sthurman

I stumbled on this Windsor Professional frame with full campagnolo nuovo record. I ne3ded the parts and was planning to flip the frame to someone else, but got intrigued by the long wheelbase. By my measurements it is about 105-106cm from skewer to skewer. That is in the range of an 80s touring bike! The only catalog I found online lists the windsor pro wheelbase at 99cm. This has not cutouts in the BB shell, so must be an early one. Serial is 401 on seat lug.

Anyhow, I was comparing the geometry visually to Cinelli Supercorsa frames online and seemed to notice that the older ones appeared to have a longer wheelbase too. But its a small sample size and only visual.

Anybody here have an old Cinelli Supercorsa and/or Windsor pro and willing to report the length of the wheelbase? Thanks in advance!

headwind15

I cant tell you what the entire wheelbase of a 60's Cinelli might be. It will depend on what size. A bigger size should be longer than a small one. I have a 60's Cinelli (52 cm) and I can tell you that the measurement (rear end) bottom bracket center to the axle center (all the way forward in the drop out) is 42cms.

repechage

Typical as assembled by the builder will have the rear wheel essentially all the way forward as the adjuster screws allow. Sliding it back is a mechanic’s trick to get a wider gear range.

the previous is correct, wheelbase is very dependent with size.

iab

I don't exactly recall, but my ex-Cinelli B, 1958-1960, 56.5 ctc seat tube is about 105.

Cinelli_Model_B 004 by iabisdb, on Flickr

Kabuki12

If that is an early Windsor Pro it has been modified. The top tube cable guides and braze on shifter bosses are not stock. I have a 1972 at my shop that has the BB shell cut outs . I can measure the wheel base for you tomorrow. I will say that it rides nicely and climbs very well with large diameter chain stays. I did Eroica California 2017 on mine and it got me up some steep climbs with a 42 small chain ring and a 26 tooth low gear on the FW. Mine is mostly Campagnolo NR and I am the third owner. The second owner only had it long enough to ride it once or twice as it was too big for him.

1972ish Windsor Pro #1837

sthurman

Beautiful bike and I love the winter wonderland backdrop! So this is some confirmation that Cinelli (though Mod B and not SC) had 105cm wheelbase. Your frame is about the same size as my Windsor. Im curious if anybody has a Windsor with a long wheelbase and what year it is?

There are for sure modifications including the top tube cable guides and downtube shifter bosses on this frame. Non original black paint as well.

sthurman

Thank you for sharing. I measured the same distance on my frame in the original post and it's about 43.5cm. My frame is 56cm seat tube CTC, so a bit bigger than yours.

I was surprised that I could fit 700x35mm tires with ease in the front and rear, with visible clearance up to at least 40mm. The wheelbase length is about the same as my similar sized 1984 centurion pro tour 15, and visibly longer than other Windsor Pro's that I've seen photos of online.

repechage

My 1971 SC is near 2 cm shorter than a 1969, same size. rapid developments in that time period.

iab

So an under 2% change in 2 years.

smd4

Of course, a wheel's location in the dropouts has no effect whatsoever on gear range.

Kabuki12

It does allow clearance for a larger cog to clear the jockey wheels.

smd4

Perhaps. But that isn't "gear range."

repechage

an argument just to argue.

many five cog freewheels of the period started with a 14 cog, one might even write most. If one wanted reliable shifting into a 28 or 29 with a typical 52/42 Campagnolo chainring set, adjusting the axle back in the dropouts was a way to achieve. You know that most likely.

repechage

as a percentage, sure. But there were other changes, head tube and seat tube angles became steeper, brake reach reduced (wave goodbye to fenders) , depending on the frame size top tubes became slightly shorter,
the one constant for Cinelli during the late 1960’s to mid 1970’s was bottom bracket drop. In my view the bikes handle very differently.

Kabuki12

OK, so I measured my tall Windsor. The axel to axel measures 100cm , the seat tube is 63cm c-t , the top tube is 58cm c-c. I hope this helps. I run 28mm tires that measure 27mm when installed.There is room for larger tires as you stated. I would not consider it a touring bike as there are no eyelets for mounting racks or fenders , plus , it is a bit tight and not so relaxed. I don't race but have a short torso with long legs , so tighter geometry bikes fit me better. This bike is an "all day" bike .....for me!

Kabuki12

never said it was

sthurman

thank you for measuring! That value is consistent with the mid 70s catalog I found online. An observation I've made is that early Windsors with 3 digit serials (under 1000) online seem to have the same geometry as mine with longer wheelbase. I have had a 1962 Ideor and 1970 Lygie Italian racing bikes with similarly long wheelbase. There seems to have been a transition to more compact geometry right around 1970.

I prefer the riding characteristics of the longer wheelbase and, as mentioned, the ability to fit wide tires up to 40mm. There are no eyelets so, yes, this is no touring bike, but a nice mix of touring stability with (pre 1970) racing geometry. Am I wrong to think of it this way?

Erzulis Boat 

Actually it does.............................

Within context of the components installed, it can "buy" you some more teeth.


I got a few more teeth than what is specified by the manufacturers range of teeth differential. Moving the wheel rearward impacts the relationship of the pivot/jockey position. Now you know!

Kabuki12

Not at all. The geometry of your earlier version will probably suit you fine and give many happy miles. The eyelets are only for adding accessories such as racks and fenders , not to say ALL touring type bikes have to have them. Even without eyelets there are ways of attaching racks , etc.

Erzulis Boat 

Back on topic, I had a 1999 Tour De France Pinarello that has a 101cm wheelbase. Frame size was 56 ctc.

Very "long" for that era from what I have seen.

My new Colnago and new SOMEC (both steel) are at 99cm.

repechage

45 years ago we had customers visit the shop I worked for and many had been drinking the Kool-Aid that if the wheelbase was over 1 meter it was a Touring bike.
the local shop that was pushing that idea would always bring out a smaller sized bike to “prove” their point.