins stated that all of '72 production was sold out by April of that year, and that all of '73 production was sold out by November of '72! Even with those high production numbers the waiting list for Paramounts grew to more than a year during the very peak!

Last edited by Metacortex; 05-13-15 at 07:44 PM.
Metacortex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-15, 06:29 PM   #16
Joe_Steel
Junior Member
 
Joe_Steel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Bikes:
Posts: 22
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooper View Post
Waterford estimates 1972 Paramount production to have been 3,300. It was the year of highest production, and monthly output varied so I would discount attempts to average. 200 or 300 Paramounts per month is high, but not unreasonable in the middle of the bike boom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metacortex View Post
The paragraph you quoted from the Waterford site significantly underestimated peak Paramount production. As @Scooper mentioned they do list some additional production estimates here, but even that is missing the true peak years of '73 and '74.
Awesome input guys! That makes more sense. Thanks!
Joe_Steel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-15, 05:17 AM   #17
pastorbobnlnh 
Freewheel Medic
 
pastorbobnlnh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ascending or Descending the NH Mountains NW of Concord!
Bikes: Snazzy* Schwinns, Classy Cannondales, & a Lonely '83 Santana Tandem (* Ed.)
Posts: 10,306
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Just curious @Metacortex, any idea about 1971's Paramount production? Is it safe to assume it was about 1200, or only an average of 100 frames per month or 4-6 frames per day? Do your Schwinn Bulletins and News Flashes provide any information? Thanks!
__________________
Bob
Dreaming about riding in NH's summertime!

Visit my websites:
FreeWheelSpa.com orpastorbobnlnh.com
pastorbobnlnh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-15, 11:34 AM   #18
Metacortex
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Bikes: Fillet-brazed Schwinns
Posts: 1,909
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pastorbobnlnh View Post
Just curious @Metacortex, any idea about 1971's Paramount production? Is it safe to assume it was about 1200, or only an average of 100 frames per month or 4-6 frames per day? Do your Schwinn Bulletins and News Flashes provide any information? Thanks!
The bulletins I have go back to '69 but unfortunately no specific numbers are mentioned other than for '72-'74. They do indicate that order backlogs really began happening at the end of 1970, and from that point forward they were increasing production as much as possible at the time. The waiting list was 4 months long at the start of '71 and grew from there. The 1,200 unit production number indicated by Waterford in the paragraph quoted earlier may very well apply to '71 as you suggest.
Metacortex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-16, 09:58 AM   #19
68Paramount
Junior Member
 
68Paramount's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Southwest Missouri
Bikes: 1968 Schwinn Paramount P13, 1977 Schwinn Sting-Ray, 1983 Schwinn Super Sport, 2007 Trek X 01, 2013 Cannondale CAAD 10, 2014 Cannondale T2, 2015 Specialized Tarmac
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have a Paramount serial number vs. model year question. Per the serial number, I have a Paramount that was the 7th. frame made in December, 1968. My question is, because of being built in mid December, was this Paramount sold as a 1969 model or a 1968 model? This question is made even more important because of the "P" designation. According to the Schwinn catalogs, in 1968, there was the P11, P12, P13, P14. In 1969, there were only the P13 and P14. My Paramount is not a track bike so we can eliminate the P14, so if she was sold as a 1969, she's a P13. If she was sold as a 1968, she could be a P12 or a P13. She's not a P11 (Tourist)

Last edited by 68Paramount; 04-11-16 at 07:49 AM.
68Paramount is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-16, 10:53 AM   #20
Scooper
Decrepit Member
 
Scooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco California
Bikes: Waterford 953 RS-22
Posts: 10,259
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 68Paramount View Post
I have a Paramount serial number vs. model year question. Per the serial number, I have a Paramount that was the 7th. frame made in December, 1968. My question is, because of being built in mid December, was this Paramount sold as a 1969 model or a 1968 model? This question is made even more important because of the "P" designation. According to the Schwinn catalogs, in 1968, there was the P11, P12, P13, P14. In 1969, there was only the P13 and P14. My Paramount is not a track bike so we can eliminate the P14, so if she was sold as a 1969, she's a P13. If she was sold as a 1968, she could be a P12 or a P13. She's not a P11 (Tourist)
Schwinn typically switched production to the new model year specification around October, so if the serial number on your Paramount is M87, it is likely a 1969 model year bike.

