RiddleOfSteel

So as the title says, RiddleOfSteel has a true riddle on his hands. I just picked this up last night, going to a place about an hour north of Seattle. The frame has high end parts, but has been repainted sadly. Many things suggest mid to late 1970's, but I've been researching and have come up empty so far as to make and model, etc. I am calling upon the great BikeForum members' collective knowledge in nailing down this bike! I do have the serial number, and it is on the non-drive side of the seat tube, just above the BB lug/cluster (and below the FD clamp). Thank you kindly, in advance, for your assistance!!

Serial number: S0H5237 (the "0" could be a capital "O" instead of zero, but it looks more number than letter).

I HAVE MANY PICTURES. You're welcome.

First, some measurements:

HT angle / ST angle: ~72.7° / ~74.0°
WB: 993mm
FC: 587mm
RC: 413mm
BB drop: ~65mm (will re-measure when tires are inflated)
TT length: 54.5cm Crazy!!
Calculated Rake: 43mm
Calculated Trail: 61cm
Dropout Spacing F/R: 100mm/125mm
Seatpost Diameter: 26.4mm (UPDATE: Confirmed 26.8mm)

Unique features (to be shown also in photographs):

1) Long fluted or "spoon" shaped seat stay caps (no engraving that I can tell).
2) Shimano EF short-length horizontal rear dropouts (Dura-Ace EX, if I am researching correctly)
3) 54.5cm top tube (CTC) is crazy short, but it looks great proportionally
4) Not-plain BB lug/cluster and fork crown.
5) Dura-Ace EX-era top tube brake cable housing clamps
6) Mavic G40 rear rim laced to unknown cartridge bearing hub
7) Tange TF-R front dropouts; steerer with "0D" (zero, d) stamped in it, thus we are looking at 1970 or 1980, and I'm biasing to 1980. Also, original color looks to be black!
8) Tange Falcon headset (may or may not be original) is in great shape inside and out. Top lock nut is quite tall--much taller than many Tange headsets I've come across/owned.

The geometry caught my eye as road/race. I didn't discover the 54.5cm TT until I got up there and measured it (several times even). The frame was straight, and the later 6200-era parts suggested that they were not original. The Dura-Ace cable clamps (how do DA cable clamps just walk onto a bike without being original??) and 600 Arabesque were things I keyed in on as being either original to the bike or original to the era. The dropouts confirm my suspicions of an upper level product. As you'll see in some of the lug work, some is plain (seat tube/post cluster), most is nice/fine, and some are interestingly detailed (BB lug/cluster). Many things point to being a product of Japan (Tange and Shimano dropouts, Shimano top-of-BB shell cable guides), but still, I want to get to the bottom of this. I have $100 in it (purchase price) and I think I could touch a few things up, make it safe, and sell it for that or $25 more and get out of it pretty quickly. As it stands, though, this bike needs to be saved and brought out of anonymity--there is too much crazy and mystery to not do so!

To the photos:

As purchased:



Serial number on the left / NDS lower part of the seat tube:



Long flute or spoon seat stay cap:



Fork crown nearly identical to my '77 Super Le Tour 12.2:



BB lug / cluster detail (through the crankset):

RiddleOfSteel

My initial research covers key-to-me frame features, namely 1) short top tube 2) serial number and location 3) BB cluster/lug detail 4) seat stay cap detail 5) (now) dropouts, as they have now been ID'd by me sanding some paint off.

Throwing possibilities against a wall, from what small details I've found regarding these companies' products (using pictures): Raleigh, Shogun, Miyata, Koga Miyata (some frame details match, oddly enough), SR, Nishiki, Univega, Atala, Olmo (fluted caps), Alan, Motobecane, Gitane, Apollo.

Again, things just say "Japan" to me. I've noticed that a company like Nishiki, through the '70s, changed a lot of small details on their bikes from year to year. I don't know how restless other companies in other countries were on stuff like that (seat stay caps, fork crowns, fork bends, lugs), but it seems to me that everyone smoothed things out in the '80s.

Anyway, on to more detail photos:

Shimano cable guides and a second look at the BB cluster/lugs with incorrect cable routing:



Shimano EF / Dura-Ace EX rear dropouts:



Tange TF-R fork dropouts:



DT shifter cable clamp braze-on stop:

RiddleOfSteel

I will finish up this initial posting set with some "before" condition photos.

Creatively angled short reach brake caliper mounting bolt to achieve desired reach while still not slotting the Scot Superbrake (R) or Scott/Mathauser (F) pads the lowest they could go. Reach is really around 52-53mm:



More Shimano rear dropout:



Who makes this QR skewer? And is it just some random skewer, or does it tell us something?



Mavic G40 rim:



Wacky finned brake pads:



Front of the cockpit. Lots of Specialized:

Trakhak

That bike looks to be of high quality, so the following may not apply, but here's what comes to mind concerning the issue of the short top tube.

In the early days of their entry into the European and American bike markets, at least some Japanese bike manufacturers used parallel seat and head tube angles, the same top tube length, and the same down tube length for all frame sizes.

