SurferRosa

"Exposed"? Hmm... I guess that's ok ... as long as we're not talking about clothing.?.

stoneageyosh

Re: Frame was designed and built by Takao, not F, Ono, Panasonic’s custom frame builder in the early 70’s. Could be that they misread the “Handbuilt by T. Ono” decal.
Ono phad previously built an eleven pound (5kg) track bike around 1971. The bike tested was a later, more extreme exercise in weight reduction.
Ono had been a gold medal rider at the Asian Games on his own frames so he knew what he could get away with for actual competition.
Some weight reduction was out of sight like the stem bolt. Another was that he probably eccentrically bored the bottom bracket shell making it thinner towards the lower front. He did this on the frame he built for me in 1973.
Ono had free rein on the materials he could use in the custom shop. Frame tubes in some were Tange and Ishiwata super light, 1500g or less, sets. His choice of brazing rod was a high strength silver alloy by Eutectic-Castolin, made in USA. Very expensive back then at $60/lb or more. He said that he fitted tubes to lugs as tight as possible to maximize strength and minimize the amount of brazing material.

Aardwolf

Here's a Mercian catalogue entry I found the other day while doing some research.
I'm not a weight weenie but I thought it was interesting: 16 lb 13 oz with no brakes.

1960 Mercian Superlight Vigorelli

The_Joe

It certainly wouldn't help make anyone more aero.

steelbikeguy

That's pretty sleek!
I was a bit surprised that trackies were still using steel cranks in 1960, but they did like steel bars and stems long after the roadies were using alloy.

The detail that caught my eye was the last bit of text...




It mentions the 28 spoke sprints, and I understood that to mean the rims.
The "silk O's" must refer to silk tubular tires/tyres... but... then I read the details about the time trial version that had "silk I's".
.... "silk I's"?? what the heck is a silk I?
There's nothing else on a bike made of silk other than the best tubulars, so it's got to be the tires, but why call it an I?
I sorta like calling tires "O's", just because the shape is correct.
Can someone explain this?

Steve in Peoria
(with fond memories of the silk sew-ups that came on a used bike a very long time ago)

Chombi1 

You can go lighter with you C&V wheels, but only to a certain point. Yes, there are alloy tubular rims that go down to as low as 280 grams each. But at those weights, spoke holes .could start bulging upward and cracking from the spoke pulling stresses after some miles. Try to stay at least in the 300 gram rim weight category to avoid this problem. The 80's tubular rims use more stronger and stiffer alloys, thsn what was used in the 60's and 70's. Rims like the lightest Fiammes sold in the seventies were just way too soft, and they never stayed true thst long, at least for me....

Aardwolf

I was thinking (with no evidence) it was the tyre width.
I should do some research, but it's unlikely a tyre from 1960 would be useable

Aardwolf

It turns out it was even lighter by 1963: 16lb 12oz
But the tyre description has changed.

The 1966 catalogue doesn't mention the actual weight.

1963 Mercian brochure:

steelbikeguy

I'm starting to wonder if it wasn't just a typo?
"I" is next to "O", so perhaps?
It's a bit of a shame that using "O" as shorthand for tire didn't catch on.

When I bought my 1974 Raleigh International around the year 2000, it had been in the basement of a bike shop for 25 years. The Vittoria tubulars were still in pretty good shape and held air. I swapped out the tubular rims for clinchers, but kept the tires fitted on the rims. They are still looking good, but I can't imagine trusting them to support me.
Here are the original tires next to the bike:



Steve in Peoria

Aardwolf

Yep, it did occur to me that they might have meant #0 and #1 in tyre sizes.

As in "Clement Silk #1" - https://www.bikeforums.net/21282517-post1.html
But I can't find any vintage Clement tyre listing with the widths.

kunsunoke 

Dropping pounds often means dropping coin as well. Some suggestions -

Titanium-railed saddle (such as Selle Italia Flite)
Tubular wheelset (32h rear 2-cross / 28h front radial) with butted spokes
Aluminum freewheel ($$$ and may not work for you if you tend to destroy equipment; ask PastorBob about durability before you make the move)
Lightweight tubular tires with latex tubes (Vittoria Corsa or similar)
Butted aluminum handlebars; can cut these if you never use the drops
Benotto bar tape
Titanium bottom bracket set
Titanium hardware (Note - you MUST use anti-galling compound on any threads)
Cold-forged crankset
High-end racing mechs and brakes (Campagnolo Nuovo Record, Suntour Superbe work for vintage bikes)
Ultra-light pedals with aluminum cages
Single bottle cage (plastic)

The single-speed / fixed gear approach also works.

Good luck!

steelbikeguy

I hadn't considered that it might be the numerals 0 and 1 instead of letters.
My old Palo Alto catalog from 1976 does list Clement track tires that number from 1 to 9. No suggestion that there might be a #0 tire, though.
No widths listed... because no one really cared back then.
I think the Campionato del Mondo was a bit wider than the usual road tubular, but there's no mention in the catalog.
as a side note.. it's a bit amazing that a very pricey silk tubular was considered a touring tire, but clinchers were relatively low quality back then. Jim Merz wrote up a tour where he used tubulars, and that didn't seem to stir up a controversy.

the Palo Alto catalog page:



Steve in Peoria

Chombi1 

The CLB brakeset can be further lightened by the use of their aluminum alloy (Dural) brake cable casings. Only thing is, the casings compresses a lot and braking power is cut at least in half. I guess it might be OK to use such, if you will be mostly riding in flat, traffic free roads.....

non-fixie 

I have heard of those. But besides me not having those available, it would really be a waste of these excellent brakes. I have them on a few bikes, and their stopping power with the original pads is pretty awesome.

PhilFo 

I gave up chasing a bike lighter than 22lbs and I'm instead focusing on making myself 10lbs lighter. If I can drop back down to 165, that's half a bike right there.
Phil