Can you post photos and list the components on your bike? What is the serial number?

__________________
- Stan
Scooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-16, 10:58 AM   #21
Metacortex
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Bikes: Fillet-brazed Schwinns
Posts: 1,909
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
If it were a standard mass-produced model then Schwinn did build frames a month or more in advance of building the bikes, so a late '68 frame may not have been painted and built-up as a bike until 1969. However Paramounts were were made to order so I don't believe they would have built 1969 model Paramount frames until after the start of that year, in other words I believe yours was built in '68 as a '68 model. The only way to verify for sure would be to check the components (if original) and either date them or compare them against any possible changes from '68 to '69.

@Scooper are you aware of any spec. changes in the Paramount from '68 to '69?

Last edited by Metacortex; 04-07-16 at 11:04 AM.
Metacortex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-16, 11:15 AM   #22
Scooper
Decrepit Member
 
Scooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco California
Bikes: Waterford 953 RS-22
Posts: 10,259
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metacortex View Post
If it were a standard mass-produced model then Schwinn did build frames a month or more in advance of building the bikes, so a late '68 frame may not have been painted and built-up as a bike until 1969. However Paramounts were were made to order so I don't believe they would have built 1969 model Paramount frames until after the start of that year, in other words I believe yours was built in '68 as a '68 model. The only way to verify for sure would be to check the components (if original) and either date them or compare them against any possible changes from '68 to '69.

@Scooper are you aware of any spec. changes in the Paramount from '68 to '69?
Metacortex, I don't believe there was any change in the P13 specs between '68 and '69; if there were changes they would have been minor.

The biggest difference is dropping the P11 Tourist and P12 Road Racer in '69. The P12 had a Stronglight steel crank instead of the alloy Campy Nuovo Record crank. The P11 had upright bars.



__________________
- Stan
Scooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-16, 11:29 AM   #23
68Paramount
Junior Member
 
68Paramount's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Southwest Missouri
Bikes: 1968 Schwinn Paramount P13, 1977 Schwinn Sting-Ray, 1983 Schwinn Super Sport, 2007 Trek X 01, 2013 Cannondale CAAD 10, 2014 Cannondale T2, 2015 Specialized Tarmac
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks Scooper
The serial number is M 807
The specs on the Paramount are exactly as shown on your Bicycle Specifications Image. ( I'd love to have a full resolution image file of that : @ ))
Were those specs identical to the 1968 Bicycle Specifications Image?

I will post photos tomorrow.

Thank you for your help. I appreciate it.
68Paramount is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-16, 11:48 AM   #24
Scooper
Decrepit Member
 
Scooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco California
Bikes: Waterford 953 RS-22
Posts: 10,259
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 68Paramount View Post
Thanks Scooper
The serial number is M 807
The specs on the Paramount are exactly as shown on your Bicycle Specifications Image. ( I'd love to have a full resolution image file of that : @ ))
Were those specs identical to the 1968 Bicycle Specifications Image?

I will post photos tomorrow.

Thank you for your help. I appreciate it.
M807 is the 7th Paramount frameset scheduled for production in December 1968, so you're correct about the serial number.

The P13 specs page are for the 1969 model year. The P11 and P12 specs pages are for the 1968 model year.
__________________
- Stan

Last edited by Scooper; 04-07-16 at 01:52 PM.
Scooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-16, 12:37 PM   #25
68Paramount
Junior Member
 
68Paramount's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Southwest Missouri
Bikes: 1968 Schwinn Paramount P13, 1977 Schwinn Sting-Ray, 1983 Schwinn Super Sport, 2007 Trek X 01, 2013 Cannondale CAAD 10, 2014 Cannondale T2, 2015 Specialized Tarmac
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 68Paramount View Post
Thanks Scooper
The serial number is M 807
The specs on the Paramount are exactly as shown on your Bicycle Specifications Image. ( I'd love to have a full resolution image file of that : @ ))
Were those specs identical to the 1968 Bicycle Specifications Image?

I will post photos tomorrow.

Thank you for your help. I appreciate it.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_3324_1024.jpg (102.3 KB, 18 views)
File Type: jpg IMG_3321_1024.jpg (101.8 KB, 8 views)
File Type: jpg IMG_3319_1024.jpg (101.7 KB, 9 views)

Last edited by 68Paramount; 04-10-16 at 06:32 AM.
68Paramount is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:16 PM.