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

Mystery Swiss bike

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.

Mystery Swiss bike

Old 10-23-23, 08:39 PM
  #26  
Stop reading my posts!
 
unworthy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 12,566
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1437 Post(s)
Liked 1,049 Times in 777 Posts
sure looks like an Allegro to me. No clue as to why the "serial number ingot" (I like to call it a lozenge) is missing, but I know no other brand/marque that checks these boxes.
unworthy1 is offline  
Old 10-23-23, 09:27 PM
  #27  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Portland, Cascadia
Posts: 513
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked 256 Times in 111 Posts
Originally Posted by unworthy1
sure looks like an Allegro to me. No clue as to why the "serial number ingot" (I like to call it a lozenge) is missing, but I know no other brand/marque that checks these boxes.
After seeing all the evidence, I agree. And maybe it did have the seat tube replaced?

Because the big mystery for me still is why are there so many stamped numbers on the bottom bracket? I'm curious if other Allegros (never seen one in person) have anything stamped into the bottom bracket, other than what was originally cast. If it was stamped sometime later, it seems strange to stamp it three times, in two different directions with three different size and type of stamp.

But I also can't imagine some other Swiss frame builder copying an Allegro so perfectly.
​​​​​
jPrichard10 is offline  
Old 10-24-23, 08:25 AM
  #28  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Greenwood SC USA
Posts: 2,252

Bikes: 2002 Mercian Vincitore, 1982 Mercian Colorado, 1976 Puch Royal X, 1973 Raleigh Competition, 1971 Gitane Tour de France and others

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 823 Post(s)
Liked 1,391 Times in 693 Posts
Originally Posted by jPrichard10
Well, I stand corrected -- and I should have measured in more than one spot first. While there are many places where my calipers read 28.6, most places are 28.2-28.4. Top tube is 26.2 or higher, never dropping anywhere near 1" range for an Imperial measurement.
Edit to add: does this make the 26.8 seatpost a bit odd? That seems to make the tube walls rather skinny. The Campy seatpost has 26.8 on it and it doesn't look like it has been shaved down at all.
Sorry for all the hubbub about tubing diameters; this was definitely a metric tubesets, and the top tube should have been the only information needed to confirm that, as it's nowhere near 25.4.
I guess we're to the point where I sand the seat tube and see if there's any sign of a former Allegro serial badge? Not sure if that's an overkill move or not. If it's not an Allegro, someone tried awful hard to mimic one.
​​​
Originally Posted by juvela
-----

given all the "attention" it has received by someone previously t'is not at all unreasonable to consider it may have been the recipient of a seat tube ream
two possible causes come to mind -
a) deformantion at top of seat tube due to overtightening of binder
b) had a 26.8mm size pillar to hand which wished to employ
-----
So I went trawling stuff and learned that Reynolds 531 seat tubes had wall thicknesses around .8/.5 mm (some places say .8-something/.56 or so. So that looks well within the realm/range of being reamed out to take a 26.8 instead of the expected 26.6, and @juvela gives two good reasons why that happened.

Over on the framebuilder forum, Mark Bulgier wrote -
"The two systems are too far apart. Neither metric tubes in inch lugs, not the other way 'round, will result in clearances suitable to brazing.
The smaller socket can be milled or reamed to fit the bigger tube, as with putting a 1-1/8" tube into lugs or BB shell that were originally 28.0 mm*. But with a metric frame, there ain't no way to put in a 1" TT, since that's smaller than the existing 26 mm TT. No way to shim it and get a strong enough joint IMHO, the tube is just too small.

So now I wonder if the seat tube was replaced at all, or if the serial number "ingot" was just removed during renovations. When I went back and looked at the thread from when this bike surfaced here, when it was still believed to be a Peugeot, I looked closely at this image, the only one I have seen from the non-drive side of the top of the BB shell -



- and I think I am correct in saying there is NO BB shell oil port there. The number stamped onto the underside of the BB shell, 194741, would have been used by Allegro during the period when they fitted oil ports, something discontinued between no. 230908 and no. 233385. So the number may be a red herring. If it is indeed an Allegro, and I think that it is, the lugs say 1961-1974, the lack of an oil port says c.1972-74, the lack of chrome says likely left the shop with the grade C parts but was still functionally identical to the ultra fancy Special models with smoked paint and chrome. I strongly suspect now that the original serial number ingot was removed when the fender eyelets were shaved and the brake cable tunnels and bottle bosses were added and it's likely that it still has it's original seat tube, just reamed out to take the 26.8 mm post.

