Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

Carrera identification

Notices
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.

Carrera identification

Old 12-22-19, 10:31 AM
  #1  
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Carrera identification

Hello guys, while looking for christmas presents ended up with this yellow (repainted) beauty as gift to my girlfriend, its pretty nice bike as far as i can tell but it will be nice to have a little bit more details about it.
Specs are following:
-frame size 50/52 seat tube CC/horizontal tube CC
-seatpost is 26.4mm
Markings i found on bottom bracket lugg - carrera and serial number A5?
fork and dropouts dont have any markings
My guess is mid-range carrera from mid 90`s with possibly replaced fork.
Have a happy holidays!





tstanev84 is offline  
Old 12-22-19, 05:11 PM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 5,085

Bikes: Numerous

Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1672 Post(s)
Liked 3,034 Times in 904 Posts
My Carrera is one of my favorite bikes, both for looks and performance! The first ones were from late 80’s - early 90’s I believe. I don’t know what to make of the odd seat post size. They still make bikes and have a web site, so maybe they can give you more info. Here are some pics of mine I’ve pegged from 1995.




__________________
N = '96 Colnago C40, '04 Wilier Alpe D'Huez, '10 Colnago EPS, '85 Merckx Pro, '89 Merckx Century, '86 Tommasini Professional, '04 Teschner Aero FX Pro, '05 Alan Carbon Cross, '86 De Rosa Professional, '82 Colnago Super, '95 Gios Compact Pro, '95 Carrera Zeus, '84 Basso Gap, ‘89 Cinelli Supercorsa, ‘83 Bianchi Specialissima, ‘VO Randonneur, Ritchey Breakaway Steel, '84 Paletti Super Prestige, Heron Randonneur

Spaghetti Legs is offline  
Likes For Spaghetti Legs:
Old 12-22-19, 07:04 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 90

Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Elite, Flandria, Pinarello Montello Cromonero, schwinn world sport

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 17 Times in 13 Posts
Here's a more modern aluminum/ carbon Carrera
I picked up a few years ago.

Johnnybikes is offline  
Likes For Johnnybikes:
Old 12-23-19, 06:01 AM
  #4  
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Spaghetti Legs
My Carrera is one of my favorite bikes, both for looks and performance! The first ones were from late 80’s - early 90’s I believe. I don’t know what to make of the odd seat post size. They still make bikes and have a web site, so maybe they can give you more info. Here are some pics of mine I’ve pegged from 1995.
Made some research today, frame looks like built from CROMOR tubes, with seat tube - 28.6mm in diameter and 0.9mm wall thickness it appears 26.8 inside diameter. Top, down and head tubes seems the correct size for CROMOR too. Dont know if there is other relevant way to double check but i guess that enough.
P.S. Thats a beautiful bike u have there!
Edit: Looks like their website is gone https://www.carrera-podium.it/english/homepage.html There is one NA distributor but i doubt they will be able to provide any information.

Last edited by tstanev84; 12-23-19 at 06:22 AM.
tstanev84 is offline  
Old 12-23-19, 07:51 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,233
Mentioned: 652 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4719 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,034 Times in 1,874 Posts
Based on the seat tube diameter, it wouldn't be Cromor. While Cromor is a double butted tubeset, it uses a single butted seat tube, with the butt at the bottom end. The wall thickness at the seat post end is 0.6mm. Consequently, it typically uses a 27.2mm seat post. A post diameter of 26.8mm would be typical of the plain gauge Aelle and Gara tubesets. 26.4mm is even smaller and down in the range of a lightweight hi-tensile steel. You should check the seat cinch slot for notable pinching at the top. Maybe the previous owner installed an under size seat post?

Last edited by T-Mar; 12-23-19 at 07:58 AM.
T-Mar is offline  
Old 12-23-19, 10:28 AM
  #6  
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by T-Mar
You should check the seat cinch slot for notable pinching at the top. Maybe the previous owner installed an under size seat post?
Thats what im thinking right now, current 26.4 post is pretty loose, needs alot of tightening and falls freely into the tube when u give it freedom


capiler shows 26.5mm but slot is still pinched a bit, id assume 26.6 will fit perfectly
And yes u are absolutely right about CROMOR, the butting is on the bottom bracket side, thanks for help T-Mar!

