another Paramount
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Missouri
Posts: 9
Bikes: 1989 Paramount 66cm
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
another Paramount
I have enjoyed reading about the Paramount serial number coding issues. Many members certainly seem to know their stuff. I recently corresponded with Richard Schwinn regarding the number on my 1989 Paramount. A couple of things members know or perhaps find interesting: My serial number is 660GMWG89051. I determined that 660 is the size (it's huge) and W meant Waterford (although some say it means Wisconsin). It was made in July 1989 and was the 51st frame (or fork) made, or bike assembled. What was curious was the letter G, which is fork size. I had never read of a fork larger than "E". Mr. Schwinn told me the "M" indicated OS sized tubing, 31.8mm for that year. Could someone tell me if this is correct? Is there anything members can add to this information? Thanks for your help.
#2
Aspiring curmudgeon
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 2,486
Bikes: Guerciotti, Serotta, Gaulzetti
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 26 Times
in
13 Posts
I'd say you already got it straight from the horse's mouth. Got any pics?
__________________
"Party on comrades" -- Lenin, probably
"Party on comrades" -- Lenin, probably
#3
Freewheel Medic
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: An Island on the Coast of GA!
Posts: 12,909
Bikes: Snazzy* Schwinns, Classy Cannondales & a Super Pro Aero Lotus (* Ed.)
Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1465 Post(s)
Liked 2,228 Times
in
977 Posts
Welcome to Bike Forums and C&V specifically. It is challenging to add anything to what Richard Schwinn has already offered. So it is a 66cm frame? I'm guessing that would have been a special order originally. I can't say that I've seen any Waterford Paramounts larger then 61cm or 63cm. Please post a few pictures.
__________________
Bob
Enjoying the GA coast all year long!
Thanks for visiting my website: www.freewheelspa.com
Bob
Enjoying the GA coast all year long!
Thanks for visiting my website: www.freewheelspa.com
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Schwenksville, Pa
Posts: 2,777
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked 348 Times
in
183 Posts
I can't say as I have seen a 66cm Waterford Paramount either. That was a common size in the 70's and early 80's, I had one. Please post a picture if you are able.
__________________
80 Mercian Olympic, 92 DB Overdrive, '07 Rivendell AHH, '16 Clockwork All-Rounder
80 Mercian Olympic, 92 DB Overdrive, '07 Rivendell AHH, '16 Clockwork All-Rounder
#5
Decrepit Member
I have enjoyed reading about the Paramount serial number coding issues. Many members certainly seem to know their stuff. I recently corresponded with Richard Schwinn regarding the number on my 1989 Paramount. A couple of things members know or perhaps find interesting: My serial number is 660GMWG89051. I determined that 660 is the size (it's huge) and W meant Waterford (although some say it means Wisconsin). It was made in July 1989 and was the 51st frame (or fork) made, or bike assembled. What was curious was the letter G, which is fork size. I had never read of a fork larger than "E". Mr. Schwinn told me the "M" indicated OS sized tubing, 31.8mm for that year. Could someone tell me if this is correct? Is there anything members can add to this information? Thanks for your help.
I believe Richard is correct about the "M". 1989 was the year the OS Paramounts were introduced, and they were built using True Temper OS tubing which Schwinn called "Paramount Tubing" as it was joint development effort by Schwinn and True Temper. The Paramounts using standard diameter Columbus tubing (SLX on frame sizes up to 57cm; SL with SP down tubes on larger frame sizes) were also available that year.
From the 1989 catalog:
Tubing diameters:
The Columbus tubing Paramounts used standard diameter tubes; the Paramount tubing Paramounts used OS diameter tubes.
Last edited by Scooper; 04-13-16 at 06:22 PM. Reason: added tubing diameter chart
#6
Decrepit Member
Here is the Paramount geometry from the 1989 catalog. Note that the Paramount OS was available in stock sizes up to 68cm!
#7
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Missouri
Posts: 9
Bikes: 1989 Paramount 66cm
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
here it is
Here it is. As you can see, it is a mix of newer and not so new components. The frame (66cm) probably has in excess of 25,000 miles on it. It was by far the biggest and heaviest frame at the HTH 100.
The frame is due for another repaint at Waterford.
I will either restore it to original and purchase another bike as my primary ride, or upgrade it to Etap (DI2 has too many wires, boxes, zip ties, etc., on a classic frame).
It was originally a shade of black cherry metallic. I had it painted by Waterford in the mid-90's to its current shade of the closest they could do to Guardsman Red. I'm thinking either the original color if I restore, or Fly Yellow, BRG or Laguna Blue if I upgrade. Suggestions? Thanks to all, especially Scooper. Doc
#8
Decrepit Member
That is a huge frame. You probably get this question all the time, but did you play basketball?