Were this one mine, I'd start looking for a 531 fork with a Vagner PL crown, strip it, paint it, decal it as an Allegro and ride it lots. Had my old one actually been my size, I probably would still have it. My perception of my last one was that it floated over the road and felt a lot like a long wheelbase early PX-10 with more trail.
rustystrings61 is offline  
Old 10-24-23, 08:55 AM
  #29  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Portland, Cascadia
Posts: 513
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked 256 Times in 111 Posts
Originally Posted by rustystrings61
So I went trawling stuff and learned that Reynolds 531 seat tubes had wall thicknesses around .8/.5 mm (some places say .8-something/.56 or so. So that looks well within the realm/range of being reamed out to take a 26.8 instead of the expected 26.6, and @juvela gives two good reasons why that happened.

Over on the framebuilder forum, Mark Bulgier wrote -
"The two systems are too far apart. Neither metric tubes in inch lugs, not the other way 'round, will result in clearances suitable to brazing.
The smaller socket can be milled or reamed to fit the bigger tube, as with putting a 1-1/8" tube into lugs or BB shell that were originally 28.0 mm*. But with a metric frame, there ain't no way to put in a 1" TT, since that's smaller than the existing 26 mm TT. No way to shim it and get a strong enough joint IMHO, the tube is just too small.

So now I wonder if the seat tube was replaced at all, or if the serial number "ingot" was just removed during renovations. When I went back and looked at the thread from when this bike surfaced here, when it was still believed to be a Peugeot, I looked closely at this image, the only one I have seen from the non-drive side of the top of the BB shell -



- and I think I am correct in saying there is NO BB shell oil port there. The number stamped onto the underside of the BB shell, 194741, would have been used by Allegro during the period when they fitted oil ports, something discontinued between no. 230908 and no. 233385. So the number may be a red herring. If it is indeed an Allegro, and I think that it is, the lugs say 1961-1974, the lack of an oil port says c.1972-74, the lack of chrome says likely left the shop with the grade C parts but was still functionally identical to the ultra fancy Special models with smoked paint and chrome. I strongly suspect now that the original serial number ingot was removed when the fender eyelets were shaved and the brake cable tunnels and bottle bosses were added and it's likely that it still has it's original seat tube, just reamed out to take the 26.8 mm post.

Were this one mine, I'd start looking for a 531 fork with a Vagner PL crown, strip it, paint it, decal it as an Allegro and ride it lots. Had my old one actually been my size, I probably would still have it. My perception of my last one was that it floated over the road and felt a lot like a long wheelbase early PX-10 with more trail.
I happen to have a 531 fork, but not the right for crown and with Imperial oval blades (assuming Raleigh). That might be what has to go in the frame unless I get lucky.

The plan is to repaint and decal it as an Allegro, but unfortunately not to ride it. I am much too tall for this one.
jPrichard10 is offline  
Old 10-24-23, 11:23 AM
  #30  
blahblahblah chrome moly
 
bulgie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,984
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1172 Post(s)
Liked 2,564 Times in 1,072 Posts
Originally Posted by rustystrings61
Reynolds 531 seat tubes had wall thicknesses around .8/.5 mm (some places say .8-something/.56 or so. So that looks well within the realm/range of being reamed out to take a 26.8 instead of the expected 26.6
Well they made different thicknesses as well, such as one very close to 1.0/0.7 mm that was very popular with OEMs.
Back then they were all made to wire gauge numbers which don't always match up well with tenths of a mm. So the 21/24 gauge tube is very close to .8 in the butt, but the unbutt is .56 -- actually closer to .6 than to .5 mm.

Seat tubes are almost always single-butted, on butted frames, so it's the .56 mm part that we have to fit a post to. With the normal amount of heat-distortion, we usually fit a 27.2 mm post if it's 1-1/8" (28.6 mm), or 26.6 for a 28.0 mm tube. But with careful low-temperature brazing (less distortion), plus a little reaming, it's definitely possible to mount a 27.4 or 26.8 post.

