View Poll Results: Which would you rather have?
1957 Cinelli SC
36
49.32%
1977 Cinelli SC
37
50.68%
Voters: 73. You may not vote on this poll
What would you rather have?
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,716
Bikes: 82 Medici, 2011 Richard Sachs, 2011 Milwaukee Road
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1957 Post(s)
Liked 2,030 Times
in
1,119 Posts
‘57 before support is provided on TDF and I could look cool with tubulars over my shoulders.
__________________
I don't do: disks, tubeless, e-shifting, or bead head nymphs.
I don't do: disks, tubeless, e-shifting, or bead head nymphs.
#27
Crawlin' up, flyin' down
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Democratic Peoples' Republic of Berkeley
Posts: 5,680
Bikes: 1967 Paramount; 1982-ish Ron Cooper; 1978 Eisentraut "A"; two mid-1960s Cinelli Speciale Corsas; and others in various stages of non-rideability.
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1035 Post(s)
Liked 2,557 Times
in
1,069 Posts
I'd think pretty hard and then choose the '57 because because of the 1950s version of "racing geometry," so it has longer chain stays, longer wheelbase and slightly slacker angles than the shorter, more upright geometry of the 1970s. It would probably be a flatland-only bike; there is no way a Campy Gran Sport derailleurs and a Magistroni crank will give me the kind of gearing I need to get my carcass up the hills around here, but it would cool as hell for shortish rides to a coffee shop. If ithe Universal Extra brakes are the center-pulls that are similar t the later 61s, they would be okay. If they were the sidepulls (and therefore Univerrsal 51sm which will stop you in a week and a half), I would find a way to make Mafacs fit on it instead, which might be a challenge thanks to that weird Italian fixation of the period with short-reach front brakes and long-reach rear brakes.
I'll be interested to see why iab is asking.
I'll be interested to see why iab is asking.
__________________
"I'm in shape -- round is a shape." Andy Rooney
"I'm in shape -- round is a shape." Andy Rooney
Likes For bikingshearer:
#28
Crawlin' up, flyin' down
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Democratic Peoples' Republic of Berkeley
Posts: 5,680
Bikes: 1967 Paramount; 1982-ish Ron Cooper; 1978 Eisentraut "A"; two mid-1960s Cinelli Speciale Corsas; and others in various stages of non-rideability.
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1035 Post(s)
Liked 2,557 Times
in
1,069 Posts
'77. Easy choice. I'm looking for a classic European race bike to hang some brakes on. Brakes that could be from that very year. (Yes, Italian bike lovers would cringe that they are far lesser French brakes but I think those French cheapos won the Tour on a Peugeot that year.)
Besides, 1977 was the heyday of my racing. And I trained with a woman who rode an Italian Masi.(Just wikipedia'd '77. Van Impe, Merckx and Zoetemelk all had a bad luck late and Bernard Thevenet won riding I presume those brakes.)
Besides, 1977 was the heyday of my racing. And I trained with a woman who rode an Italian Masi.(Just wikipedia'd '77. Van Impe, Merckx and Zoetemelk all had a bad luck late and Bernard Thevenet won riding I presume those brakes.)
Here's a set of 2000s.
And here's a set of Competitions. (Ignore the arrow; that was for a several year old question that has long since been answered.)
__________________
"I'm in shape -- round is a shape." Andy Rooney
"I'm in shape -- round is a shape." Andy Rooney
Likes For bikingshearer:
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Beaverton, OR
Posts: 1,440
Bikes: You had me at rusty and Italian!!
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 567 Post(s)
Liked 1,058 Times
in
549 Posts
‘57 all day. A ‘77 would ride like a nice bike but the ‘57 would be a unique experience unlike what you would get in a more modern bike.
I’m basically in-line with obrentharris
I’m basically in-line with obrentharris
Likes For RustyJames:
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 13,113
Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci/Ti x3, Gordon, Fuso/Moulton x2, Bornstein, Paisley,1958-74 Paramounts x3, 3rensho, 74 Moto TC, 73-78 Raleigh Pro's x5, Marinoni x2, 1960 Cinelli SC, 1980 Bianchi SC, PX-10 X 2
Mentioned: 269 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4527 Post(s)
Liked 6,421 Times
in
3,697 Posts
I just checked the Kennedy Bros. 1977 TdF book (great photos, impenetrable writing, like most of the Kennedy Bros offerings of the era). Thevenet's bike had MAFAC 2000 brakes, basically Competitions with wheel guides and a smoother gold-anodized finish.
