Thought you guys might enjoy the 1987 vs 2012

I'll take the '87 - just my size!!!

How would you contrast the difference in the ride? Do you prefer one over the other?

you need a 62 paramount to really get a good judge on ride quality..

No offense, and nothing against the new bike.

But many paramount fans don't consider the new paramount to be a true paramount. Some even take offense at the current re-use of the name.

But then, some traditionalists hate on the '90s PDG paramounts as well.

Others' perception doesn't anything to your riding enjoyment. But it affects resale. Look at the prices of the PDG bikes compared to the earlier Paramounts. The newer ones don't have the prestige or resale, even though they have the name.

I'm glad you enjoy both of your rides.

Personally, I shake my head in disgust at any post-94 Schwinn. The series 8 you have seems like a rare nice bike from that group.

I'd take 'em both.
A good bike is a good bike.

Welcome to the forum.

The new paramount and the old one are both sweet rides but different as night and day to ride; neither being a "bad" thing. The new series 8 is fast. Very fast. It only weighs 17lbs. This one only has a 23 cassette, so you'd better be ready to get out of the seat on the hills. Therefore, for me, it's a challenge. And the short head tube puts me in a position where it's hard to monitor traffic behind me (hard to look over my shoulder; I'm 53 and a Clydesdale).

The older bike is simply amazing with the 7400 group. And honestly, it's my pick due to a more relaxed riding position. Now I know for another person, that comment might not hold true. This one is a 58cm and after several people telling me it's too big for me, I'll ride it all day long. So much for that. It just has this feel of quality and control. It's quiet and firm and confidence inspiring. I'm getting reacquainted with down tube shifting, but it's only a problem if I'm in the wrong gear when I start a climb and I have to push my pedal strokes. That's not a time you should be taking your hands off the bar.

So, in essence. The Series 8 is fast. Is it a Schwinn? I don't know. You'll have to answer that one. It has the name, anyhow. I've heard it's actually a Cannondale frame.

The 87 I could stare at all day. The beauty of the componentry, the quality and workmanship in the frame the quietness during a ride. Unless you've ridden one, you wouldn't understand. It makes my Trek Madone 2.1 seem like a rattletrap. The changes from the front derailleur are almost silent when the 105's on my Trek complain. It reminds me of an old classic Packard or a Rolls-Royce. It just does what it's supposed to beautifully; like a symphony.

I couldn't agree more with all of your statements; except the post-94 comment. To me, a good bike is a good bike. Let the nay-sayers say whatever. Bike snobbery is not in my vocabulary. When I was able to buy a carbon-framed Ultegra 6700 component bike for $1000, why not? It's never quit going down the road because it said Schwinn on the side. Plus, how many have you seen on the road? it's unique in it's own right, love it or hate it.

Eventually, I will find a 70's Paramount to round out the collection. It will be uber cool..

Maybe, but my 1992 Paramount PDG Series 7 frame cost me $120 pretty lightly used, and it's a great frame, clearly superior to my Trek 510, and comparable to my Tommasini Super Prestige, but with the advantage of modern rear spacing. I didn't buy it for prestige, I bought it to build a classic steel bike with a very versatile modern drive-train, without having to cold-set my Tommasini and dump it's Campy Super Record group.

My built PDG series 7 exactly as I wanted it cost me less than $450 all in. A real Waterford-built Schwinn Paramount built as I wanted it would have cost me double that starting at $500+ for the frame alone, and I would have had to cold set it to get a modern drivetrain. And I would not have any better a bike - although I would have one with more cachet and prestige - But my Tommasini already served that purpose for me.

The reason that the Schwinn traditionalists hate the Asian Paramount PDGs is that they used the same name, when they probably shouldn't have, and as such it signals the extinction of the Waterford-built Paramounts. But on the merits of the frames themselves, they're as nice as any classic steel frame you can get from the U.S. short of something made by an artisan builder like Bruce Gordon or Richard Sachs or Ben Serotta (by no means an exhaustive list - and the cost is 4 digits for such a frame). And at $120 for a clean aftermarket steel frame of that qualiity - that speaks for itself. I'm actually GLAD the Schwinn collectors sneer at them.

BTW, if you don't want to build your own, and you're patient, you can get nice fully built Paramount PDG Series 7 or the almost the same Series 5 (but for color and a few components) for $300-400 or so. Good luck finding a clean Waterford Paramount for under $800.

As someone with a longtime respect for the Paramount name, I have to say that I respect Scott Sports' and then Dorel Industries' efforts to preserve the reputation of Paramount labeled products, building them to the high standards set by the Schwinn family from 1938 to the November, 1992, bankruptcy. While the Schwinn brand has been tarnished by a marketing decision to sell cheap Schwinn branded bicycle models through mass marketing big box retailers, the Paramount labeled bikes have pretty much retained the quality discerning customers expect. The fact that Scott and Dorel both contracted exclusive anniversary editions of the Paramount to high end builders (60th anniversary Paramounts were produced by match cycles - note lower case - and Serotta, and 70th and 75th anniversary Paramounts were produced by Waterford Precision Cycles) demonstrates a commitment to preserving the Schwinn Paramount legacy.

Just MHO as a certifiable Schwinnphile.

Maybe I missed it but who built the carbon Paramount above? I'm not hating on any Paramounts despite who built it. I've had my fair share of PDG's and finally a 93 Waterford built model.