Last edited by tstanev84; 12-23-19 at 10:32 AM.
tstanev84 is offline  
Old 11-16-20, 02:28 PM
  #7  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by T-Mar
Based on the seat tube diameter, it wouldn't be Cromor. While Cromor is a double butted tubeset, it uses a single butted seat tube, with the butt at the bottom end. The wall thickness at the seat post end is 0.6mm. Consequently, it typically uses a 27.2mm seat post. A post diameter of 26.8mm would be typical of the plain gauge Aelle and Gara tubesets. 26.4mm is even smaller and down in the range of a lightweight hi-tensile steel. You should check the seat cinch slot for notable pinching at the top. Maybe the previous owner installed an under size seat post?
Very slow response but maybe some use.....I have a Carrera podium in the form of a Carrera 1. Seatpost diameter is 26.8mm and paint and stickers are original, they state 'Columbus' cromor on them.
I also have a Gitane Mach 340 GTX which has original paint and stickers, seatpost diameter 26.2mm. Original stickers state Columbus Cromor Custom
I also have a Motobecane Super Record 2, original paint and stickers identify it as Columbus SL. Seatpost diameter also 26.2mm
So, although Reynolds 531 has a seatpost diameter of 27.2mm, it is gas pipe compared to these Columbus frames. Maybe seatpost diameter is not necessarily a direct guide to the quality of the frame tubing.
Vintage Campagnolo Record seatposts appear frequently on e bay with diameters of 26.2 and 26.4mm. I'm pretty sure you would not have bought a gas pipe frame with one of these fitted to it.
Maybe Italian and French frame makers bought sets of these tubes and the seatpost only has a thicker wall at the stress point, ie where the clamp is located...
levoz is offline  
Old 11-16-20, 04:47 PM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,233
Mentioned: 652 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4719 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,034 Times in 1,874 Posts
Originally Posted by levoz
Very slow response but maybe some use.....I have a Carrera podium in the form of a Carrera 1. Seatpost diameter is 26.8mm and paint and stickers are original, they state 'Columbus' cromor on them.
I also have a Gitane Mach 340 GTX which has original paint and stickers, seatpost diameter 26.2mm. Original stickers state Columbus Cromor Custom
I also have a Motobecane Super Record 2, original paint and stickers identify it as Columbus SL. Seatpost diameter also 26.2mm
So, although Reynolds 531 has a seatpost diameter of 27.2mm, it is gas pipe compared to these Columbus frames. Maybe seatpost diameter is not necessarily a direct guide to the quality of the frame tubing.
Vintage Campagnolo Record seatposts appear frequently on e bay with diameters of 26.2 and 26.4mm. I'm pretty sure you would not have bought a gas pipe frame with one of these fitted to it.
Maybe Italian and French frame makers bought sets of these tubes and the seatpost only has a thicker wall at the stress point, ie where the clamp is located...
During the period question, there were two standard seat tube outer diameters, 1-1/8" (28.6mm) which was the imperial standard and 28mm, which was the metric standard. When comparing two frames using either metric and imperial seat tubes, and assuming the same seat post clearance (0.2mm diametral clearance is standard) the seat tube requirng the larger post wil have thinner walls and therefore be lighter and typically made of higher strength material. This is the basis for using seat post diameter as an indicator of frame strength. The assumptions are that the outer diameter of the seat tube are the same and the diametral clearance between the post and seat tube are the same.

In your case, all the frames are late enough that I would expect imperial diameter tubing and 27.2mm post. Even if byy chance, some were metric standard, I'd still expect a 26.6mm post. Assuming all the posts use the same outer diameter, the Reynolds 531 uses the largest post and therefore has the thinnest walls and is the lightest frame. The Gitane and Motobecane, by comparison would be the "gas pipe" frames, with Carerra being in the middle.

