I recently removed the paint of my colnago frame and I am pretty sure it is a Colnago Mexico/ Nuovo mexico, who can tell me the difference? The top and downtube are crimped.
As you can see on the pictures somebody has moved the cable guides on the toptube and replaced the rear dropout. It is all nicely done.

Is this an expensive frame? I saw one on ebay which had bidding up to 600$.


Pictures without paint:
https://www.mijnalbum.nl/Album=O6X3INIB

Pictures with paint:
https://www.mijnalbum.nl/Album=DJVALDOU

1 question why did you remove the paint ?
NOt to jump to conclusions ,but ! i sure hope i dont smell a DREW ( fixie ) coming out of this .

I removed the paint because I did not like the paintjob, to flashy. I am planning to give it a more original paintjob and no I am not making it a fixie.

What could be MORE original than the Original paint .

Nuovo Mexico. Those channels in the top and downtube are the difference.

OP didn't say it had the original paint prior to removal.

(Oh, and no, it's not generally an expensive frame.)

and i give you this below .
i personally cannot see the point AT ALL to remove that paint that was on the frame in the pictures on the link he posted.

T

I can - it's completely wrong for the period of the frame. I might very well have done the same thing.

And by the way, I told you what it was when you originally posted it.

Classic case of someone who has a machine that is not what he wants, and would rather turn it INTO what he wants at a great expense of cost and ruination of the original quality then to seek out a suitable replacement that strikes his fancy.

Drew.

EDIT: I retract the accusation - it looks as if this is an earlier frame that has already been subject to a later repaint. By all means then, the frame is most worthy for repaint.

-Kurt

Wrong. That frame wasn't original to begin with. Might be a good idea to learn a bit about Colnagos before ripping people.

It looks like an original Colnago paint job to me... this frame was is production for a looooonnnggg time.

vjp

You got me there then - is this, then, a repainted machine which is older then the paint job suggests?

-Kurt

Can you document that, including the frame details? The Nuovo Mexico was succeeded by the Essa Mexico in the mid-late-80's. Check the '88 catalog on bulgier. Some of the tubes on the Essa Mexico were fully shaped, rather than just having the channels on top and downtube. By the time that paint scheme rolled around, the frame details on that bike (Colnago stamped in the sides of the stays, bottom bracket style, seatstay caps) had morphed quite a bit. By sometime in the early 90's, Colnago had switched from "Colnago" on the caps to a single clover. The details on this frame all point to early-mid 80's, unless you have some real evidence to the contrary?

Looks as if Colnago repainted this thing sometime down the line then. Under those circumstances, most worthy of a repaint - IMO.

-Kurt

The frame details (which admittedly are easier to make out in the original thread by the OP) all point to circa 1983-85. I know the paint looks original, so I'm guessing it was repainted by Colnago, with some other changes (TT braze-ons moved). But the little frame details are surely removed in era from the paint scheme by years. I've been wrong before, and I'll be wrong again, but I've owned and seen enough Colnagos (including a couple from the same general era of this bike) to feel pretty strongly on this.

still with all that has been said .
if it was infact as you state a repaint by Colnago . i still dont see the sense in destroying that paint job that was on the frame before .
it was professionally done and a beautiful color scheme ( IMO ) Whatever method he used to strip the paint and totally destroy that paint job , to do what powdercoat it ?
if the frame set paint was extremely bad i might consider having Colnago do all the work . from step one .
otherwise period correct or not i would leave it .
Just my opinion .
T

Fair enough. But previously you said you couldn't see the point "AT ALL" to removing the paint. That's pretty strong. While you might not have done so yourself, can you at least see the point that the era of the frame didn't match the paint? That there was no real historical value or collectibility issue involved? That the OP is the one who's going to have to look at the bike and ride it, and that he just didn't like the paint that was on there and found it too flashy and a bad match for the era of the frame? It's not like he put a mustache on the Mona Lisa.

+1

t

You are correct! It looks like a frame from after 83 with a paint job from around 95. It does look like a factory paint job though, so maybe a repaint??