#9
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Missouri
Posts: 9
Bikes: 1989 Paramount 66cm
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
When I purchased the bike, the dealer had another 66 frame for sale. I passed. I regret it to this day. Yes, I played basketball, poorly.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liberty, Missouri
Posts: 3,120
Bikes: 1966 Paramount | 1971 Raleigh International | ca. 1970 Bernard Carre | 1989 Waterford Paramount | 2012 Boulder Brevet | 2019 Specialized Diverge
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 129 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times
in
41 Posts
Glad you shared this - all the other details jibe with my understanding of the Waterford coding, but this is the first time I've heard that "M" indicated the OS tubing. I think I recall one table referring to that digit as a "company code." That never made any sense to me at all until now, so good information!
My '89 is two months younger than yours and a bit smaller. One interesting thing about my 60cm OS frame is that it is has a Columbus SLX decal. So it's wrong on two counts: (1) it's not Columbus tubing at all, and (2) SLX - at least to my understanding - would not have been used on a 60cm frame. Nevertheless, this odd decal is the only peccadillo. It's a truly remarkable bike, as I'm confident in saying yours is also likely to be.
My '89 is two months younger than yours and a bit smaller. One interesting thing about my 60cm OS frame is that it is has a Columbus SLX decal. So it's wrong on two counts: (1) it's not Columbus tubing at all, and (2) SLX - at least to my understanding - would not have been used on a 60cm frame. Nevertheless, this odd decal is the only peccadillo. It's a truly remarkable bike, as I'm confident in saying yours is also likely to be.
#11
Senior Member
At one point I had two Waterford Paramounts, built within a couple weeks of each other in Jan '89, IIRC. The earlier one was a late Columbus skinny-tube, the later one an early OS-tube. Both bought/won on separate ebay auctions, from different sellers, so the production timing was completely coincidental. I thought it was cool having model changeover-cusp examples. It's been a while since I sold them---I liked how they both rode, can't recall if I perceived much difference due to the frame tubing.
__________________
Fuggedaboutit!
Fuggedaboutit!
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Pico Rivera, CA
Posts: 4,208
Bikes: 1983 Basso Gap...2013 Colnago CX-1...2015 Bianchi Intenso
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1209 Post(s)
Liked 1,375 Times
in
726 Posts
Unfortunately the frame isn't for sale but it is a 66cm.
I'd go with purple if you're repainting.
I was going to post all the sellers pics but the frame is in really bad shape. The front looks the best.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Schwenksville, Pa
Posts: 2,777
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked 348 Times
in
183 Posts
I always like the Black Cherry. My vote would be to repaint it, replace the current parts and pick up a new Waterford. Two bikes are always better than one.
__________________
80 Mercian Olympic, 92 DB Overdrive, '07 Rivendell AHH, '16 Clockwork All-Rounder
80 Mercian Olympic, 92 DB Overdrive, '07 Rivendell AHH, '16 Clockwork All-Rounder
#14
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Missouri
Posts: 9
Bikes: 1989 Paramount 66cm
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Just for fun, as I was cleaning the bike the other day, I took a metric tape measure to the bike. Curiously, the wheelbase is significantly different that the measurement listed by Waterford. No matter how many time I measure, I come out with a wheelbase of 99.5mm center axle front to rear. Granted the rear stop screw is a few mm forward, but not enough to account for the 36 mm difference between Waterford's/Schwinn's figure and mine? Comments?
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 2,982
Bikes: LESS than I did a year ago!
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
Here it is. As you can see, it is a mix of newer and not so new components. The frame (66cm) probably has in excess of 25,000 miles on it. It was by far the biggest and heaviest frame at the HTH 100.
The frame is due for another repaint at Waterford.
I will either restore it to original and purchase another bike as my primary ride, or upgrade it to Etap (DI2 has too many wires, boxes, zip ties, etc., on a classic frame).
It was originally a shade of black cherry metallic. I had it painted by Waterford in the mid-90's to its current shade of the closest they could do to Guardsman Red. I'm thinking either the original color if I restore, or Fly Yellow, BRG or Laguna Blue if I upgrade. Suggestions? Thanks to all, especially Scooper. Doc
#16
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Missouri
Posts: 9
Bikes: 1989 Paramount 66cm
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Yes its a big bike, but I am 6'5", 220lbs. The bike rides like a dream although I will never climb or corner as my friends on their carbons. Great century bike that is easy on my back. There is quite a bit of weight on the front when I am on the aero bars but I compare it to a mid-sixties Cadillac convertible. The plan was to go Etap this summer but I don't like the idea of spreading the rear drop out. I'll probably reinstall the original rims and put the SLR's on a carbon "burner" for those "hammer" rides.