One set of lug angles, one bottom bracket model, one frame jig setup: all they had to do was cut seat tubes and head tubes (and steerer tubes) to the necessary length to manufacture frames in different sizes with minimal material and labor costs.

That approach didn't last long, probably because of negative feedback from dealers in the target markets.

Given the quality of the frame pictured, though, I'd be more inclined to guess that it represents a custom build rather than one of those cost-cutter frames.

Edit:

I see that the seat tube and head tube angles listed in the OP are not the same, so, never mind!

I'll leave this post anyway, in case there are people reading this thread who don't know about this episode in the history of Japanese export bike building.

exmechanic89

It seems Japanese to me, too. I got nothin' else.

verktyg 

The Japanese built most of their light weight sporting bikes for the export market.

I remember back in 1974-1976 a lot of the larger sized Japanese frames that I saw had disproportionately short top tubes.

That was a selling point we used for customers who needed 58cm and larger frames.

T-Mar

Based on the serial number, in conjunction with the frame characteristics, it is 1980 Japanese manufacture. I don't know who the manufacturer is but the serial number format has turned up on some Shogun. Undoubtedly, there would be numerous other brands made by the same builder.

Seat post size is one size smaller than I would typically expect for one of the Tange Champion sets, though a slightly smaller post may have been used due to seat tube distortion. The closest Ishiwata set would be 0245. Is there a brand on the fork's steerer column?

thumpism 

Sekine made tall frames with short top tubes. I briefly had a pink one that was noticeably shorter than my other bikes but I do not have the measurements.

Finned pads look like Mathausers.

T-Mar

^^^ The serial number format doesn't match that used by either Sekine Japan or Sekine Canada.

Colnago Mixte

Could be a relic of the "big bike" era in the 70's, when it was fashionable to ride the tallest frame you could find. The short top tube seems to indicate that the rider was intended to be someone who didn't actually *need* a 63.5 cm frame, but just wanted to sport then-popular Big Bike Look.

vtchuck

I have a later model Shogun 500 touring frame. Serial #S555773 on underside of BB. If that helps?

Tange 900 DB frame & 26.6 post. 62.5 / 55 c to c

El Chaba

Holy downhill shimmy, Batman....

tyler_fred

I think you need my 140 mm Cinelli 1A stem and bars that just happen to be for sale...

RiddleOfSteel

Big thanks, guys. Fork is a Tange creation. 0D is the stamping. I had forgot to think if it was original at all--could that be throwing things off for us? Could that have been the or a reason for the repaint? Was it common for two different companies to 'advertise' dropouts on a frame? Normally it's something like Campagnolo front and rear, or Suntour, or just simply unbranded. The 26.4mm SP diameter was weird to me. I would have thought 26.6mm at minimum given things. I'll take a look again to check for overly clamping/deformation. Tubing is standard 28.6 OD, and not metric (28.0mm).

EDIT:

I'll post pictures later (gotta get to work!), but the seat post cluster slot (for tightening) was angled in pretty good. 26.6mm is no problem, and 26.8mm seems easy, I'll just have to test it with a post. Given the ease of 26.6mm, it could very well be a 26.8mm diameter, thus putting it squarely in the realm of high end frames (Miyata, IIRC, used 26.8 on a lot of upper end models). This is great news!!

Mr. 66

I don't have much for you but in the Seattle area of that time the Sekai brand was really popular. That would be a guess.

The finned brakepad, I had some of those on a set of Grand Comp side pull calipers. To me thatbike looks like it came with center pull brakes and was updated to side pull with an adapter. Never seen that adapter looks almost unnatural,

John E

It looks Japanese to me, as well. My 1971 Nishiki Competition had an unusually short top tube. Even though the 23" (58cm) C-T frame was taller than anything I comfortably ride now (the Bianchi and both Capos are 55cm C-T, and the Peugeot is a 21" (53cm), I had to resort to a long-reach stem to let me stretch forward. In contrast, my 57cm 1980 Peugeot PKN-10 was so long in the top tube that I never did get fully comfortable with it, even with a very close-coupled stem.

This is why I tell people that the top tube length is at least as important as the seat tube length and the stepover height.

McBTC

although... they look like pretty looong crank arms.

McBTC

Maybe... Panasonic? I had a 27" back in the day.

zukahn1 

Looking at the bike nearly everything seems consistent with a mid level 1980 Shogun who were noted for making a lot of large frames with fairly short top tubes and wheelbase. Also I have seen a lot of there bikes in this color.

T-Mar

The fork is probably OEM, as it is from April 1980. That increases the probability of the frame being Tange too. Champion #1-#3 all used the same seat tube, with a top butt I.D. that was the same as Champion #5. The standard post size was 26.6mm, while 26.8mm was often used by manufacturers who reamed/honed the seat tube. Consequently, the frame could range from mid-range to high end. It's nicely manufactured but there is not a lot of finishing work, so I'm leaning towards mid-range.

