![]() |
Old Paramount track: here's another!
|
I love this line in the description:
The best estimate was that this was built in the early to mid to late 1940's. Um, yeah, OK! |
Wouldn't mind owning an early Paramount, but I'd much rather have a Pop Brennan. A relatively few guys have basically cornered that market, however, led by Jeff Groman.
|
Originally Posted by 753proguy
(Post 13356692)
The best estimate was that this was built in the early to mid to late 1940's.
I find it interesting that the Waterford paint job (though beautiful) on Scooper's is much fancier (even given the modern materials) than the originals. |
Originally Posted by dbakl
(Post 13358901)
Apparently there were differences in the frames as they evolved over time, which does help date them to a period. Mine was dated to the 50s. I was told they started over every year with the serial numbers, which makes them useless for dating. Mine is I912 for what its worth. Like the one on ebay it also has no headbadge, or holes for one. Jeff Groman seems to be the expert in such matters.
Originally Posted by dbakl
(Post 13358901)
I find it interesting that the Waterford paint job (though beautiful) on Scooper's is much fancier (even given the modern materials) than the originals.
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d7...1940_14_15.jpg |
Originally Posted by Scooper
(Post 13361986)
I dunno. Here's the Paramount in Schwinn's 1940 consumer catalog. The paint scheme is very similar to the scheme Waterford applied to mine.
I pulled my frame out, I'll try and shoot some pics tomorrow. Serial number 1912 doesn't even appear on the list. #336 from the ebay ad would place it in the early 50s according to that list. |
Originally Posted by dbakl
(Post 13362476)
I wasn't dissing yours, its very well done, and beautiful. The decals seem fancier; the originals look like a basic paint job with some waterslides slapped on. The modern clear makes them look much slicker than I think they must have originally.
I pulled my frame out, I'll try and shoot some pics tomorrow. Serial number 1912 doesn't even appear on the list. #336 from the ebay ad would place it in the early 50s according to that list. |
Originally Posted by dbakl
(Post 13358901)
I was told they started over every year with the serial numbers, which makes them useless for dating.
Bob |
Sometimes I wish I was an American so I could rightfully own a Paramount. I would love to have one but it just doesn't seem right for an Australian to have one.
|
I say go for it Gary!
|
Originally Posted by Gary Fountain
(Post 13364929)
Sometimes I wish I was an American so I could rightfully own a Paramount. I would love to have one but it just doesn't seem right for an Australian to have one.
|
Originally Posted by Gary Fountain
(Post 13364929)
Sometimes I wish I was an American so I could rightfully own a Paramount. I would love to have one but it just doesn't seem right for an Australian to have one.
Bob |
Colonel - you sir, should come with a warning - laughter ahead! And yeah, Tasmanians can be 'alright' and I would eat a burger with you any day.
norskagent and BobHufford, Thanks for your encouragement re Paramount ownership. Over the years I have been a member of this forum I have seen many fine Schwinn Paramounts and have come to think of them like Aussies are bought up to revere the Malvern Star - 5 star. To me, the Paramounts are the definitive American racing bicycle. How do you guys think of them? I am always drawn to threads where 'Paramount' is mentioned and my knowledge is growing post by post. I still cant see myself owning one as a forigner - they just 'feel' like they are 'as American as apple pie' and should remain in American hands. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:42 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.