capricho

When I was a kid we all lusted for the Stingray bikes. My dad couldn't afford even that so my brothers and I ended up with department store knock offs like Royce Union or Huffy or Senator or whatever. I remember my purple Royce Union getting stolen in 1971 and I felt that it must be a desirable bike after all. In high school everyone was riding 10 speed Centurions, Univegas, and maybe an occasional Raleigh or a Schwinn. I never did own a Schwinn until two weeks ago when, during a moment of weakness, I won an eBay auction for a vintage red Typhoon. I'm now obsessed with restoring this very ordinary but iconic bike.

DavidW56

+1 on reading the book "No Hands -- The Rise and Fall of the Schwinn Bicycle Company". The reasons for the downfall of Schwinn are many and complex. There is an essay on Sheldon Brown's site that neatly summarizes, "Schwinn continued to make very good 1960's bicycles into the 1980's." The Japanese Schwinns were actually very good.

But the Schwinn nameplate you see at Wal-Mart, et. al., is not the Schwinn family company. That went bankrupt in 1993, as stated above, and the Schwinn name was purchased at the bankruptcy proceedings. Those bikes are made in China. There is no connection to the former Schwinn of Chicago at all.

As for me, Schwinn was the best bike in town when I was a kid, but beyond my parents' budget. My brother and I rode old hand-me-downs like Huffy and Western Flyer, and then our new bikes were Royce Union and Sears Free Spirit. That's partly why I collect Schwinns now; that, and they are not difficult to find, and people like to buy them. And they are just about indestructable.

sciencemonster

My dad got us Varsities in 75-76. I didn't know squat about bikes, but I knew it weighed a ton. It looked like a race bike, but it wasn't one of those exotic foreign bikes that were light as a feather.

NormanF

Electro-forged Schwinns were well made and bomb-proof. For a little more, you could get a filet-brazed Super Sport made of straight gauge cro-moly.

SirMike1983 

For me Schwinn represents both good and bad. I come from a different perspective than most people here-- I focus on the old heavy weights, including Schwinn products. The balloon tire Schwinns from the 1930s-1950s were quality machines. They represented a sort of "Cadillac" essence: cushy American luxury that turned heads. The wealthy kids rode new Schwinns. Those that could afford them would ride second hand used ones (my grandpa got his in 1939 or so that way, and it was already 3 years old when he got it). Many today also forget that adults often-relied on these machines as transportation if they couldn't afford a car (as many couldn't in the 1930s). If there was any stigma attached, it was that Schwinns weren't as affordable as they could be. But interestingly they didn't fully cash in: these bicycles are rarely Schwinn-branded. You'll see Admiral, Henderson, Excelsior and a ton of other oddball names. They're all Schwinns from the same factory, but often they don't tell you in as many words.

After WWII they continued that "top of the line" position, but now were quite proud to display their own logo, especially in the heavyweights. But part of the problem was the automobile. In the 1920s and 1930s adults actually rode bicycles, because these people could not afford cars. This included the heavy weights. The tankless "roadster" double parallel curve bar frames are examples of bicycles made to be more "mature" and affordable than the loaded-down deluxe ones the kids rode. But by the 1950s most people could afford some kind of car or another, and the depression was well over. The bicycle got relegated to a kids' toy and Schwinn never really broke free of that. They did make some excellent lightweights, but the market just wasn't there in the US, and Schwinn remained a domestic brand really. The matter, as I see it, was that the european brands were able to maintain their reputation as builders of quality adult performance bicycles (no not Viagra performance, but road performance), because their markets supported it. In America in the 1950s, the bicycle was really more the analog to a bb gun.

Schwinn was able to remake itself on some level with some decent lightweights in the 70s and 80s, but they still had that "old school" heavy 1950s bike essence about them. I think there might well have been a stigma of being heavy and backwards there. I see the road bike boom as a sort of countercultural movement against the more traditional 1950s. As part of that counter movement, I tend to think Schwinn was associated with traditional American bicycles-- the 1930s-50s. By contrast, the imports were new and exotic and may have had an element of cachet-rebellion in them against the old guard in the US.

In modern times they've really dropped the ball. They do make some nice bicycles, but the ultimate bastardization comes when they do this "Schwinn approved" thing and will allow cheap license-built Chinese bicycles from Wal-Mart to hit the street as "Schwinn". Maybe the Caillac analogy continues to apply-- some of you probably remember that phase in the early 80s when Cadillac tried to compete with the imports by making "small economy Cadillacs". They were basically re-badged low-end Chevys. Well they took a hit, like Schwinn will with this Wal-Mart business.