It's definitely not a Miyata. Both the serial number format and location are incorrect and I've yet to come across a contract manufactured Miyata from this era.

non-fixie 

Hmmm. This frame looks like it's a relative of a couple of Miki-built frames I have. The purple one in the back is 63.5 x 55 and takes a 26.8mm seat post. I haven't measured the angles, but I've since built it up and can report that the result feels very stable going downhill.



WRT its origins, perhaps @Hummer has an idea?

repechage

Refinish it in pink, set it up for a woman with LONG legs and a short torso.
Perfect fit.

0.2HP

That's my guess.

For a few years before they stop making bikes, they had a "Panasonic Individual Custom System" where you could order factory semi-custom bikes, including your own frame dimensions (with in limits.) This site has some details:

Panasonic Bicycles at Yellow Jersey

Also this:





Panasonic Individual Custom System

RiddleOfSteel

Thank you for your insight. I was able to get home and tried out a (new) 26.8mm seat post and it slotted in without issue. 27.0 was a no go, though the frame thought about it for a second. 26.8 is certified, which I think is good news!

When you refer to 'finishing work,' what do you mean? I know the lugs are not engraved, pantographed, accented, or have particularly radiused edges. And the seat post insert opening is incredibly basic. My Super Le Tour 12.2 has a nearly identical seat lug, but even more basic where the seat tube meets it at the bottom (flat cut vs. Mystery Bike's scalloped/concave profile).

I'm still mystified on the serial number location--I do not know enough manufacturers who placed them there.

In my out-loud thought process, trying to square all the evidence up to form a conclusion, and having researched more, they are thus:

Evidence and the case for a mid range frame:
1) T-Mar's extensive knowledge.
2) Inconclusive tubing differentiation when considering seat post diameter (26.6mm, but confirmed 26.8mm).
3) Lack of finishing work.
4) Some basic lugs.
5) Potentially, original componentry (Shimano 600 Arabesque, Tange Falcon HS instead of Ritzy Alloy, Ritzy Light Alloy, etc).
6) Potentially, lack of brake cable and down tube shifter braze-ons (though several of Japanese top-shelf bikes eschewed these braze-ons in 1980, but this is worth stating for argument's sake).

Evidence and the case for a high- or higher-end frame:
1) 26.8mm seat post can mean Tange Champion #1 tubing (or #2, one gets the idea).
2) Dropouts, TF-R in front and Shimano EF (Dura-Ace) in the rear, including it being a short-length horizontal design with adjusters.
3) 413mm chainstay length is squarely in 'race bike' zone--Peloton, Super Sport, Trek 970, Shogun Samurai, etc.
4) 993mm WB is incredibly short (more than my 63cm C'dale SR!), possibly crit spec? Short WB for extra maneuverability, but at that size, using a 130mm stem etc helps keep it in check.
5) BB drop of 60-65mm also possibly crit spec? Or they just needed the extra angle to work with a much shorter down tube as a result of a short top tube.
6) Bicycle fully assembled is well inside a normal nice lightweight road bike weight range of that size.
7) Potentially, original pieces (Dura-Ace cable guides, to go with the dropouts and frame geometry)--more corroborative than anything. Falcon HS is still very nice.
8) Japanese bikes of this era (latter '70s into '80 or '81), in my observations/ownership so far, tend to have a set of eyelets on their bikes up into some high models. Nishiki Competions do this, and high end Shoguns and Sekai's do this as well. To clear the no-fender-eyelets hurdle means, to me, a near top level bike.

Things to still find out:
1) Frame/fork/headset weight--if it is at or under 3256g (7.16 lb), the weight of my (former) '83 Trek 970 with Columbus SP, then that bodes well for high-end.
2) Serial number location (I've researched a few companies that do it, but it is very inconclusive).
3) Serial number decoding (Shogun SN's match well, even as they seemed to use two systems simultaneously with LnLnnnn and LnLnnnnn during this time).
4) Corroborative dates from the rear dropouts (they exist, so I am told/shown online via photos), headset, and BB if possible, plus any other evidence seen down there.

Thank you again, everyone, for your help. I will continue to dig!

Regarding the picture of the squeezed in seat post clamp, complete with spacing-the-bolt-out washers (ugh):

RiddleOfSteel

Ok, the frame has been freed of its shackles of old parts. And the weight is......(lol) 3.552 kg or 7.81 lbs...soooooo, not exactly lightweight. Therefore I believe it sounds the death knell for being a high end frame. Dang it. I do have further confirmation that it used to be painted black.

But let's compare. F/F/HS of this Mystery Bike is 1/4 lb lighter than my '84 Miyata 610 touring bike (cromo and hi-ten). It is also only 1/4 lb heavier than an '87 Schwinn Super Sport (Tenax) I used to own. Fleet average for my framsets that are newer/nicer is just over 7 lbs.

So what to do? Build it up quickly and see how she runs. At this point, it'll probably get put back together with many of the same parts to be sold, but I will make sure it's safe to do so because it isn't at present. Unless one of you guys wants a great deal on a unique frame. Firstly, though, I'll have to see if there is any magic to this thing.