yet another Mercier ID please
 

I'd like to know more about this Mercier. The serial no. on the BB shell is 554899. Mean anything to anyone?

I was told the tubing is Reynolds 631. It has Simplex dropouts and BDM lugs (at least that's what it says on the top head lug.

Little help?

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d28/drong/fullon.jpg

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d2...headtube-1.jpg

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d2...tcluster-1.jpg

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d28/drong/back.jpg

and yes, the right side of the rear triangle is bent. Looks like something got piled on top of it in storage:cry:

A stamped dropout with integral hanger on a frame devoid on braze-ons usually indicates a 1970s boom era model that is mid or high range. The spindle looks to be cotterless and if original, would corroborate this. The only thing I see that looks out of place is the rear triangle (and I"m not talking about the bend). Typically, the stay ends would chromed, like the fork, but this does not appear to the case, based on what I can see.

A Mercier model from this era with Reynolds 531 would be the model 300. The best way to determine the tubing is probably the seat tube diameter. Being a french frame, it should have the smaller, 28mm outer diameter seat tube. The inner diameter for a Reynolds 531 butted, 28mm seat tube was typically 26.6mm, though a thinner tube with a 27.0mm inner diameter was also available.

Meaning that it would take a 26.4mm seatpost? Please advise.

If the bike is what T-Mar thinks it is, it's what my teammate rode on the 1972 Los Angeles Wheelmen Double Century. It was every bit as good as a Peugeot PX-10.

Knowledge... Dropped! Thanks T-Mar

One day this Mercier will be pink and stripey.

Maybe. It all depends on the amount of time and money the framebuilder wants to take in finishing/re-sizing the inside of the seat tube. Ideally you want a nice sliding fit between the post and tube. Anything too tight and you mar the post. Too loose and the post is not not properly supported along its insertion length.

During the frame manufacturing operation there can be various build-up on the inside of the tube, including scale, flux, primer, paint and in the bad cases, big blobs of brazing mat'l. If the manufacturer can properly control the manufacturing and minimize the amount of build-up on the inside of the seat tube, he will reduce his costs to finish the inside of the tube and maximize his profits. This is obviously critical on mass produced frames, with lower profit margins. The easiest way to minimize these costs is to simply insert a smaller post.

In the case of good frames, most manufactuers will hone and/or ream the seat tube to clean it out and optimize the fit. This normally involves re-sizing the inner diameter a little over its original dimensions and verfying with a gauge (or an actual seatpost) of the intended post size . In the LBS where I worked, we would verify and if necessary, re-size the seat tubes on bare frames. If you got it just right, an uncinched post would not fall into the frame and pushing down on it would compress the air in the tube, making the post pop back up.

I've even seen cases where framebuiders have apparently enlarged the inside diameter on a thicker seat tube to match the inner diameter of a thinner seat tube on a more expensive frame. In relaity, they proably just spec'd a mixed tubeset with a higher graded seat tube. Either way, this adds costs and results in a larger than expected seat post, but it is offset, to some extent, by not having to stock as many seat post diameters.

In general, quality standards have improved over the years, and todays fits are probably better than the old days. And better frames should have better fits. Depending on the age, level and manufacturer's practices, you can get quite a range.

The bottom line is that the inside diameter could be over or undersize for the tubeset. Ideally you want to perform trial and error with a number of posts, working up from a undersize post until you get the correct fit. However, this is not practical and the alternative is to measure the inner diameter with either a caliper or seat post gauge. The problem with these methods is that they cannot measure very far down into the tube and will give false readings if the tube is pinched or pried open. So you want to ensure the sides of the cinch slot are parallel and that the inside of the tube is smooth and clean. Then go with the the closest undersize post.

In the case at hand, given the assumed age and level, it is hard to say if the tube was re-sized. During the boom, many operations were cut and quality suffered in an attempt to increase output to meet heavy demand. However, the inside of the tube certainly looks it recieved some refinishing, so it is likely 26.6mm, but it could also 26.4mm.

I realize this is a lengthy explanation and that it throws some complicators into the practice of using seat post/seat tube diameters for identifying tubesets on unmarked frames, but we must remember that this practice is only a guideline and is still the best tool at our disposal.

Do you have a PhD in this stuff, T-Mar?

I've got so many PHD that I cant't keep count,.... but only if you're refering to Pedals, Handlebars and Derailleurs.:D

Several forumites have asked, "How does he do that?" :)