I've read the article about vintage lightweight pricing by Michael Kone on Sheldon Brown's website and his brief comment in the Schwinn Paramount section of the article, "Chrome bikes a bit more (although they are a bit heavier and more prone to failure)", sounds more like a general comment about chrome plated bicycle frames than failures of Paramounts specifically. My father was a factory sales manager for Schwinn in the southeast U.S. for thirty years. Part of his job was to visit Schwinn distributors (before Schwinn set up its own distributor network) and dealers and provide feedback to the factory regarding product complaints and quality problems. According to him, Schwinn stopped offering chrome plated Paramounts from 1973 on because of the increased cost to properly prepare frames for plating (file marks and sloppy brazing show through chrome like a sore thumb) and the cost to plate the frames (a very complex process since it involved copper plating, then nickel plating, then chrome plating, then baking the frame to reduce the risk of hydrogen embrittlement) could not be recovered in the retail price. In fact, an all chrome finish was priced the same as painted finish when Schwinn decided not to offer completely chromed frames at the end of 1972. Also, environmental restrictions were making disposal of the plating process waste chemicals extremely expensive.

Dad told me that he had never heard of a chromed Paramount failing because it was chrome plated, and he was very close to the folks at the factory. I believe the comment about chrome bike failures was due more to failure stories related improper post plating baking to relieve hydrogen embrittlement than to chrome plated frames in general, and Schwinn had the process down pat.