Both Reynolds and Columbus typically used single butted seat tubes. While manufactures could spec a custom seat tube, I doubt they'd spec a double butted version. The theory is that the seat post itself effectively acts as the top butt and reinforces the joint. I've never across a fame with a double butted Cromor or SL seat tube.

Having said that, it is possible to have the effective diameter of the seat tube reduced by scale, burrs or distortion during brazing. Normally, a respectable manufacturer will ream/hone the inner diameter to return it to spec but there have been cases where manufacturers simply installed a smaller post to compensate. I would hope that wouldn't happen with a Cromor or SL frame. Very rarely, we see a case where the seat tube was inadvertently installed upside down, with the butt at the top.

Yes, you could buy Record post in 26.2mm and even 25.0mm. There are always exceptions to the rules, such as the Columbus MS seat tube and the aluminum tubes which had to use much thicker walls to compensate for lower material strength and metal fatigue. However, I think you find that most popular size for high grade vintage seat posts would be 27.0-27.2mm (for imperial seat tubes) and 26.4-26.5mm (for metric standard seat tubes).

As far as I'm concerned, the post sizes for your Cromor and SL frames are atypical. It seems strange that they are all under size. If you're using calipers to determine the size, I wonder if there is a calibration issue? It would also be interesting to know if the outer diameters of the seat tubes are 28.6mm or 28mm. Finally, photos of the cinch slots would aid in determining if the posts are undersize for the seat tube. Something isn't normal.
T-Mar is offline  
Old 11-23-20, 03:38 AM
  #9  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by T-Mar
During the period question, there were two standard seat tube outer diameters, 1-1/8" (28.6mm) which was the imperial standard and 28mm, which was the metric standard. When comparing two frames using either metric and imperial seat tubes, and assuming the same seat post clearance (0.2mm diametral clearance is standard) the seat tube requirng the larger post wil have thinner walls and therefore be lighter and typically made of higher strength material. This is the basis for using seat post diameter as an indicator of frame strength. The assumptions are that the outer diameter of the seat tube are the same and the diametral clearance between the post and seat tube are the same.

In your case, all the frames are late enough that I would expect imperial diameter tubing and 27.2mm post. Even if byy chance, some were metric standard, I'd still expect a 26.6mm post. Assuming all the posts use the same outer diameter, the Reynolds 531 uses the largest post and therefore has the thinnest walls and is the lightest frame. The Gitane and Motobecane, by comparison would be the "gas pipe" frames, with Carerra being in the middle.

Both Reynolds and Columbus typically used single butted seat tubes. While manufactures could spec a custom seat tube, I doubt they'd spec a double butted version. The theory is that the seat post itself effectively acts as the top butt and reinforces the joint. I've never across a fame with a double butted Cromor or SL seat tube.

Having said that, it is possible to have the effective diameter of the seat tube reduced by scale, burrs or distortion during brazing. Normally, a respectable manufacturer will ream/hone the inner diameter to return it to spec but there have been cases where manufacturers simply installed a smaller post to compensate. I would hope that wouldn't happen with a Cromor or SL frame. Very rarely, we see a case where the seat tube was inadvertently installed upside down, with the butt at the top.

Yes, you could buy Record post in 26.2mm and even 25.0mm. There are always exceptions to the rules, such as the Columbus MS seat tube and the aluminum tubes which had to use much thicker walls to compensate for lower material strength and metal fatigue. However, I think you find that most popular size for high grade vintage seat posts would be 27.0-27.2mm (for imperial seat tubes) and 26.4-26.5mm (for metric standard seat tubes).

