Hi all,
i went to a cycle jumble at the Manchester Velodrome in the north if the UK - sold a fair bit of my stuff and decided (wish i hadn't) to buy this frame.
It was built up as a retro time trial bike - definately a respray - the chrome forks were badged columbus - as is the frame (the forks are actually made in taiwan crap).
campag aero post (cut right down so useless) tubular wheels (OK) simplex rear derailleur (broken) cinelli bars and stem (OK)......
I very much doubt it's a Stan Pike as badged (he died in 1984 or thereabouts), there is a cinelli BB, short point lugs (the downtube has a "P" engraved) , no serial numbers or marks on the dropouts, 27.2 seatpost size - time trial shifter boss on the down tube and internal brake and rear derailleur cabling......... it's reasonably light too,

any ideas??? here's some pictures.

Looks to me like it could well be a TT design, with the aero shifter mount and through-chainstay cable routing. Also, at least some of the Ilkeston TT Specials used the vertical rear dropouts, so that may be a clue as well. Looks like a cool frame.

Maybe....its hard to tell from your pictures but he frame angles do NOT look like typical road race or crit angles...but then again the aero top mounted shift lever are an aero feature. Back in the early 80's it was mostly components that made a TT bike a TT bike not overly aggresive frames like we see today.

Measure the rear chainstay length center to center, a traditionl RR frame would be ~40cm w/ frame angles of 73/73 give or take.

I don't know who built the frame but I can see why you bought it. It does look as if it was specially built as a time trial frame. I am impressed with the milled out Cinelli bottom bracket as that must have been done as a one off job. The aero designed seat cluster is another special feature along with the internal gear routing and specially cast head lug with the "P".

You haven't shown the fork front but it could be OK.

Your happiness all depends on what you paid for the bike and how much you like the frame. Sounds like some of the components are worthwhile like the cranks you have shown. I think I would have been attracted to the frame as well.

hi,
just been out to the shed...
the chainstay lengths are 40cm c to c, the frame is 57cm c to c top tube and seat tube.

I am with Jim on this, it is hard to tell what the geomentry of the frame is in those pics. I don't see it mentioned what size are the wheels? It could be a frame built to be aero dynamic but not really a TT or Funny bike as we think of them. I am not certain but I am sure someone else does just when the 26 and 24 front wheeled bikes came into use.

OH right I see the frame is a 57 so it must have 2 700c wheels? it looks like a nice frame, perhaps the tip mounted shifter is just a bit of a custome touch.

hi,
yes, both 700c wheels . Designed to just have a rear derailleur and a single chain ring up front.

like this...

suh-weet! are those two brakes operated by one lever? besides, that bike looks an awful lot like the one the OP posted. Do you have parts specs?

A single shifter for the rear definitely points to a Time Trial rig - especially in the UK, I think. At the time that bike was likely built, "funny" TT bikes were not yet in existence, and 700C front and rear would have been standard on specialized time trial frames.

Here's a Raleigh Ilkeston time trial special from the late 70's for comparison:

https://picasaweb.google.com/10997459...eTrialSpecial#

Note the single chainring and vertical rear dropouts. The top-mounted shifter would have come into existence just a few years later.

How's that frameset any different from a road race frameset? It has semi-vertical dropouts like my RRA and it has a FD cable guide.

Other Raleigh 753 frames would not have had vertical dropouts. At Ilkeston, those were reserved for the TT frames (they're also drilled out). Ilkeston TT frames also had stickers instead of headbadges. Obviously, the front derailleur allows for the use of a front double chainring for hillier courses. That frame may also use a lighter gauge of 753 - not sure about that. It also lacks cable guide braze-ons on the top tube, and the bottom bracket is slotted. There are no brazed-on bottle bosses - that's pretty telling for the time. The geometry is also likely different. The differences in dedicated time trial frames are definitely much more subtle in that period than they would become later, but they're there.

I want close-ups of this bike. Nice.

Correct, and the frame would have been constructed out of the lighter (801) gauge of 753, even though it was larger than the 'standard' cutoff point for that light-gauge tubeset of about 22.5" c-t. The frame itself is crazy-light (maybe not stupid-light, but close...).

I have a British-made circa mid-1970s TT frameset, and it is constructed of Columbus KL tubing, even though it is a 24-inch (61 cm.) size. Very light....

This frame is supposedly made of Columbus KL but due to it being respraayed there's no way to prove it.. or is there?

KL tubing was butted 0.7/0.5 thickness, should take a 27.4mm seatpost. Is a 27.2mm post a somewhat loose fit?
You can always cut the frame up and measure the thickness of the tubes to determine origin! You might also try tapping a tube and comparing the ringing sound to another similar constructed frame of know tubing type. If you can find a frame known to be made of SL, then a KL tube frame should ring a higher note. It should also be very similar note to a 753 frame which shares 0.7/0.5 butting, an 753 frame is just much stronger (but no stiffer) due to heat treated tubing.

