1960's and 1970's serial numbers

I was talking with Don Farmer yesterday .  For those not familiar with Don, check these out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weJhKMsuThY  and  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYVtP6OqjzM

Don's focus is on the 50s / 60s era,  3 speeds in particular .  He believes that for many years in the 60s that more than one Letter designator may have been used.  Out of necessity, Dons memory is acute. 

 He recalls having  new bikes in 62 and 63 with the letters D and G respectively.  From his experience over five decades of collecting bikes, he recalls that the following years and letters correspond to each other..1961 - C; 62 - D; 63 - G; 64 -H; 65 - J; 66 - K; 67 - ?; 68 - B.  He also suggests that the date on original SA 3 speed hubs is a good way to establish the date.

Contact me at bmwchev@msn.com and I will give you Dons number and  between the two of you you may come up with a conclusive list. Cheers

With all due respect to Mr. Farmer and other distinguished members of the hobby, my experience tells me that even the best memories can become clouded over the years. That is why I prefer to base my findings on matching details of actual bikes with the pictures and data from original catalogs, etc. and charting these findings along with the serial numbers.

If I was to use the serial numbers that were quoted, most early Marauders would be declared to be from 1968 (they did not get mentioned until the 1970 catalogs and usually have late 1969 SA hubs). CCM Chargers would fall into the 1965/1966 catagory. They did not appear until 1967  or 1968.

Were would the (1969 only) CCM Cobra fall?,..... prior to the quoted 1968  "B" code bikes? All known Cobras have an "A" serial number.

Do we think that after the "T" serail numbers of 1960 CCM would have jumped to starting with  a "C" for 1961?

There would be other facts to dispute some of the quoted matchups of year and serial numbers, but I don't want to sound like I'm trying to offend anybody. I just hope that in posting my suggested data, more collectors will supply pictures and serial numbers of their bikes.

I have never seen a 1966 or 1967 catalog, only a few individual advertisements. Lots of the CCM bikes changed slightly from year to year, even if it was in minute ways (such as details to decals or parts).

My main interest is in the musclebikes from 1965 to 1977 and I compared data from over 50 of my bikes. Other similarly interested collectors agreed with my findings. Their serial numbers helped confirm my data from those years.

I'd also be interested in seeing catalog pictures from any 1961 to 1964.

Again, I do not mean to disrespect anybody, just encourage the sharing of actual visual or numeric data.

My intent was not to cast doubt on your  much appreciated and diligent research, but to suggest that speaking with Don may assist in this endeavour.  I totally respect your investigative skills and passion.

A thought did come to mind as a result of this dialogue...I am quite unfamiliar with Musclebikes...Could there have been a sequence of serial #s for the Muscle bikes separate from the mainstream?

Interesting question. The response from the younger collectors here certainly seems to reinforce ccmusclebike's reading of the numbers.

John

I wasn't offended by your comments Wayne. I'm just an anal collector of data. 

I occassionally see people claimimg that there bikes are a specific age, when I know it's not possible. I usually just bite my tongue and carry on. Sometimes I'll politely suggest a differnt age and supply catalog pictures to persuade them to change their info.

My collection of serial numbers included my non-musclebikes, such as Imperials, Grand Tourings, Centennials, Elans, Rangers, Rebels and a few others that may have escaped my memory.  :-)

I would like to set up an online picture database, with numerous bicycles and written details (such as c hainguard styles, decal styles and placements, mechanical details and of course suggested serial numbers).

I'd like to find all 1960 to 1980 catalogs to help us with our research. We'll get it sorted out efficiently, someday!

I can corroborate the OP's chart, with a very high degree of confidence, at least  for the period 1969-1974 inclusive. During the bicycle boom  I was a CCM dealer and have the sales log book covering this period. It's the ideal situation for serial number analysis, containing the model name, model number, serial number, colour and date of all of the store's CCM bicycle sales for 4-1/3 years. With 52 pages and up to 16 entries per page there are literally hundreds of data sets, Consequently, there's little doubt as the accuracy, validity and statistical significance of the data..