As far as I'm concerned, the post sizes for your Cromor and SL frames are atypical. It seems strange that they are all under size. If you're using calipers to determine the size, I wonder if there is a calibration issue? It would also be interesting to know if the outer diameters of the seat tubes are 28.6mm or 28mm. Finally, photos of the cinch slots would aid in determining if the posts are undersize for the seat tube. Something isn't normal.
a few more facts...
Columbus Cromor double butted tubing 0.9 0.6 0.9 and also 1/0.7/1.0(mm) although seatpost is 0.9/0.6
Columbus SL double butted tubing 0.9 0.6 0.9 mm and seatpost is 0.9/0.6
(thanks to equus for info)


Carrera Podium 1 Seat tube OD 28.9mm including approx 0.3mm worth of paint. 28.6 - (2x0.9) = 26.8mm Original fitted ITM seat post = 26.8mm
Motobecane super record II. Seat tube od = 28.3mm including paint. therefore 28.0mm - (2x0.9) = 26.2mm. Seat post = 26.2mm
Gitane Mach 340 GTX . Seat tube OD = 28.3mm including paint. therefore 28.0mm - (2x0.9mm) = 26.2mm. Original fitted Campagnolo seatpost = 26.2mm
levoz is offline  
Old 11-23-20, 01:18 PM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,233
Mentioned: 652 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4719 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,034 Times in 1,874 Posts
Originally Posted by levoz
a few more facts...

Columbus Cromor double butted tubing 0.9 0.6 0.9 and also 1/0.7/1.0(mm) although seatpost is 0.9/0.6

Columbus SL double butted tubing 0.9 0.6 0.9 mm and seatpost is 0.9/0.6

(thanks to equus for info)



Carrera Podium 1 Seat tube OD 28.9mm including approx 0.3mm worth of paint. 28.6 - (2x0.9) = 26.8mm Original fitted ITM seat post = 26.8mm

Motobecane super record II. Seat tube od = 28.3mm including paint. therefore 28.0mm - (2x0.9) = 26.2mm. Seat post = 26.2mm

Gitane Mach 340 GTX . Seat tube OD = 28.3mm including paint. therefore 28.0mm - (2x0.9mm) = 26.2mm. Original fitted Campagnolo seatpost = 26.2mm
A 0.3mm increase in diameter would be very thick for paint. Typically, the increase in diameter would be ~0.1mm. Since the increase is consistent across all three frames, this suggests your calipers need calibration or possibly there is some foreign material on the jaws that requires removing.

You're making an incorrect assumption in your calculations. The SL and Cromor seat tubes are single butted. That is why the seat tube specs say 0.9/0.6 rather than 0.9/0.6/0.9 The 0.9mm butt is at the bottom of the seat tube to stiffen the bottom bracket region, where stresses are higher. The top, 0.6mm, non-butted end should be used to calculate seat post size. You should also deduct a further 0.2mm from the calculated inner diameter of the seat tube to allow for clearance fit.

Imperial seat tube inner diameter for SL or Cromor = 28.6 - (2 x 0.6mm) = 27.4mm
Correct seat post size is 27.2mm

Metric seat tube inner diameter for SL or Cromor = 28.0 - (2 x 0.6) = 26.8mm
Correct seat post size if 26.6mm

Your seat posts are all 0.4mm (2 sizes) under the correct size. I assume the reported seat post sizes are those stamped on the posts because if they're measurements, the actual post sizes are almost certainly smaller based on the errors in your seat tube diameter measurements. I know it doesn't sound like much but that a significant difference when talking tubesets. Again, it's curious that the difference is consistent across all three frames. I wouldn't expect that if it was due to something like tube distortion. Typically, these sizes seat posts would be used on tubesets with walls that are two steps thicker than SL or Cromor. The appropriate Columbus tubeset for those size seat posts would be Aelle.

Last edited by T-Mar; 11-23-20 at 01:37 PM.
T-Mar is offline  
Old 11-23-20, 02:42 PM
  #11  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Seat post diameter

Originally Posted by T-Mar
A 0.3mm increase in diameter would be very thick for paint. Typically, the increase in diameter would be ~0.1mm. Since the increase is consistent across all three frames, this suggests your calipers need calibration or possibly there is some foreign material on the jaws that requires removing.