Another KL tube thread over here https://www.bikeforums.net/archive/in.../t-535395.html

Definitely a TT frame, and a nice one at that. As you say, Stan Pike died in November 1983 but it could be a "Stan Pike" frame marketed through Competition Cycles of NW London or Argos of Bristol rather than from Stan's Crewkerne workshop. Bill Philbrook of Gillingham in Kent was building special TT frames with many similar features back in 1973 or 1974, so no real reason I can see to think the frame post-dates Stan's death, he was still building frames in February 1983. You might find this a useful source of additional info:

https://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/...howtopic=20484

No idea about the forks you mention, can you show photos?

no idea if it's any use but my chas roberts '74 (ish) audax has almost identical lugwork the only differences are some cut-outs which could have been done to make the bikes unique.

Couldn't tell if it is or isn't TT, but I can tell you it's a gorgeous frame.

well, an update.........
there is a serial number on the bottom bracket:

01 863 1773

any ideas?
does this follow any sequence that people have seen before?

whatever it is, it's cool looking. how do you know it's a respray? Can you see a different color scheme underneath?

I have an idea or two...
Almost definitely your frame is a Stan Pike. His later work often had that high fastback seat cluster treatment - some people like it, some don't. Mine is from late 1982 - your seat cluster looks identical to mine. . . I bought mine through Competition Cycles (now long gone) in Cricklewood. I had to wait ages for it – the proprietor Colin Freud (rip) didn’t always pay Mr. Pike in a timely manner, it seems, so it was only a few months after I purchased mine that Pike stopped dealings with Freud.
Although the angle of your photo doesn't give the best view, the headtube angle is much more upright than the seat tube angle - so tt is plausible – Pike was known to have built to this configuration. See the link https://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=20484 - read all of the threads, there’s a few BS posts.
Mr. Pike built completely to the customer's specification, no matter how odd.
The vertical rear dropouts look like Shimano, just like mine. I have a SABA cast BB – he liked to use investment cast bits.
I've still got the original fork on mine- I specified an aero crown with 531 sl blades. 72.2 mm seatpost says Reynolds 531 to me – it’s what Stan Pike usually built with.
Your lugs look as fine as mine too. What's not to like? That you have a lot of work to do to bring it back? Even though Stan Pike’s frames did not have the refined elegance of their Italian contemporaries, his frames were really top rate. Since he built under his own name only from 1975 until his death in 1983, there are not a huge number of these around. He was a master builder/brazer/welder. So treat it with respect!
I posted a picture of mine earlier in C&V. see https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...=#post12333653

Sorry to rain on your parade, OP but that number sequence is actually an OLD London phone number - since the "01" codes we've had "0171" and "0181" and now have "0207" and "0208" - it's probably the original owner's number, rather than the number of the shop? In 1998 the Police stamped my phone number on the BB's of the two bikes I owned at that time, free of charge, as a theft deterrent/ bike security tracing measure. Don't know if this was done by the Police or by Stan Pike, but I'm 110% sure it's a London phone number.

That's absolutely correct. The practice of marking parts/frames was especially prevalent from the mid 70's through the 80's, thanks to...

Crack Cocaine spawning an army of drug zombies.

When I moved to the UK in 1980, all my bike parts from the US were ID'd. In the U.S., you could sneeze and in that time your bike or something on it would get whipped. ID'ing bits deterred the disappearances a bit.

Back to the topic at hand... yet another indication that this is a genuine Stan Pike: He let you choose a serial number/identification on the BB. For instance, I have my birthday date as the serial number on my Stan Pike. As I said before, Mr. Pike would do whatever you wanted. So it's not surprising that the OP's frame has a London phone # as a serial number. That's what the original owner specified.

OP, you still there?

Hello Cranky/Hello All,

The OP has left the building... and the proud new owner has now entered the conversation.

I've no better idea as to whether this is an authentic Stan Pike and I bought it based on the fact that, whatever it's origin, it seems a high class TT frame of some sort. I love it. Unfortunately the restoration was far from sensitive. Looks like a powder coat of some sort (not a sparkly one thank goodness - the flat white looks quite classy to me). Bad paint job on the "P" pantograph. And the transfers need to be clearcoated. But in a way all that works even better for me as I don't really want a bike that I'm too worried about to ever cycle. I'm gonna build this up as my fairweather ride with the best parts I like to ride ...not a concours restoration.

The bb is a 102 ISO - so I think I'll go with a 90s campy record double if I can find one cheap (rather than find and fit a new bb to work with the sugino mighty).

Back to the issue of its authenticity. If anyone has any more info relating to this particular frame-build or even just some contact information regarding someone related to Stan Pike bikes, then it'd be most appreciated. CrankyFranky the photo of your Pike has been the most positive contribution. The seat-cluster is certainly spot on. The most dubious part of the frame would have to be the recessed brake bolt hole on the rear. Would british builders have been using recessed by 1983?

On the positive side you'd have to wonder who else would be building high-class 1980s single-chainring time trial machines in Reynolds/Columbus tubing with "P"s pantographed into the lugs?