Here's a set of 2000s.
And here's a set of Competitions. (Ignore the arrow; that was for a several year old question that has long since been answered.)
Here's a set of 2000s.
And here's a set of Competitions. (Ignore the arrow; that was for a several year old question that has long since been answered.)
These in silver were my first brake upgrade purchase, very nice and fantastic performance.
#31
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Arnhem NL
Posts: 230
Bikes: Might as well, now that I am here...
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times
in
66 Posts
'57 because older hence more special.
I mean, if you are going to spend that much, make it something really unique. I doubt that there are a lot of good bikes left from that era.
1977 is still doable.
Provided that you know what you are getting into I guess (I think you do).
Maintenance might be more difficult for the older bike? I dont know. Something to consider perhaps.
So 1957! And we need pictures somewhere along in this thread.
I mean, if you are going to spend that much, make it something really unique. I doubt that there are a lot of good bikes left from that era.
1977 is still doable.
Provided that you know what you are getting into I guess (I think you do).
Maintenance might be more difficult for the older bike? I dont know. Something to consider perhaps.
So 1957! And we need pictures somewhere along in this thread.
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,547
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18403 Post(s)
Liked 4,528 Times
in
3,363 Posts
For me it is a tossup. The answer would depend on one's goals.
I'd likely choose the '77 as a bike that I could just hop on and ride.
Yet, there is also some attraction to the older more rare vintage frames.
I'd likely choose the '77 as a bike that I could just hop on and ride.
Yet, there is also some attraction to the older more rare vintage frames.
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Posts: 5,860
Bikes: 1989 Cinelli Supercorsa
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3560 Post(s)
Liked 2,977 Times
in
1,801 Posts
'77 for me. Better geometry and probably better tubing.
#35
Señor Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hardy, VA
Posts: 17,945
Bikes: Mostly English - predominantly Raleighs
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1499 Post(s)
Liked 1,099 Times
in
644 Posts
1957.
1. Much rarer
2. Magistroni cranks are art
3. I already have 16 examples of 1970s bicycles. I have one that I think is from 1950s.
4. I prefer riding a slightly more relaxed geometry
1. Much rarer
2. Magistroni cranks are art
3. I already have 16 examples of 1970s bicycles. I have one that I think is from 1950s.
4. I prefer riding a slightly more relaxed geometry
__________________
In search of what to search for.
In search of what to search for.
Likes For USAZorro:
#36
Bike Butcher of Portland
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 11,654
Bikes: It's complicated.
Mentioned: 1300 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4690 Post(s)
Liked 5,837 Times
in
2,297 Posts
57.
Geometry is more suited for a 650b conversion.
Geometry is more suited for a 650b conversion.
__________________
If someone tells you that you have enough bicycles and you don't need any more, stop talking to them. You don't need that kind of negativity in your life.
If someone tells you that you have enough bicycles and you don't need any more, stop talking to them. You don't need that kind of negativity in your life.
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,470
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 881 Post(s)
Liked 2,307 Times
in
1,291 Posts
I would be humble enough to have either, but if I COULD choose, it would be the 1957 for historical value....and coolness. I have a few bikes from the seventies that are racy enough for that sort of riding. The '57 would give a different riding experience, even though I prefer a tighter geometry. Something about riding around on a bike with that kind of history knowing that this was as good as it got in 1957. When I had my 1957 Porsche , any decent Honda car could leave me in the dust , but the cool factor was off the charts!
#38
señor miembro
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 6,652
Bikes: '70s - '80s Campagnolo
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3906 Post(s)
Liked 6,517 Times
in
3,229 Posts
Based on two replies to my posts in the "Vintage vs Modern Video" thread posted right before this one, I'm guessing he expected a far more lopsided vote:
Likes For SurferRosa:
#39
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NW Burbs, Chicago
Posts: 12,065
Mentioned: 201 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3017 Post(s)
Liked 3,814 Times
in
1,412 Posts
Since SurferRosa was entirely a tool, I bet you stood in line telling everyone Darth Vader is Luke's father, I'll come clean.