You're making an incorrect assumption in your calculations. The SL and Cromor seat tubes are single butted. That is why the seat tube specs say 0.9/0.6 rather than 0.9/0.6/0.9 The 0.9mm butt is at the bottom of the seat tube to stiffen the bottom bracket region, where stresses are higher. The top, 0.6mm, non-butted end should be used to calculate seat post size. You should also deduct a further 0.2mm from the calculated inner diameter of the seat tube to allow for clearance fit.

Imperial seat tube inner diameter for SL or Cromor = 28.6 - (2 x 0.6mm) = 27.4mm
Correct seat post size is 27.2mm

Metric seat tube inner diameter for SL or Cromor = 28.0 - (2 x 0.6) = 26.8mm
Correct seat post size if 26.6mm

Your seat posts are all 0.4mm (2 sizes) under the correct size. I assume the reported seat post sizes are those stamped on the posts because if they're measurements, the actual post sizes are almost certainly smaller based on the errors in your seat tube diameter measurements. I know it doesn't sound like much but that a significant difference when talking tubesets. Again, it's curious that the difference is consistent across all three frames. I wouldn't expect that if it was due to something like tube distortion. Typically, these sizes seat posts would be used on tubesets with walls that are two steps thicker than SL or Cromor. The appropriate Columbus tubeset for those size seat posts would be Aelle.
Surely seat posts are not an interference fit. Reynolds 531c seat post is single butted 0.8 mm and 0.5mm. according to you the seat post diameter should be 28.6 - 0.5 + 0.5 therefore 27.6 and not the actual size which is 27.2mm. the difference is 0.4mm . The same applies to the tubing that I have described, except that the difference is 0.6mm.
I have two Peugeot Perthus 753 frames. Seat post diameter is 26.6mm. It seems that french bikes have metric tubing, so 28mm od. 28.0 minus 2x0.5 mm does not equal 26.6 mm.
levoz is offline  
Old 11-23-20, 09:30 PM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,233
Mentioned: 652 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4719 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,034 Times in 1,874 Posts
Originally Posted by levoz
Surely seat posts are not an interference fit. Reynolds 531c seat post is single butted 0.8 mm and 0.5mm. according to you the seat post diameter should be 28.6 - 0.5 + 0.5 therefore 27.6 and not the actual size which is 27.2mm. the difference is 0.4mm . The same applies to the tubing that I have described, except that the difference is 0.6mm.

I have two Peugeot Perthus 753 frames. Seat post diameter is 26.6mm. It seems that french bikes have metric tubing, so 28mm od. 28.0 minus 2x0.5 mm does not equal 26.6 mm.

I never stated that seat posts are an interference fit. I said they were a "CLEARANCE FIT". That's why the correct post size in my examples are 0.2mm (one post increment) smaller than the nominal inner diameter of the seat tube.


I don't know why you're digressing to Reynolds when we were discussing Columbs but Reynolds introduces it's own complications. Being British, the wall thickness is actually based on Standard Wire Gauge, which doesn't translate into a nice, even metric figure. The non-butted wall of Reynolds 531C is 24 SWG, which is 0.559mm and closer to 0.6mm than 0.5mm, however it's advantageous for Reynolds to round down and market the tubes slightly thinner than actual. Since posts don't come in odd increments, you go down closer to 1-1/2 sizes and the correct size post for Reynolds 531C is 27.2mm.


French bicycle came with metric standard tubing into the early 1980s. Around the mid-1980s most French manufacturers started converting to the imperial standard. Not everybody converted at the same time.
T-Mar is offline  
Old 07-27-21, 09:41 AM
  #13  
Recovering Bikeaholic
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lambertville
Posts: 171

Bikes: 84 Specialized Expedtion, 85 StumpJumper, 85 Schwinn Cimarron, 2019 VO Polyvalent, 2007 Niner MCR, 2008 Niner SIR

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked 128 Times in 47 Posts
Carrera Podium? This one's got me stumped...

