Originally Posted by
T-Mar
The subject bicycle is boom era (1971-1974), second from the bottom of the line, from a reputable Italian manufacturuer.
As for Italian bicycles being spec'd with Japanese components during the boom, that is incorrect. Japanese components were found primarily on Japanese and North American models. Europeans tended to cling to domestic components on the basis on national pride and the belief that the their long association with cycling, particularly racing, would natually produce better components. Of course, this belief did not hold true with the North American population, which was largely ignorant of the history of cycling and the technical merits of the components. They bought the Japanese bicycles because they were better finished (smoother, shinier paint and no brazing blobs or gaps), thad wider gearing, stem shifters and brake safety levers. The last three criteria cannot be overemphasized. The typical US buyer had just outgrown his Stingray and was not used to the bent over position or strong enough to handle the narrow range European gearing. Only after the Japanese cornered the entry level market did the Europeans take notice and spec Japanese components, a trend which started taking place largely in the late 1970s.
As a high schooler in the late '60s and college freshman, I spent a LOT of time haunting the bike shops of the North Side of Chicago. My memory may be fuzzy, but I recall in the EARLY '70s being disappointed that lower-end Italian bikes were starting to show some Japanese parts. Plus if some historian has established the the Bike Boom was in fact the years you say, I stand corrected.
My Italian bike I refer to was in fact not a more modern bike, but less modern. It was one of an odd lot of Rossignolis that Turin Cycles had found, with a hodge-podge of excellent but obsolete components: Campy steel Record, early hubs, Nisi Evian (I think) rims in 36/28 spokings, a Magistroni and FB chainset, Sheffield pedals, a Brooks Pro and a wierd Simplex or AVA seatpost. The geometry was rather laid back with 44 or so cm chainstays, and it rode very smooth and very efficient. Tubing was a question mark but several shops commented on the quality of the frame while I had it. The bike was much higher quality than the Torpado we're talking about here.
You're speaking mainly in generalities and drawing hard specifiec conclusions, which I don't think has a good basis. I can't argue with the trends you claim. Even if you have examples of Italians of 1970 with all Italian componentry it doesn't disprove my recollections. At the same time I have no evidence, why would I have kept literature on bikes I wouldn't have considered buying?
I do truly think this bike could have been late '60s into the early '70s, because of bikes (Atala, Coppi, Fiorelli) that were available in Chicago, competing with Peugeot, Raleigh, Dawes, Mercier, and Gitane.
But what can we prove? Nothing.
It's clear this bike will probably be a decent rider, that it would benefit from rim and shift system upgrades, and I'd dare to say it will probably need a good saddle. A pair of (at least) toeclip MKS pedals would also be a worthwhile improvement. If the crankset is trashed, use Sheldon's site to spec out a cotterless replacement - don't go crazy with least weight, because of the value of the bike and the inherently heavy straight-guage steel drawn tubing - just get something that has some life in it and is modern enough to maintain. Don't treat this old girl as a valuable collectible - it isn't.
+1 on the spoke protector - don't trust the Valentino for stability.
Look for a 5-speed Shimano freewheel, it will shift a lot better than the original.
Road Fan