cudak888 

Just got this on an unknown frame that I picked up recently. Frankly, I can't figure out why this was done, unless someone was improvising the Campagnolo 1010B before its time. Neither can I figure out the difference in the treatment of the stays (the fork blades match the seat stay treatment).

Figured I'd run this by you fellows regardless. Incidentally, it's English threaded throughout.







I've got a few more photos up here: https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...=1#post9347540

-Kurt

Nessism

Sorry but I don't understand your question?

unterhausen

Is it because the wheel was too hard to get into the frame without shortening?

Is there any indication that the derailleur hangar was moved back? Because the long 1010 dropouts in my possession have the hangar way further forward than that. It looks like a 1010b as well, the long dropouts were much rounder. I'm too lazy to go downstairs and look at a 1010b.

cudak888 

There is no other explanation for the hanger's location. The 1010B's have "BREV. CAMPAGNOLO" curving around the rear edge of the dropout, while the 1010's and 1010A's have them on the top edge, as obvious with these (and also conspicuously filed out).



From what I can tell, the flatter shape of these drops seem to be because a considerable amount of material has been removed from the back edge.




That is a very good point - could have been a flub-up.

-Kurt

cudak888 

Well, in short: Has anyone here seen this before on any particular frame? I'm hoping that - if it has - it might lead to ID'ing the frame.

-Kurt

unterhausen

I agree, sure seems to be a long dropout. The hangar may not be original, neither of them had that ridge. Since the frame seems to have been repainted, could have been done later. Maybe the original hangar broke off and this was the repair.

cudak888 

The early 1010's had that ridge (and a hole drilled in it) for the spring on one oddball, low-end Campagnolo RD from the '60s. I don't know the RD, but I know the dropout:


https://www.velobase.com/ViewSingleFr...C97FC&AbsPos=7

I believe at least a couple were produced without the spring hole, or it could have been filled in, in this case.

Someone spray-bombed it a bright orange - underneath it is a paint job in a lighter, metallic orange. While I cannot be sure, I suspect it as being original (if nothing else, the lighter color is a pro job). No evidence of tampering around the DO's.

-Kurt

e-RICHIE

the frame has been repaired, repainted, and the leading edge of
the raised area of the forging has been revised with a dull file.
nothing important to see on that unit atmo.

cudak888 

Figured that it made a trip to the framebuilder for revisions, though I'm not quite convinced that the dropouts are not original to it (though the differing stay tapers are suspect). If anything, why use late 1010's, and not 1010A's or the 1010B's if doing a repair?

That said, I'm basing this hypothesis only on the fact that the frame has the hallmarks of an early-mid 1970's machine - over BB cable routing, no top tube braze-ons - and it also appears to have some details that were probably added in the 1980's, namely the recessed brake bosses, shifter bosses, and waterbottle cage bosses. Why use early '70s dropouts if the repairs were done by the time the 1010B's were introduced? Doesn't seem to add up.

Oh - FYI, the fork blade/dropout treatment matches the seat stay/dropout treatment. It would suggest the chainstays were on the receiving end of the repair, though I haven't figured out if this would have any particular significance.

-Kurt

e-RICHIE

why does it matter if they are original or not? anyway, a 1010A is just a 1010 without
an eyelet forged in. it's had the hanger replaced and brazed in the new position a bit
further back. the seat stays at the top look like a backyard job too, so i am positing
that whoever did this had the most basic frame building skills at best atmo. if you think
that it was the chainstays that were replaced, the dropout is original still, and the lead
area was chopped and channeled to let the wheel drop out more easily. is the rear triangle
on the short side?

cudak888 

Mainly as I'm trying to locate as much as possible on the frame that might ID when and who built it. Not that there is anything special about it, but I figure it'll get on my nerves sooner or later when folks keep asking "what is it?" (Inevitably followed with "I don't know.")

Interesting. Might I ask what about the stay tops look home-spun? The manner in which the spoon caps are fitted? I'm filled with curiosity.

The rear triangle is long enough to accommodate someone installing a 700x28c, but anything else would ride up on the chainstay bridge. The brake bridge and fork crown clearance are a bit more generous, however. Could be that the wheelbase was longer at one time. I haven't checked the BB mitering to see if the stays show any potential indication of having been replaced.

-Kurt

unterhausen

the seatstays don't look original to me. The chainstays are domed, and the seatstays aren't. In addition, it looks like the person that installed the seatstays just cut them off straight and brazed them on to the reduced area part of the dropout without any slotting. The cap of the stay bothers me a little, it's atypically short.