This bike was given to me by a friend (who acknowledged it was special, but he had no room in his new living space, and had too much going on in his life to prepare it for sale... so he simply bequeathed it to me). That was 5 years ago. It finally came up in my project queue, and I am in the process of freshening it up. I have replaced the original tubular rims with a set of NOS Wolber clinchers (apologies to the purists). I am trying to identify exactly what I have... (by the way, I will be selling this on behalf of my friend, who is battling cancer. I will donate 100% of the proceeds to The American Cancer Society in his honor)... stay tuned, I will list on the Marketplace very soon.

The Carrera name seems to have gone through several incarnations. This particular bike pretty closely matches one that I found on the The Pro's Closet website (recently sold for $1400)... except for a few subtle differences: Mine just "feels" like it was built in the 90s, from the 8-speed Chorus group to the overall wear and tear... whereas the Pro's Closet version claims to be a 2007 (and has updated Record carbon crank and 10-speed drivetrain)... ???? Mine CANNOT be that new... Another subtle difference is the 2007 version has the Carrera bird stamp at the seat post lug; mine has no such stamp. The paint jobs, while the same pattern, have slight differences.. mine has sprayover onto the seat tube; the 2007 does not. The head badges appear to be similar (if not the same), but the 2007 has white background, and mine is gold (or the white has completely worn off?) IS it possible that Carrera made a replica (in 2007) of a previous original version? Or was this so-called "2007 version" actually the original, except updated with new components? Could mine be an original? It's fairly confusing due to the similarities, YET I can see there are obvious differences! I can't seem to find any information online...

Any insights would be most appreciated. Thanks!


Carrrera with Campagnolo Chorus (8-speed) group, appears to be from the early 90s??

One of the decals on the frame indicates "Carrera by Podium"; others read "Carrera Biciclette"

Head badge appears to have a gold background, or did some background color wear off?

Overspray onto the lugs; 2007 version doesn't seem to have this; and there's NO sign of the Carrera bird stamp on the lug (which does appear on the 2007).

Chrome fork with Carrera lettering on the crown

Last edited by montclairbobbyb; 07-27-21 at 11:16 AM.
montclairbobbyb is offline  
Old 07-27-21, 11:05 AM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,233
Mentioned: 652 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4719 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,034 Times in 1,874 Posts
Originally Posted by montclairbobbyb
This bike was given to me by a friend...I am trying to identify exactly what I have...
It looks mid-1990s to me. Campagnolo introduced their dual pivot brakes for the 1994 model year and Chorus went 9 speed for 1997. The graphics are typical of the Carrera-Tassoni team bicycles of the era.
T-Mar is offline  
Old 07-27-21, 06:42 PM
  #15  
Recovering Bikeaholic
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lambertville
Posts: 171

Bikes: 84 Specialized Expedtion, 85 StumpJumper, 85 Schwinn Cimarron, 2019 VO Polyvalent, 2007 Niner MCR, 2008 Niner SIR

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked 128 Times in 47 Posts
Thanks, T... Seems like the evidence points to '94-'95... So that's the story and I'm sticking to it... 👍
montclairbobbyb is offline  
Old 07-27-21, 07:45 PM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: South Shore of Long Island
Posts: 2,762

Bikes: 2010 Carrera Volans, 2015 C-Dale Trail 2sl, 2017 Raleigh Rush Hour, 2017 Blue Proseccio, 1992 Giant Perigee, 80s Gitane Rallye Tandem

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1073 Post(s)
Liked 999 Times in 710 Posts
Looks like a carrera zeus, not certain when the Zeus became the Volans but from what I've dealt with the Volans was just a new generation of the Zeus. They share similar paint jobs, I remember this yellow, the white with blue like the one further up, and a blue with yellow and blue pattern. I had a Zeus from the last year they made them, I bought it in 2000 or 2001 and the only difference between it and the Volans I bought in 2012, which was a left over from a couple years prior, was the tubing. But the earlier Zeus to the later was the eagle logo, lack of lettering on the BB and slight changes to the style of the lettering. All of them are just really nice frames and worth having.
Russ Roth is offline  
Old 07-28-21, 04:04 AM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 568
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked 174 Times in 139 Posts
There's a nut missing on that front brake.....
Mackers is offline  

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.