My nephews are now at the age when I discovered vintage bicycles, specifically prewar Schwinn (in the form of a 1936 Henderson roadster). But they know Schwinn as the "bikes at Wal-Mart". In contrast, my grandpa, dad and I all think of Schwinn as a highly respectable maker of old bicycles. So, while I think Schwinn did have a somewhat backwards stigma a couple of decades ago, I think they have a far worse problem now. They're going the route Dayton/Huffman went in becoming the much-loathed "Huffy". If Schwinn had a problem in the 1970s and 80s, they have a catastrophe on the way now. (sorry for the long post, but it just seems a long-running topic)

thook

If I may.........

Growing up (since 1972 to present) my only exposure to Schwinn cycles was the inexpensive, heavy clunkers with cheap components. Until, one day with my first marriage, my wife wanted a chro-mo Schwinn mtn bike. I thought....ungh, why? But, when I looked close it was decked out with some really good components. Shimano Deore, Ritchey tires, Rock rims, I forget what else. But, it really wasn't much heavier than my GT Alum. Backwoods costing more with lesser quality components. The components may have to do more with the LBS build, but still.....I was impressed. Changed my mind. They did make some good bikes. That was in '92.....from the Memphis
Schwinn dealer.........now extinct, btw.

Melliman

I'm 56 - my recollection is that Schwinn was perceived as the Cadillac of bikes in my working class neighborhood - the better off kids got them, and the rest of us got brands like JC Higgins. The introduction of the Stingray further solidified their image as the brand to buy.

Then in the mid to late 60's, it was no longer "cool" to ride a bike - we walked everywhere - this period ended abruptly when bikes suddenly became cool in the early 70's, and everyone had to have a 10 speed (at least us high schoolers). My brother and I lusted for a Varsity - $100 - we finally scored a yellow one after much searching in the western suburbs of Chicago. As I recall it, there were big out-of-stock problems at the dealerships, and our dealer, at least, adopted an smug attitude caused by the sudden popularity of Schwinn bikes. Ultimately, we gravitated to Le Tours, until later in the decade we discoverd a whole other world of bikes made in Europe.

I just purchased my third Schwinn - an 87 Paramount - and I couldn't be happier with my purchase - this bike rivals the Colnago and Ciocc bikes I had in the 80's. Perhaps influenced by the attention that Paramounts receive here, I don't feel that I'm riding a brand that's perceived to be inferior, but that's probably not the case. I wouldn't consider a new Schwinn for my children - there are other brands that I trust more.

David Newton

My recollections from the 1960's, if they haven't been too romanticized by age, is that in my neighborhood, the Schwinn was seen as top-of-the-line, but the boys would rather have a Western Flyer or JC Higgins, because they were lighter, and less jarring to ride than a schwinn. The hardware store bikes had a little "slop" in the frames that gave some shock absorbency.

We didn't have a choice so much, your dad bought your bike with no input from you, it came at christmas or a birthday, as a surprise.

We stripped our bikes back then, no self-respecting kid in my neighborhood had fenders, chainguard, kickstand, tank, basket, or reflectors. I remember my mom making me reinstall my rear fender so my younger brother could ride back there with me to the pool.

Oregon Southpaw

Love this thread. I'm completely immersed in the Schwinn story now; from a business perspective, from a family perspective, from a branding perspective. And trying to be unsentimental about it - which isn't easy when you learn alot about Ignaz and Frank W. and the way things went downhill.

Everyone should read "No Hands", as was mentioned earlier. It is strange that book is out of print.

"Other than a few specific Paramounts or afilado's sprint bike, I'm simply not into them."

Afilado's sprint bike? Is that the Circuit?
If so, that thing is sitting here waiting for me.

NormanF

I think the consensus here is that Schwinn's fall from grace had to do with a lack of innovation and adapting to market realities. The company failed to foresee the mountain bike boom and did not offer any serious lightweight bikes to compete with ones arriving from Japan and Taiwan. And the rest was history. Today's Schwinn has no connection to the Chicago original.

dit

In Indiana the bike to own in the 50's was a Schwinn if you could talk your parents into one because they were expensive. I was not lucky enough to own one. My neighbor had one and the big leather seat must must have weighed 10#. The whole bike was big and heavy and not near as fast as my middle weight Monarch. There were a few 'english' 3 speeds around but they were considered flimsey and sissy bikes. In the early 60's the Schwinn 10 speeds were the only 'racing' bike to be had and only the lucky few got one. By the late 60's Huffy was selling some 'racing' bikes and I finally bought one as a young adult and rode the crap out of it. By 70' I was looking to upgrade and I did not even conside a Schwinn other than the Paramount. I ended up with an Italian columbus tubed bike with all campy stuff and I rode the crap out of it. sew-ups and all. In the mid 70's I had a local frame builder build me a frame, which I am still riding. As far as my preception of Schwinn adult bikes, they were on the down swing in the late 60's. I never got to own a Stingray. I was a little old for a kids bike when they came out but I still would like to own one of the crates to this day.