I don't believe Schwinn ever revealed the source of the "‘N’Litened Black Label" carbon fiber frame and fork used for the Series 8 and Series 9 Paramounts, and the cycling press didn't publish a source for them as far as I know. I've assumed they were sourced from one of the better Asian factories.

EDIT - Road Magazine described the Schwinn 'N'Lightened Black Lable frame like this in 2007:

The frame is comprised of a cross layering of two different patterns of Black Label carbon fiber, T-700 and TX-50, to ensure strength and lateral stiffness throughout the frame, especially around the bottom bracket shell. This layering of carbon is designed to yield better acceleration while remaining vertically compliant and helping to eliminate road chatter. The monocoque design coupled with the straight-blade fork creates a surprisingly stiff and responsive frameset. The head tube, like the bottom bracket, is super beefy and makes for a front end that is extremely stiff allowing for a quick response when driving out of the saddle.

Road Bike Action Magazine said, in 2008, describing the Peloton Pro model:

THE FRAME
The Peloton Pro is the middle bike of the three-model Peloton lineup. It shares the same frame as the $1699 Peloton and runs without the high modulus carbon used on the $4299 Peloton Limited. Like many other companies, Schwinn has come up with a variety of catchy names that sound good, but don’t really add much in-depth information about their frame technology. To that end, the Peloton Pro uses a monocoque frame and fork using Schwinn’s N’Litened Black Label Carbon.

The front triangle is made as its own part and then bonded and wrapped to the rear triangle. The ‘semi’ compact frame has an integrated headset and is available in four sizes (small, medium, large and extra large). Overall production quality would rate as very good.

THE RIDE
We tend to downplay any made-in-China carbon fiber frame, but the flip side is that, based upon sheer numbers and the fact that they have access to the brain trust of every major bicycle maker, it is possible for Chinese frame makers to produce an outstanding product at an untouchably low price. Schwinn’s Peloton Pro is a prime example of this relationship. It cranks out race-worthy performance with a 2300-dollar sticker price-and we say this without “yes, but” switch-this-part-or-upgrade-that-part caveats. Test riders liked its positive-shifting SRAM Rival drivetrain and mentioned that the lower-priced Double-Tap shifters required less swing to execute shifts than the Force models. The frame is stiff enough to handle strong climbers and powerful jumps, without the dull, wooden-wheel ride that overly rigid carbon frames have over rough pavement. There is just enough damping in the frame and wheels to take the edge off of rough pavement. At 17.2 pounds, you’ll feel its weight, compared to a pro-level ride, but the Schwinn won’t remind you of this fact with every acceleration-in fact, it closes gaps and tops rollers quite easily. Where Schwinn earns its marks in the design department is in the handling department. The Peloton Pro’s secure feel while cornering lets you brake late and turn inside of other riders-or simply enjoy descending at speed.

I'm guessing the Paramount frames used the high modulus carbon fiber used in the high end Peloton Limited.

As far as I am concerned, Schwinn did that in 1960 with the introduction of the Varsity. The single most important bicycle to American culture is a piece of crap and the main contributor to the fact that the bicycle is considered a fringe instead mainstream in this country.

But to get back on topic. OP, cool bikes. I have a 1959 and a 2009 Cinelli. They hang side by side and it is an interesting to compare and contrast the two.

Thanks for the added reflections.

I own a '71 Chicago built P-13 and a '83 Waterford built Standard, so I'm familiar with how your '87 rides. I agree with your assessment in the last sentence, except, when I think about those two classic cars, I think "Big" and "Heavy!" While that describes me fairly well, my Paramounts, while not lightweights by modern standards, remain "sleek" and "nimble" in a very classic manor, more similar to a Datsun 240Z. (although some would disagree since I have the '71 set up for participating in mountain climbing races).

I took the '83 out yesterday for a 32 mile spin through the NH mountains. Could have gone another 20+ if I had had the time. Since I'm a big guy in my late 50s and I live in the mountains, all my bikes wear some nice low gears for when I need them.

Have you thought about adding a wider range cassette and possibly a compact double crankset?

Yesterday I only needed "granny" on one hill.

I just got the bike last week. Paid $500. I really don't know what I'll do yet. It has a 26 tooth in the rear now. But, yes the large crankset hinders that range. I think the first thing is STI Dura-Ace Shifters. I've almost wiped up the pavement with a handlebar twitch while riding with one hand during a shift. If I messed up this bike, I'd cry.

What saddle are you using?

Looks like that saddle is a Brooks Professional.

Congrats and enjoy. As for finding a 70's era Paramount, maybe neat to have it in white. Red, white and blue trio.

I have a nervous need to be able to see behind me- it sounds like you need a good mirror. Since most of my bikes have non-aero levers, the old style Mirrycle mirror is perfect, it puts the mirror right where I need it to glance.

However, with your bike- and I'm unfamiliar with the body positioning being that aggressive- you'd need a mirror that would either clamp on the bars, or onto the brifter somehow. I have an Axiom clamp-on mirror on the one bike I have with aero levers-

Axiom FastFlash DLX Mirror - Outside Outfitters




And on my bike:

And the correct answer is made by cb400bill!

Specifically the limited edition Vans collaboration.

Pretty cool.