M A V

I'm happy to say the J.Lang Collection has added a 1971(?) Cinelli Supercorsa to the lineup. It's a beautifully preserved machine with a repaint (and a wrong decal) but a wonderful example of an Italian built masterpiece by one of the biggest names in cycling.

Kilroy1988 

It does look wonderful but after spending years admiring Cinelli road bikes I must say that the TA crankset is very jarring!

-Gregory

merziac

Keep in mind that Spense Wolf special ordered, specced and used many of these as a touring platform, many had TA cranks and his "Alpine gearing" mods for serious hill, mountain and back country riding.

Later on he used Merz to get exactly what his discerning clientele wanted.

He probably didn't use many of these cranks but the others are legendary as we know.

Kilroy1988 

Well, if anything else about this Cinelli resembled a touring bike or gearing I could understand that rationale. It looks like a pretty fast road machine to me!

-Gregory

mpetry912 

chain is about 1 link too short

but nice otherwise

/markp

repechage

Super Champion rims, TA cranks, Universal brakes, non standard pedals. I would seek out a Campagnolo seatpost and a second World Champion bands.
Looks purposeful and deliberate.
A Sunday morning ride bike.

Robvolz 

I disagree. The more Cinelli that have gone through my hands, and some very original, I’ve seen some TA as original equip since campy didn’t make a triple at the time

merziac

And here's one actually with the crank in question.

https://velobase.com/ViewComponent.a...3-73e94257f7d9

merziac

Agreed, but there was a lot of outside the box thinking that came out of Cupertino and some of it may simply have been just to be different, or not.

Kilroy1988 

I'm not an expert on Spence Wolf Cinellis, but please keep in mind that I followed up that my comment was based on the fact that this particular TA crank is clearly set up for fast road riding with big rings and only a double, with a standard Nuovo Record derailleur and tight cluster. If this bike had obviously been set up with touring or some crazy hills in mind, then I would totally understand the rationale. Here it just seems like it's on there for the sake of being different, which is fine, but it's clearly not the norm.

-Gregory

M A V

This one isn't in the list of serial numbers sold through Cupertino, but all the components came from a 6 year period (pedals were just thrown on for test ride), 3 years on either side of the frame build year. I respect the original build, I'm sure someday others will look at my modern builds and wonder why I picked the parts I did.

merziac

Also agreed, maybe they were out of Campy cranks that day or just simple cross pollination.

merziac

One can only hope.

daka

I'm with Gregory here. I associate that particular crankset with the pre G.S. Raleigh Competitions of the '70s. Good value, but not top-drawer. And certainly not for touring as a cinq-vis TA setup would be.

Kilroy1988 

I just thought it looked out of place and hadn't even thought of the fact that it probably cost less than half of what a Nuovo Record crankset would have at the time. A lot of you guys are old enough to remember what was going on in cycling at the time but as a youngin' the best I have to go by is old photos and trying to make sure that the components on my builds make sense. Having them mostly be within the same category of value for what they are seems like a logical thing to do. The exception comes at times like those described above, when TA cranks would be put onto machines that may typically have more expensive Campangolo arms because a triple was required, etc.

-Gregory

repechage

you are offending FiFi

merziac

So this crank is a 3 arm TA Professional according to Velobase, yes Raleigh used them too on the 76 GS. Maybe not top drawer but Spense obviously thought it a worthy component.

I wasn't saying the bike in question is any kind of a touring bike, it obviously is not but if that crank is original, somebody had their reasons for using it.

Maybe this bike made its way to Spense or somebody that was influenced by him, maybe not, all conjecture at best, especially on my part.

daka

Well, I wouldn't want to do anything to offend FiFi. Interesting nickname, I thought a "FiFi" was a member of the Free French which fought against the Vichy regime and the Nazis during WW2.
Anyway, we can only speculate as to why the bike is outfitted the way it is. Maybe the owner had just broken yet another Campy Record crank arm and decided to try a different brand......

repechage

T.A. Cranks had a rep for a small “Q” factor.

obrentharris 

I can only hope that fifty years from now my modern bikes generate this amount of debate over my eclectic component choices.

In 1971 much bike building was more a la carte than it is today. Most of us bought bare framesets and hung our choice of components on them. Those choices were often dictated by what we could transfer over from our previous bike, also by our budget, sponsorship deals, and previous experience. In subsequent years we replaced and upgraded as needed. We were not yet concerned with "period correct." Perhaps the fully period correct bikes with all the matching components that we collectors are thrilled to find now days are the ones that were originally bought as complete bikes and went almost directly from the hook in the bike shop to a hook in a garage where they slumbered for decades. Bikes like the OP's are the ones that were ridden.
Brent

bikingshearer 

Some of us still aren't. At least not very much.

Chombi1 

Cyclist back then weren't beholden to used all matching brand ajd/or model components on their bikes as much as we C&Vers are today.
For example, I did not find anything wrong with using a Suntour Cyclone MkII RD or a pat 83 Campy NR RD on my otherwise, mostly French 84 Peugeot PSV. Back in the 80's.