But R also made 531 plain-gauge tubes in 0.8 mm, which for 1-1/8", take a 26.8 post "natively". So just knowing the seatpost size doesn't tell us which ST is in this frame.

-Mark B
bulgie is offline  
Likes For bulgie:
Old 10-24-23, 11:51 AM
  #31  
small ring
 
droppedandlost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PNW
Posts: 1,024
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked 925 Times in 370 Posts
Something else to look for, mine has stamping on both sides of the seat lug


__________________
72 Bob Jackson -- 74 Motobecane Grand Jubile -- 74 Sekine SHS 271 -- 80 Nishiki International
85 Shogun 800 -- 86 Tommasini Super Prestige -- 92 Specialized Rockhopper -- 17 Colnago Arabesque
droppedandlost is offline  
Likes For droppedandlost:
Old 10-24-23, 11:59 AM
  #32  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Portland, Cascadia
Posts: 513
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked 256 Times in 111 Posts
Originally Posted by droppedandlost
Something else to look for, mine has stamping on both sides of the seat lug


This is helpful, and while I can't see any markings through the paint, there might be some signs with the paint removed.

And I'm sure you would have said, but there's no frame size stamped between your chainstays on the BB shell?
jPrichard10 is offline  
Old 10-24-23, 12:08 PM
  #33  
Stop reading my posts!
 
unworthy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 12,566
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1437 Post(s)
Liked 1,049 Times in 777 Posts
I think (at least the RH) are just Nervex (angle and socket numbers) so nothing to do with frame maker. Also the OP's uses Bocama (BCM) type 14/11 lugs so won't have any Nervex numbers. Not sure about the "A 77" (?) on the LH side, that could be stamped by Allegro I suppose
unworthy1 is offline  
Likes For unworthy1:
Old 10-24-23, 12:15 PM
  #34  
small ring
 
droppedandlost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PNW
Posts: 1,024
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked 925 Times in 370 Posts
Originally Posted by jPrichard10
And I'm sure you would have said, but there's no frame size stamped between your chainstays on the BB shell?
correct, no size stamp
__________________
72 Bob Jackson -- 74 Motobecane Grand Jubile -- 74 Sekine SHS 271 -- 80 Nishiki International
85 Shogun 800 -- 86 Tommasini Super Prestige -- 92 Specialized Rockhopper -- 17 Colnago Arabesque
droppedandlost is offline  
Old 10-24-23, 01:41 PM
  #35  
blahblahblah chrome moly
 
bulgie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,984
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1172 Post(s)
Liked 2,564 Times in 1,072 Posts
Originally Posted by droppedandlost
Something else to look for, mine has stamping on both sides of the seat lug
The angle marking on the right and the "A" on the left were stamped there by Nervex, not the framebuilder. The "77" is not a Nervex marking though. Maybe the year? Could your frame be a 1977?
bulgie is offline  
Old 10-24-23, 02:52 PM
  #36  
small ring
 
droppedandlost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PNW
Posts: 1,024
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked 925 Times in 370 Posts
Originally Posted by bulgie
The angle marking on the right and the "A" on the left were stamped there by Nervex, not the framebuilder. The "77" is not a Nervex marking though. Maybe the year? Could your frame be a 1977?
serial number 167974 places it in 1960
__________________
72 Bob Jackson -- 74 Motobecane Grand Jubile -- 74 Sekine SHS 271 -- 80 Nishiki International
85 Shogun 800 -- 86 Tommasini Super Prestige -- 92 Specialized Rockhopper -- 17 Colnago Arabesque
droppedandlost is offline  
Old 10-24-23, 02:59 PM
  #37  
blahblahblah chrome moly
 
bulgie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,984
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1172 Post(s)
Liked 2,564 Times in 1,072 Posts
Originally Posted by droppedandlost
serial number 167974 places it in 1960
Yeah I figgered 77 probably wasn't the year; Nervex lugs were pretty unpopular by then. (I still like 'em though!)

So what the 77 means? Might have to remain a mystery. It sure ain't the seat tube angle
bulgie is offline  
Old 10-24-23, 04:36 PM
  #38  
Senior Member
 
juvela's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Alta California
Posts: 14,234
Mentioned: 415 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3797 Post(s)
Liked 3,314 Times in 2,164 Posts
-----

77 might be identification mark of builder

or of quality control inspector

[wylde speculation ]


-----
juvela 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.