trainman999

Anyone id the year or model of this Olmo?

T-Mar

The Portacatena dropout in conjunction with cable routing over the BB shell and other features, suggests very early 1980s. This is too late for the Columbus decal style but too early for fade paint .Consequently, it is almost certainly a repaint. The components suggest an SL grade frame but the lack of chrome, unless it has been painted over, suggests it may be a tre-tubi SL or Aelle grade frame. The bottom line is you'll have verify the seat post size and whether or not it has a Columbus steerer tube, to determine the actual grade and model of the frame.

trainman999

Thanks T-Mar I'll check the seat post size and the steerer when it gets here Tuesday

merziac

Very nice!
Both good ones without a doubt.

MiloFrance

15 mins searching for images of OLMOs and nothing remotely like that paintjob comes up. I'd bet on a repaint. Would they have used a nice panto'd fork crown on Aelle Tretubi?

T-Mar

Yes, in the early 1980s they used an embossed fork crown and stay caps on all models, even the Olympic/Sprint/Super Sprint (Columbus Aelle) and Super Gentleman (Columbus Zeta).

Peter_B

Derailleur cable routing over the BB shell seems to have continued for some years with Olmos. Olmo #7939 has brazed Campagnolo bottom bracket derailleur cable guides. If Olmo serial numbers are sequential (and they may not be), and given various datings on previously numbered Olmos, I would guess that Olmo #7939 is 1986+. I'm not saying that the Olmo in original post is 1986+ but that Olmos with over-BB cable routing are not restricted to the early 1980s

See https://www.peterbrueggeman.com/cr/ca...s/olmo-ssn.htm

Mr. 66

trainman999

Finally had time to work on this bike. seat tube is 27.0 a post measuring 27.11 goes in but 27 .2 will not. Steerer is Columbus and rifled. It has been repainted and had chrome socks or maby a chrome fork. here are more pictures

T-Mar

The 27.0mm seat post suggests an SP seat tube, while the presence of a Columbus steeerer suggests the full SP tubeset. However, extant literature from the mid-1980s indicates Olmo migrated from SL to SP on frames over 60 cm. This one does not look that large, so maybe it's SL with a slightly pinched or distorted seat tube?

Regarding the model, my leading candidate would be one of the Competition C variants from the very late 1970s to early 1980s. It clearly has the Portacatena dropout and is therefore no older than a 1978 model. On the modern end, Olmo debuted a new SL model, the Firenze, for the 1985 mode year. The extant introductory literature for that model shows it having a pump peg, dual bottle bosses, a brazed-on front derailleur mount, cable routed under the bottom bracket shell and Olmo branded dropouts. Your frameset has none of these features. Consequently, I believe it frameset to be pre-1985.

The bicycle has obviously be frankenbiked to a degree but the Campagnolo components could be OEM, in which case the date codes may provide some clues. There should be a patent date on the rear derailleur's upper pivot housing and date codes on the back of the crankarms. There are also date codes on the back of Campagnolo hub locknuts but I strongly suspect the wheels are replacements based on the aero rims and non-Campagnolo skewers. The brakes, appear to be the 1978-1983 version of Record.

BTW, the inner chainring appears to have been mounted backwards, unless it is an inexpensive replacement which does not have recesses for the mounting nuts.

trainman999

frame is a 60cm weighs 2230 grams, fork weighs 770 grams does this sound right for a SP frame? Rear derailleur pat date 84, front and rear hubs lock nuts stamped 11, I am guessing thease are 1985. Crank is 3 in a circle should be 1983. rear break record ,front super record. inner chain ring a Sugino. You are right it has been frankenbiked
T -Mar does your knowledge extend back to 1900 parts and frames? Have a late 1800 early 1900 bike trying to find out about.

plonz 

T-Mar

If these components were OEM, I wouldn't expect a 2 year variation in date codes. The rear derailleur and crankarms might be OEM but I don't have a high level of confidence. .


Regarding weight, I consider it the least reliable parameter for determining a tubeset. Selection of fittings can cause more variation in weight than stepping up or down a tubeset. Unless I have a valid comparison using another model of known tubing from the same manufacturer and using the same fittings, I tend to dismiss the weight as an identifier.


While I'm most familiar with 1970s-1980s bicycles, I do have some familiarity with TOC bicycles and would be interested in seeing the pictures. Private message me with a link to some pictures.