# Columbia original color?



## ChadC (Mar 2, 2020)

I just disassembled my '18 Columbia for a correct repaint and some closer to correct parts.
Thought I'd share a color comparison...the paint on the badge looks like it could be original? Thoughts? Don't know what color the frame is(came that way from Europe) and the Neverout is WW2 Rapco 34087(maybe?, too many vehicles around here in different shades of OD).


----------



## redline1968 (Mar 2, 2020)

Id say yes it is original..


----------



## Mercian (Mar 3, 2020)

Hi,

yes, the paint on the badge is original, the one below is on my bike:









However, you must remember that the paint colour is very likely to have changed from when it was painted. Lead based paints especially tend to oxidise over 100 years of exposure, the lead becoming white lead oxide.

Below is an example photo I took when dismantling my 1917 bike.  

The vertical tube is the frame's original paint after 100 years, and it is a yellow green colour.

The upper horizontal tube is the stem of the fork, hidden away from light and air circulation in the head tube for most of it's life, and so closer to the original colour, and a lot darker green.

The lower horizontal tube is one of the NOS WW2 G519 handlebars.  This is only slightly darker than the fork stem.





Incidentally, does your badge have U.S.A. stamped under the end of the Columbia name or not (like mine).

Best Regards,

Adrian


----------



## ChadC (Mar 3, 2020)

No USA after Columbia. Gotta love funky, 100 year old leaded guacamole green paint!


----------



## blackcat (Mar 3, 2020)

Hello Chad;
Your headbadge without the USA next to COLUMBIA is normal for your bike.
I noticed( i think  and this is only my opinion) that the COLUMBIA with the USA on the side had the BB number USAXXXX and those who don't had no, had the BB number blank or Jxxxxx.
For painting, here is a nice palette of colors, the civil red then the yellow green COLUMBIA (  requisitioned frame?) and some traces of green OD army.
My brother's:
BB number: blank






@New Mexico Brant
BB number: J26252






In summary, the painting of your headbadge is that of origin, and it was also that of your frame originaly delivered to the army by COLUMBIA.
The OD army color was done later on the ground.
Regards;
Serge


----------



## ChadC (Mar 3, 2020)

Thanks for your knowledge Serge! Always appreciated! Your pictures got me thinking...since she's apart at the moment...looks to be some overspray in there, but maybe a little trace in the middle?


----------



## blackcat (Mar 3, 2020)

Re;
Your frame has been sanded and repainted .
Regards;
Serge


----------



## ChadC (Mar 3, 2020)

Got a wet rag and cleaned the blasting dust and grease out some interesting stuff came out of the tubes.


----------



## Mercian (Mar 4, 2020)

blackcat said:


> Hello Chad;
> Your headbadge without the USA next to COLUMBIA is normal for your bike.
> I noticed( i think  and this is only my opinion) that the COLUMBIA with the USA on the side had the BB number USAXXXX and those who don't had no, had the BB number blank or Jxxxxx.
> For painting, here is a nice palette of colors, the civil red then the yellow green COLUMBIA (  requisitioned frame?) and some traces of green OD army.
> ...




Hi All,

Serge, I noticed the same thing about the badges/frames. Although there are not really enough examples so far though to be definitive.

As ever, I am happy to discuss, and modify my ideas if there's more evidence out there, but this is what I think.

I am working on the history of these bikes now, and will publish it here shortly. What is evident is that there are three Columbia contracts (though I can only find details of the first and last one at the moment), and there are variations in the bikes supplied on the contracts (such as pedal types etc).

I think the first contract is identifiable by no BB number, and a badge without U.S.A. stamped on it.
Another contract could be identifiable by the USA stamped on the BB, and U.S.A.  pressed into the badge below Columbia.
And another contract is probably the bikes stamped with a J - 1918 year letter.

I am not sure which of the last two is the second contract, and which the is the third.

There are several reasons why I think this.

We know the first contract on 29th October 1917 was for 10,000 bikes, to be delivered in 90 days (so, January 1918), and that work had already started at this point.
We know that in October 1918 there was an order for 25,000 bikes, divded between Columbia, Dayton and Great Western. We also know that at this point Columbia had made 19,164 bikes, so it seems likely there was a second contract for 10,000 bikes early to mid 1918.

If the second and third contract are in 1918, then we know also that J is a 1918 Columbia code, and, so far, we have not seen a USA BB stamped bike with a number higher than 10,000. Did Columbia start marking their bikes J at the start of the year, and then start marking USA or mark them USA, and, with the war finishing at the start of the third contract, then start marking them with a J?

We also know that in December 1917 there was discussion between the USQMD and bike makers about marking bikes.

This is from the article I’m writing on the ‘Military Model’ history:

_“Also discussed was the necessity of marking the bicycles as military equipment. …. To this end the … bicycle would have a number of distinctive features, For instance, the sprocket would have the letters "U. S. A." stenciled on it to prevent unauthorized use. In addition, the letters "U. S. A." would be stamped into the crown before the frame was welded. The enameling would be done over this stamping or embossing. This would make it possible for any one readily to identify (the) bicycle as government property. It was believed these two stampings, together, of course, with the serial number stamped on by the manufacturer and the number stenciled on by the property clerk of the army, would enable the authorities to trace without great difficulty any bicycle which might disappear under suspicious circumstances.

It is known from surviving examples of the Columbia “Military Model” that these ideas were not directly adopted, but the frames can be marked in three different ways, and the badges in two ways. Frame marks on the bottom bracket so far seen consist of either nothing, a “U.S.A.” number or a J sequence Columbia number, J being 1918. The badges are either as made, or stamped with an additional “U.S.A.” at the end of the Columbia name plate.

The implication from the discussion on marking is that no system had been introduced for bicycles before this point (December 1918), but that it had decided that one was necessary. It seems likely that early “Military Model” bicycles were produced without the “U.S.A.” marked badge, and with blank BB’s. The BB would be subsequently stamped by the Army, and eventually the J 1918 date mark was used to identify the bicycle.”_

It is known that at a certain point (I have still not found the date) in WW1, much transport equipment was marked U.S.A. for idetification purposes, such as Liberty trucks, and this EA horn: (Both images from https://libertytruck.org/ )









And, of course, Neverout lamps:





Best Regards,

Adrian


----------



## ChadC (Mar 4, 2020)

Great reading, thank you! Can't wait to see more!


----------



## blackcat (Mar 4, 2020)

Hello Adrian;
Yes, proof to the contrary, i'm on the same wavelength as you:
My feeling:
The first contract identifiable by no BB number and a badge without U.S.A. stamped  beside of COLUMBIA ( MOD. 1917).
Second contract identifiable by the USA stamped on the BB number and U.S.A. pressed into the badge below COLUMBIA (MOD. 1917).
Thirth contract, the bikes stamped with a Jxxxxx  and a badge without  U.S.A. stamped  beside of COLUMBIA (MOD.1918).( BB number: J18182 - J26252).






Left badge: no BB number ( MOD.1917) 
                     BB number  Jxxxxx  (MOD.1918)
Right badge: BB number USAxxxx stamped (MOD.1917)

Regards;
Serge


----------