After leaving the retail bicycle business, I worked for 20+ years as a Quality Engineer, so I am quite competent in data analysis. Based on my experience I can only echo the OP's reservation in relying on memory and reiterate the insistence on first hand objective evidence.

When the letter code groups are plotted by sales year it quickly becomes apparent that the highest letter code in each year, starting with A-codes in 1969, advance by one letter for each subsequent year. The latest letter code is also, with one exception, the largest letter group for the year, with margins of up to 5:1. The presence of old letter codes for a sales year are easily explained by leftover stock. Sometimes this amount could be considerable due to the practice of buying leftover CCM  inventoriy at bargain prices.

As previuously stated by the OP, one can further verify the system through new model introductions, In 1970 the Mustang was introduced and that was theyear the first sales are logged and they are all B-codes. The Targa was introduced in 1973 and that when it's first sales are logged and they are all E-codes. I could site additional cases, but it would be superfluous.

When the results of the letter code plotting is taken in conjunction with the results for new model introductions, the code system becomes virtually indisputable, at least for 1969-1974.

I should mention that the log also has several sales records for L-codes and can corroborate the existence of  I, J and K-codes. This, in conjunction with the recently documented G-codes, would mean that CCM used every letter from A though L during the period of 1961 to 1969. It's obvious that CCM using some form of multiple codes during the 1960s. While I don't the necessary data for a definitive statement I have my suspicions.

While I don't have Canadian figures, the US industry doubled sales  between 1960 and 1965 and it would not be unreasonable to expect CCM bicycle sales to have experienced simllar growth. The growth was fueled by improved ecomonic conditions and the continually expanding market in the lucrative 5 -15 year old children's category due to the aging of the 1950s baby boomers. Sales would continue to rise thoughout the remainder of the decade due to  bicycle turnover driven by demand for the new hi-risers.

Consequently, my current belief pending further information is that CCM doubled up on the letter codes starting in 1965 or 1966. This would lead to following sequences:

1965 = E or E & F

1966 = F & G or G & H

1967 = H & I or I & J

1968 = J & K or K & L

1969 = L & A or A

 A AAA preliminary, quick review does not suggest  that the letter codes were stratified by bicycle type, however even after more detailed analysis I may not have adequate data to make a definitive statement.  More likely CCM simply had late 1960's sales that exceeded the capacity of their serialization system and that this evaporated during the early 1970s bicycle boom. The failure of CCM to capitlize on the lightweight craze is another story.

Hi T-Mar

I like your definition of the possible extra use codes from 1965 to 1969 and the explanation as to why!

There may always be an odd bicycle popping up that makes us think twice about things, but we're making progress.  :-)

I am confident in the "F" going with the 1966 date, because I have a nice CCM Continental that has a newer chainguard than is shown on the 1965 poster and the decalling is also a slightly newer version. Having said that, "YES" there are likely some 1965's with the "F" code too.

If anybody wants to send me pictures of their 1960 or 1970 bicycle and the serial numbers, I'll keep them on file and use them to help us in defining this range of serial numbers.

(ccmbikes at yahoo.ca)

Thank-you but just because something makes sense and is a nice fit does not make it correct. It's only a  hypothesis. Like yourself, I'd much rather have a comprehensive set of 1960s serial number data for formulating my statements.

Currently, I have 46 sets of data for the I to L codes. I'm going to go back and chart them against model numbers to see if I they provide any further clues. I'll probably get to it over weekend and have a report ready sometime next week. Of course, that will push back another CCM project (wink-wink).

I completed my look at the I through L codes and the evidence certeinly indicates that all belong to the late 1960s. There is a J-code that was on a model that produced only in 1967 (thxs Ron) and several cases of K and  L codes on models that were introduced in 1968. There are sveral cases on specific model numbers spanning 3 and 4 codes, indicating that the codes are not related to specific styles or groups of bicycles. Based on the current data, the most plausible explanation for the codes still apears to be that in my 4/16 post.