C&V frequently gets a, let's bash modern stuff, thread. No need for clicky-e-gears, batteries suck, real men take their hands off the bars, steel is real, and so on. My hypnosis is people are comfortable with the tech they know. So while 1977 tech is fully known by C&V because that was their youth, hell yes, they would ride that bike. Go back 20 years, that stuff isn't well known and less desirable. Poll results confirm and while the written replies skew 1957, it seems those would have the 57 as a wall hanger than a ridden bike like the 77. So for me, it is no surprise why most regular people don't drink the C&V Kool-Aid, and neither do the people of C&V.
So new question, why is the 57 a wall hanger and the 77 a rider?
C&V frequently gets a, let's bash modern stuff, thread. No need for clicky-e-gears, batteries suck, real men take their hands off the bars, steel is real, and so on. My hypnosis is people are comfortable with the tech they know. So while 1977 tech is fully known by C&V because that was their youth, hell yes, they would ride that bike. Go back 20 years, that stuff isn't well known and less desirable. Poll results confirm and while the written replies skew 1957, it seems those would have the 57 as a wall hanger than a ridden bike like the 77. So for me, it is no surprise why most regular people don't drink the C&V Kool-Aid, and neither do the people of C&V.
So new question, why is the 57 a wall hanger and the 77 a rider?
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 13,113
Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci/Ti x3, Gordon, Fuso/Moulton x2, Bornstein, Paisley,1958-74 Paramounts x3, 3rensho, 74 Moto TC, 73-78 Raleigh Pro's x5, Marinoni x2, 1960 Cinelli SC, 1980 Bianchi SC, PX-10 X 2
Mentioned: 269 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4527 Post(s)
Liked 6,421 Times
in
3,697 Posts
Since SurferRosa was entirely a tool, I bet you stood in line telling everyone Darth Vader is Luke's father, I'll come clean.
C&V frequently gets a, let's bash modern stuff, thread. No need for clicky-e-gears, batteries suck, real men take their hands off the bars, steel is real, and so on. My hypnosis is people are comfortable with the tech they know. So while 1977 tech is fully known by C&V because that was their youth, hell yes, they would ride that bike. Go back 20 years, that stuff isn't well known and less desirable. Poll results confirm and while the written replies skew 1957, it seems those would have the 57 as a wall hanger than a ridden bike like the 77. So for me, it is no surprise why most regular people don't drink the C&V Kool-Aid, and neither do the people of C&V.
So new question, why is the 57 a wall hanger and the 77 a rider?
C&V frequently gets a, let's bash modern stuff, thread. No need for clicky-e-gears, batteries suck, real men take their hands off the bars, steel is real, and so on. My hypnosis is people are comfortable with the tech they know. So while 1977 tech is fully known by C&V because that was their youth, hell yes, they would ride that bike. Go back 20 years, that stuff isn't well known and less desirable. Poll results confirm and while the written replies skew 1957, it seems those would have the 57 as a wall hanger than a ridden bike like the 77. So for me, it is no surprise why most regular people don't drink the C&V Kool-Aid, and neither do the people of C&V.
So new question, why is the 57 a wall hanger and the 77 a rider?
Very few here are even remotely adept, let alone good enough at this to have a 57 that could be a regular rider as you.
I'm too lazy and fussy to wrangle such a thing when i can hardly keep myself motivated to ride my daily driver that is set up and ready to go all the time.
I do lament my 58 Paramount sitting all the time just to look at and have many others as well.
the one thing they still do is keep my juices flowing so that I try to keep up and track mentally.
I have a early 60's SC frame that I have entertained building up semi modern for a rider but like the Paramount it is a bit small so....
Too lazy, too many excuses and not enough easy motivation.
Still pick the 57 all day long and yes would tell myself I would try to ride it but....
Always glad you're here and that you posed this to us.
Last edited by merziac; 03-24-23 at 03:32 PM.
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 658
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked 475 Times
in
201 Posts
I think this may be the reason for many. It's familiar, it's "iconic", the components "look" right. Most of what I collect and ride are 80s race bikes, some Dura-Ace 7400, some Campagnolo. To step back to the 70s was a leap for me, but still, everything is super familiar. To step back a generation before that means learning a bunch of new stuff and maybe buying some new tools.
