Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Thu Dec 08, 2016 1:40 am

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 11:57 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:10 pm
Posts: 921
Location: Hampshire
Thanks. Good call. Just had a look at the early 93 built clockwork and it doesn't have the down tube cable routing.
Only other diagnostic features I can think might be handy to tell the difference are:
1) any evidence of sticker marks on the seat tube ? diamond shape=p7, rounded rectangle=tange sticker and probably clockwork
2) clockwork had a butted bottom bracket I think
3) is the canti hanger on the monostay useful ? or is that age related ? my p7 has a curve in the canti hanger whereas the 93 clockwork has the hanger made out of two little triangular bits of metal ?
4) what aboout chainstay length ? definitely 16.5" on clockwork and suspect the p7 was fractionally longer though can't find this written down
5) the p7 tubes were slightly oversized so downtube diameter or circumference might be diagnostic .....cue to to get the tape measure out again !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:08 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:22 pm
Posts: 7306
Location: Hove
My understanding is that the name P7 denotes the 7th version of the Prestige, but the Prestige model itself continued to be sold alongside the P7 for a short while. Orange were coy about the name and the tubeset because the P7 was just as expensive as the Prestige, but was really a downgrade - the Prestige had ultimately been made of Tange Prestige Ultimate Superlight, which was more expensive than standard Tange Prestige MTB. It was also lighter, and Orange must have been concerned about the myth that light weight = better, as they were going for a stronger/stiffer design with the P7. So the P7 was heavier than the Prestige and made of a cheaper tubeset, so even though it may have produced a better mountain bike (especially in the era of suspension which requires a stiff frame for good handling), market perceptions meant that they couldn't really say so.

I believe it has always been the case though that the P7 was made with heat-treated tubing, whereas the Clockwork/C16 was made with standard non heat-treated tubing.

As far as the OP's question is concerned, I don't think there were ever any explicit differences in design, but I agree that he should show photos of his frame as there were colour schemes that were only used for the P7 and not the Clockwork and vice versa.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:20 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:13 pm
Posts: 9726
Location: Skipton
I can go with that Anthony and it would tie in with the c16 being the 16th variation of the Clockwork. From memory the p7 was pitched as a tougher Clockwork with better tubes rather then the lighter upgrade. Other bikes in the range were classed as the light weight flying machines so I guess they didn't need the Prestige (as it was) in the line up.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:43 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:10 pm
Posts: 921
Location: Hampshire
I quote from page 9 on the 1993/94 brochure page 10 (which can be found here->http://www.indiansummer.ch/downloads_9269901.php)

"And so, with the current Prestige being in its 6th generation, the P7 concept was conceived, denoting the 7th generation of our original Prestige frameset. Utilising a custom drawn slightly oversize tubeset, with similar wall thickness configuration to its lightweight brother, we increase strength and stiffness remarkably, with a minscule weight increase."

I am sad enough to have got the tape measure out. I could do with a better tape measure I am finding that the top and down tubes of the 95 p7 I have are roughly 9mm large in circumference than the equivalent on the clockwork. Can post more accurate measurements later when I've found a better tape measure.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:49 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:22 pm
Posts: 7306
Location: Hove
brocklanders023 wrote:
I can go with that Anthony and it would tie in with the c16 being the 16th variation of the Clockwork. From memory the p7 was pitched as a tougher Clockwork with better tubes rather then the lighter upgrade. Other bikes in the range were classed as the light weight flying machines so I guess they didn't need the Prestige (as it was) in the line up.

Just to illustrate what you say, an ad in MBUK a little later, June 95 has frame prices C16R £285, P7 £395, E3 £660. Elsewhere, places were still selling the Prestige (possibly old stock) for the same as the P7.

Clearly aluminium was considered the lightweight way to go at that time and had a huge premium - compare the E3 price with the price of a Roberts Team DOGS BOLX in the same ad, £675!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:22 pm
Posts: 7306
Location: Hove
raymondluxuryyacht wrote:
I am sad enough to have got the tape measure out. I could do with a better tape measure I am finding that the top and down tubes of the 95 p7 I have are roughly 9mm large in circumference than the equivalent on the clockwork. Can post more accurate measurements later when I've found a better tape measure.

'Sad' = enthusiastic. A 9mm circumference increase is roughly in line with a tubesize increase of 1/8" - e.g., like going from say 28.6 (1 1/8") top and 31.8 (1 1/4) down to 31.8 top and 34.9 down.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:37 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:10 pm
Posts: 921
Location: Hampshire
So we have an answer for this thread. The p7 has slightly bigger tube size. Measurements to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:34 pm 
Devout Dirtbag

Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:06 am
Posts: 143
Anthony wrote:
brocklanders023 wrote:
I can go with that Anthony and it would tie in with the c16 being the 16th variation of the Clockwork. From memory the p7 was pitched as a tougher Clockwork with better tubes rather then the lighter upgrade. Other bikes in the range were classed as the light weight flying machines so I guess they didn't need the Prestige (as it was) in the line up.

Just to illustrate what you say, an ad in MBUK a little later, June 95 has frame prices C16R £285, P7 £395, E3 £660. Elsewhere, places were still selling the Prestige (possibly old stock) for the same as the P7.

Clearly aluminium was considered the lightweight way to go at that time and had a huge premium - compare the E3 price with the price of a Roberts Team DOGS BOLX in the same ad, £675!


list for my e2 in 94 was £695 iirc, i paid £640 via local shop.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:50 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:10 pm
Posts: 921
Location: Hampshire
OK the measurements are as follows:

P7 down-tube circumference = 11cm, top-tube circumference =10.1 cm (to estimated accuracy of plus or minus 1mm)

Clockwork down-tube circumference = 10cm and top-tube circumference=9.1cm
(i.e clockwork's downtube is about the same as the p7s top tube)

I reckon this makes the p7 down-tube 1.375 inches in diameter (externally) and the clockwork down-tube 1.25 inches in diameter.

On the question of chainstays, I couldn't measure any discernible difference.
I spotted another difference between frmes though. The clockwork has bolt holes in the sides of the top bit of the rear monostay/seatstay and a bolt hole in the back. The p7 only has a bolt hole in the back and none on the sides. I guess this could have changed over time, but something worth considering.

So tinker, out with the tape measure measure down-tube circumference as best you can and you have an answer.
Also be interested to know about the bolt holes on your frames monostay.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:54 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:10 pm
Posts: 921
Location: Hampshire
By the way, is it worth making this thread a sticky somewhere mods ?

Also I emailed orange in case they have anything to contribute :)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Antel1982, Ghosty, Retro Spud and 33 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group