Bheleu

Back in the 70's Schwinn could still afford to be picky on who made their bikes. The manufacturer of the Volare is reported to be Panasonic. If you've read any history on them you might understand why Schwinn choose Mr. Konosuke Matsu****a to make their better than Paramount bicycle. The phrase they used as their bicycle slogan... "Panasonic - just slightly ahead of our time"

ricohman

Schwinn, in Canada, usually meant dept store junk. Still that way to this day. I don't think Schwinn even sold bikes in Canada in the 70's or early 80's.

Chombi

Could there be similarities between the Schwinn Bicycles story and the Harley Davidson Motorcycles story?? I think there might be, because i'm reading some familiar thing in these posts. counds to be an almost typical pattern with many big american companies that continually struggles with an ever evolving economy and market that gies beyond the US. the struggles eventually not only negativley affect these companies overseas, but also back here eventually.

Chombi
84 Peugeot PSV

Kommisar89

That may all be true but it's irrelevant - in the 70's, especially the early to mid 70's, we didn't know anything about all that. Japanese stuff was just Japanese stuff. We "knew" that good bikes came from Europe and if Schwinn was sourcing bikes from Japan then something seemed fishy. It would be like Harley having Honda build motorcycles for them and sticking Harley badges on them. Like I said, hindsight is 20/20. Who knew?

Bheleu

Aye and if the yen/us $ ratio had not of dropped, we'd still be getting quality bikes from there. There's still one importer though (only real supplier I know of for sewups, etc). I was half surprised to see they were the one that imports them in, Panasonic still making beautiful frames by hand today in many sizes and colors.

https://www.yellowjersey.org/panak.html

Kommisar89

There's probably a lot in common there but a lot of differences. Schwinn and Harley-Davidson were famous for the same class of machine: big heavy American cruisers. But in Schwinn's case the market for big heavy cruiser bicycles disappeared and they didn't innovate while in Harley's case the market for big heavy cruiser motorcycles expanded both in the US and globally. I believe most motorcycles sold in the US today are cruisers. Cruisers are all about cool and Harley is the coolest of the cool. ...And still in business.

Plus Harley has an advantage over Schwinn - cruiser bikes are quintessentially American. There are enough people like me who attach significance to things like that to keep Harley afloat even in the difficult times. What I mean by that is I believe a big cruiser motorcycle is an American animal as much as a Samari sword is Japanese. If I were buying Samari sword it would have to be a Japanese sword. I don't care if an American company can make a sword just as good or even better. Or an Italian company or even a Taiwanese company. It doesn't matter because by definition a Samari sword has to be made in Japan and big cruiser motorcycles have to be made in America (by an American company, not the local Honda manufacturing plant in Smallville). And for the record, all three street motorcycles I've owned were Suzuki sport bikes not cruisers.

Picchio Special

Some of the makers in Japan whose products we no longer commonly see here make lovely, inexpensive bikes in the randonneur and touring mold.

i-timy

Schwinns were for the richies, but back then only one or two families in town owned a Cadillac, had cable, used a Lawnboy mower.
It appears about 15 years ago money started falling outta the sky and now 10 yr olds have cell phones and wear $50.00 shirts. crazy times.

Chombi

Lawnboy mowrers?? More like John Deere or Toro riding mowers and snow blowers for the small town doctor's family. ;^))

Chombi
84 Peugeot PSV,

Picchio Special

Wouldn't we actually be talking lawn service, here?

LesterOfPuppets

Sometimes I miss ye olde lawnboy 2-stroke. I always thought of them as a notch above Toro, but I was young back then, so what did I know?

Chombi

Not in the small towns I lived in, I guess!
The lawyers and doctors were so rich, that they even paid the neighbor kids to run their equipment for them. At least they could boast to everyone that they bought the biggest Toro and/or John Deere that was displayed at the town hardware store that the rest of the townfolk were ogling at! ;^)......and those jimminy jeepers super neat Schwinn 10 speeds for the kids too!

Chombi
84 Peugeot PSV

i-timy

To us, a self propelled mower was pure luxury.

mrmw

The fact remains that for the under 30 flip bike customers I mostly see, Schwinn late '70's to late '80's entry and mid-level road bikes sell quicker and command a premium over all other brands, with the exception of Trek which fetches maybe a little more.

The Schwinn brand equity remains unfathomably deep.

And every time I take my '82 silver Schwinn Super Sport S/P out on a rail trail it draws admiring complements. It's semi-retired now from everyday riding, and maybe slipping towards dementia, but I still love it.