#42
señor miembro
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 6,652
Bikes: '70s - '80s Campagnolo
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3906 Post(s)
Liked 6,517 Times
in
3,229 Posts
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 13,113
Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci/Ti x3, Gordon, Fuso/Moulton x2, Bornstein, Paisley,1958-74 Paramounts x3, 3rensho, 74 Moto TC, 73-78 Raleigh Pro's x5, Marinoni x2, 1960 Cinelli SC, 1980 Bianchi SC, PX-10 X 2
Mentioned: 269 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4527 Post(s)
Liked 6,421 Times
in
3,697 Posts
I think this may be the reason for many. It's familiar, it's "iconic", the components "look" right. Most of what I collect and ride are 80s race bikes, some Dura-Ace 7400, some Campagnolo. To step back to the 70s was a leap for me, but still, everything is super familiar. To step back a generation before that means learning a bunch of new stuff and maybe buying some new tools.
The generation before the Campy cookie cutter times is the one that teaches us where much of this comes from, both Cinelli and Campy saw and realized a market ripe for a standardization storm and capitalized on it with a vengeance that paid off in spades.
The times before were fraught with many compatibility challenges that took real men to adapt and overcome if they wanted to go the distance and win.
Mechanics and riders were wizards and performed miracles daily at every race, we have it so easy now, they could have done today with their eyes closed, bottle of wine in one hand and a cigarette in the other and regularly did so in their day.
#44
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NW Burbs, Chicago
Posts: 12,065
Mentioned: 201 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3017 Post(s)
Liked 3,814 Times
in
1,412 Posts
This is what confuses me. I'm no more adept at anything than others. Hubs are hubs. Ball bearings are ball bears. ETC, etc. The biggest difference between the 57 and 77 are the cottered cranks. Which even in 77 were common on low-end bikes. There is no additional upkeep of a 57 over the 77, physically. There is definitely a perception it's different, and perception is reality.
#45
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NW Burbs, Chicago
Posts: 12,065
Mentioned: 201 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3017 Post(s)
Liked 3,814 Times
in
1,412 Posts
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Visalia, CA
Posts: 2,249
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked 1,844 Times
in
609 Posts
To be completely honest I think that the general idea that folks would consider the '57 less serviceable for regular riding is totally aligned with the outlook of the C&V community in general... I'm only 34 years old, and when I attended Eroica I was on a bicycle from 1954. I noticed that a number of other bicycles from the 1950s or earlier were also being ridden by young people (mostly men) who were clearly enamored by the technology for the sake of what it was in times of yore.
A majority of riders were not riding frames or components any older than they were - many of them would have been familiar with the technology from their youth. This is not the same paradigm I'm living in as a young C&V rider. Everything is old, everything requires more maintenance and cleaning and everything is heavier than what I'm used to thinking of as "modern." Jumping back from 1977 to 1957 is hardly a leap for me when both dates precede my birth by more than a decade.
-Gregory
A majority of riders were not riding frames or components any older than they were - many of them would have been familiar with the technology from their youth. This is not the same paradigm I'm living in as a young C&V rider. Everything is old, everything requires more maintenance and cleaning and everything is heavier than what I'm used to thinking of as "modern." Jumping back from 1977 to 1957 is hardly a leap for me when both dates precede my birth by more than a decade.
-Gregory
Likes For Kilroy1988:
#47
Full Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Upper third of the central USA
Posts: 493
Bikes: N+1
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked 659 Times
in
320 Posts
I only saw this today -- been out of town for a bit. I was going to answer the '57, as I've got a basement full of nice 70's and '80s bikes and they're of the era I grew up in, and it would be really neat to have at least one bike from the 50s or before that fit well and that i could ride.
35+ years ago I had a 1930s Schwinn road frame with some bits -- and de-accessioned it prior to a life-changing move across the country. Although I do not at all regret the move, I do regret getting rid of that bike -- never did build it up, but I imagine it would have been be fun to ride...
Someday something like it or your hypothetical '57 Cinelli might surface in my jumbo (65c+ cm) size... if it does I'll be ready!
