3alarmer 

I bought this from the local CL yesterday, thinking as
I viewed it in a narrow hallway that it was a PDG
Paramount from the late 80's/early 90's which had been
considerably modified by someone to use as a triathalon
bike (I've taken off the Profile bar extensions, etc.)

The BB is pretty clearly stamped (I can see it now in
the daylight and with some room to maneuver) as
6000 .... W8 (or 0) ....85030.

I am far from expert in these, and if it is an 85 frame,
it seems to have been relentlessly modified in terms of
components. Here are the pictures:




Am I correct in now deciding it is a Columbus tubed, Waterford
paramount frame that was made in '85 ? Am I also correct in
assuming it was probably bought as a frame and built up with
Shimano 600 components to be more affordable, and that the
Campy stuff that now appears on it are probably incremental
upgrades ?

Certainly, I'm pretty sure neither of the wheels are original, and
the 8 speed Campy rear requires some coaxing to reinsert..haven't
pulled and measured it yet, but I'm guessing it's closer to a six cog
standard rear spacing.

Thanks for any suggestions, schooling, general information, or
envy. The price was pretty good, about right for a PDG Paramount
in better original condition than this one.

Scooper

It looks like an mid-eighties Waterford built Paramount to me. If it were a PDG Series Paramount, it would have OS tubes and a unicrown fork. The chromed drive side chainstay was pre-1987 (Waterford quit doing that with the '87 model year). If it's an '85, it would have 126mm rear OLD spacing.

What's the serial number? Looks to be ~62cm.

EDIT - I see you listed the s/n... 60cm c-t, B85030 would be the 30th Paramount frame scheduled for production in February (B) 1985.

rhenning

I don't believe that is a Paramount. PDG was the design studio name that Schwinn had. Almost all the upper end road bikes in the mid to late 1980s used Columbus tubing. I for example have a Schwinn 564 aluminum bike that says PDG on it but it never was a Paramount nor will it ever be one. The lugs on that bike are not fancy enough to be a real Paramount. Roger

Orrery

Definitely not a Series PDG, seems like a Columbus-framed Paramount to me.

Looks like a nice pickup!

shnibop 

based on what? no fancy lugs = not a Paramount?

i would be seriously shocked if that weren't a Schwinn Paramount! the fork crown looks more like an '87/'88 (although the back side looks a little different and has a lot more slope) but the serial number indicates an '85. perhaps the fork is a replacement.

1985 catalog

3alarmer 

Thanks, Stan, that's how I scope it, too.

Oh frabjous day!

3alarmer 

Thanks also for this, those catalog photos are
just what I was trying to find.

ColonelJLloyd 

Scooper has it right. The fork looks just the like the Columbus fork on my 1990 Paramount OS.

tugrul

I don't remember seeing that fork on a mid-decade Paramount before.

I think the one on my 1984 was the same through 1986ish. (excuse the pre-cleaning photo)

miamijim

An easy way to tell if the fork's original to pull it out and look for red/brown primer on the steerer tube. If it's red/brown it's original Paramount. Lake of the primer doesnt mean the fork isnt original.

3alarmer 

Again thank you. I did not know this.

Here are two pictures of a 1984 Paramount I got from Joe
Englert.............quite a difference in appearance, I think.

Scooper

The fork crown on my '87 looks like the fork crown on the Feb '85 bike pictured in 3alarmer's original post. I'm thinking the crown may have been changed between the time tha catalog photo was taken and February '85 production.

jjhabbs 

Looks like a waterford to me. I was a schwinn dealer that year.

tugrul

That crown made it to the 1986 catalog anyway.



3alarmer, does your crown match these later ones. It seems more curvy around the steerer from the angles we have.

3alarmer 

I'll post a couple of better fork and crown shots tomorrow
when there is enough light to shoot some photos outside.

Maybe it's bent.

3alarmer 

Here is the fork in question against a darker background for contrast:

............................

If it is a replacement, someone did a very good job
of matching what must be a difficult paint to match up.

On close inspection, the fork paint and the frame paint
are identical to my eye..........but very much more curve
than in the catalog photos.

tugrul

I think your Paramount just has a one off crown, so no point in matching it to the "old" and "new" crowns.

3alarmer 

Yeah, I think so too. God help me if Kurt finds out.

Scooper

To me it looks identical to the one on my '87.

tugrul

The blade sockets are similar, but the "bridge" is different. The 1987 crown looks to maintain constant width, whereas this 1985 crown is more sculpted, curving inward then wrapping around the steerer. It also appears to have more slope.

ColonelJLloyd 

I agree that there are subtle differences in Scooper's 1987 crown and 3alarmer's 1985 crown. But, the '85 crown looks just like the crown on my 1990 Paramount. Maybe Waterford was using a couple different fork crowns simultaneously during those years.

3alarmer 

What about your blades ? Anywhere near as much curve to them ?

ColonelJLloyd 

You be the judge.

3alarmer 

Waterford was all over the place with forks, I guess.

Maybe there really is no "standard" for these given
all the drama that was going on at the time with Schwinn ?

Is that repainted or did you just get lucky ? The paint on mine
is some kinda really nice epoxy, and it's not nearly bad enough
to repaint, but maybe sometime in the future ? The seat stays
look like they got banged pretty regularly on mine.

ColonelJLloyd 

It had been repainted some with some terrible 80s fade that was somehow even worse than the putrid neon with which it left Waterford. I had it powdercoated.