35+ years ago I had a 1930s Schwinn road frame with some bits -- and de-accessioned it prior to a life-changing move across the country. Although I do not at all regret the move, I do regret getting rid of that bike -- never did build it up, but I imagine it would have been be fun to ride...
Someday something like it or your hypothetical '57 Cinelli might surface in my jumbo (65c+ cm) size... if it does I'll be ready!
Likes For JulesCW:
#48
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked 181 Times
in
74 Posts
This is what confuses me. I'm no more adept at anything than others. Hubs are hubs. Ball bearings are ball bears. ETC, etc. The biggest difference between the 57 and 77 are the cottered cranks. Which even in 77 were common on low-end bikes. There is no additional upkeep of a 57 over the 77, physically. There is definitely a perception it's different, and perception is reality.
Likes For FrejusFlyer:
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 13,113
Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci/Ti x3, Gordon, Fuso/Moulton x2, Bornstein, Paisley,1958-74 Paramounts x3, 3rensho, 74 Moto TC, 73-78 Raleigh Pro's x5, Marinoni x2, 1960 Cinelli SC, 1980 Bianchi SC, PX-10 X 2
Mentioned: 269 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4527 Post(s)
Liked 6,421 Times
in
3,697 Posts
This is what confuses me. I'm no more adept at anything than others. Hubs are hubs. Ball bearings are ball bears. ETC, etc. The biggest difference between the 57 and 77 are the cottered cranks. Which even in 77 were common on low-end bikes. There is no additional upkeep of a 57 over the 77, physically. There is definitely a perception it's different, and perception is reality.
Many here won't go near the damn things from what I see.
I love it but freely admit I don't go there lightly, I have to gather a lot of chi, pay close attention and take my time to keep from screwing some of it up.
Your expertise and confidence on this seems to far outstrip most of us by far which I fully applaud and appreciate.
I am not as adept but do value the difference and welcome the challenges as I am stubborn.
And I consider myself a pretty good wrench of many things having been a lifelong and professional auto mech/tech as well as having spent about 25 years at the dragstrip winning, losing and making it to the next round when things went wrong.
Again, really appreciate that you're here and reality check us when you do.
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 13,113
Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci/Ti x3, Gordon, Fuso/Moulton x2, Bornstein, Paisley,1958-74 Paramounts x3, 3rensho, 74 Moto TC, 73-78 Raleigh Pro's x5, Marinoni x2, 1960 Cinelli SC, 1980 Bianchi SC, PX-10 X 2
Mentioned: 269 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4527 Post(s)
Liked 6,421 Times
in
3,697 Posts
To be completely honest I think that the general idea that folks would consider the '57 less serviceable for regular riding is totally aligned with the outlook of the C&V community in general... I'm only 34 years old, and when I attended Eroica I was on a bicycle from 1954. I noticed that a number of other bicycles from the 1950s or earlier were also being ridden by young people (mostly men) who were clearly enamored by the technology for the sake of what it was in times of yore.
A majority of riders were not riding frames or components any older than they were - many of them would have been familiar with the technology from their youth. This is not the same paradigm I'm living in as a young C&V rider. Everything is old, everything requires more maintenance and cleaning and everything is heavier than what I'm used to thinking of as "modern." Jumping back from 1977 to 1957 is hardly a leap for me when both dates precede my birth by more than a decade.
-Gregory
A majority of riders were not riding frames or components any older than they were - many of them would have been familiar with the technology from their youth. This is not the same paradigm I'm living in as a young C&V rider. Everything is old, everything requires more maintenance and cleaning and everything is heavier than what I'm used to thinking of as "modern." Jumping back from 1977 to 1957 is hardly a leap for me when both dates precede my birth by more than a decade.
-Gregory
Younger guys are what it takes to keep some of this going, old stubbornness can only take you so far with rapidly diminishing returns as both body and mind proceed to betray you down the road, resistance quickly becomes futile and can often accelerate the process in the moment and beyond.
As with iab, I applaud you anyone that stays with and goes there and does that.
I still need to get after the BB on the 40's Paramount that your rack went on but as it is fine and I was able to get some lube in it after I unclogged the port it can wait.
And it is not ridden much at all so....