I recently obtained a bicycle shop sales ledger documenting 499 CCM sales (with serial numbers) for 1965-1968.  After analyzing the data, the evidence indicates the serial number codes for 1964-1968 are as follows

1964 – Gxxxxxx

1965 – Hxxxxxx

1966 – Jxxxxxx

1967 – Kxxxxxx

1968 – Lxxxxxx

For those of you interested in how I came to this conclusion you can read on, though I warn you, it may be tedious. The rest of you can skip to the last paragraph.

First off, a big thank-you to John McKenty for providing me with 1962-1964 products lists that were invaluable in cross-checking the ledger data against available models.

1965 new bicycle sales, with the exception of handful of serial numbers, consisted of G-codes and H-codes. H-codes comprised 67% of total sales and appeared as early as March 19, suggesting they represent 1965.  All G and H-codes sales are consistent with 1964-1965 models. It should be noted that the product line was unchanged during these two years with the exception of the 1965 introduction of the Mustang, Le Voyageur and Moulton.  Unfortunately there were no sales logged for these models.  The shop in question seems to have had a relatively conservative clientele. Hi-risers were slow to catch on and there were no documented sales of racing models or many of the other specialty models.

1966 new sales consisted of G, H and J-codes. There were no I-codes. I had previously seen one I -code in another ledger, though that may have been an error. J-codes totaled 60% of sales and appeared as early as April 13. The 1966 model line underwent several changes and most of these show up as J-codes, including the new Imperial 700 series  (as opposed to the 1964-1965 Imperial MK IV series), the new Rambler 500 series, the new Buccaneer and the new Rambler Scrambler. However, there are no sales of the new Mustang Duomatic or Grand Prix. Still, this suggests J = 1966. The H-codes and handful of G-codes are consistent with the 1964-1965 model line and appear to be unsold stock from previous years.

1967 new sales consisted of H, J and K-codes. While there was only the expected handful of G-codes, it was surprising to see H-codes greatly outnumber the K-codes. Still, the K-codes start appearing as early as April 15, suggesting that they represent 1967. There were no documented sales of the new Charger, however there were several sales of the Centennial, which was catalogued only in 1967. Interestingly, Centennial sales comprised both J and K-codes.

The existence of both J and K-codes for the Centennial is the earliest case I have found to suggest that CCM may have started manufacturing new models in the autumn. This is a common practice in the bicycle industry. Models for the upcoming calendar year usually start production around September. This allows time for building up stock and time for shipments to make their way through distribution channels, so that the new models are available for the lucrative Christmas season.  An advance of several months is typical when dealing with off-shore manufacturers. In CCMs case, their market was primarily domestic, so the advance is not nearly so great, though its still possible that hey advanced the production a month or two prior to the model year so as get new models to dealers by Christmas. This would have been particularly important in the late 1960s. Prior to that time, the model  line had been relatively stagnant but the 1965 introduction of the Mustang and a constantly expanding hi-riser line would have changed that. These are exactly the type of bicycle a dealer would want in stock for Christmas.

The ledger also shows a 1967 sale of the new Charger with a J-code, indicating  1966 manufacture.

The sales ledger runs out of space before 1968 is complete. So, while there are L-codes, they are outnumbered by J and K-codes. Still, the L-codes appear for the new GT-101 which was the 1968 replacement for the Centennial, so it appears L= 1968.

1968 also shows several more probable cases of new model manufacturing starting prior to the calendar year.  There are 1968 sales of the new Mustang 3 speed and the new Rambler Scrambler Duomatic, both with 1967 K-codes.

A little more puzzling is the existence of several 1968 Mustang  3 speeds and 1968 Rambler Scrambler Duomatics with J-codes that would indicate 1966 manufacture.  The immediate reaction is to say that the serial number codes do not correspond to calendar years.  However, it does not fit with other plausible scenarios.

It has been suggested the codes may be related to mode, frame sizel or frame style. However, looking at the data for the G through K-codes show them spanning almost the entire model range regardless of model, frame size or frame style.  

The other possibility is a split year with multiple codes for a particular year, with two codes per year being the most reasonable. If so, when we look at new model introductions or limited runs, we would expect to see the number of codes to be a multiple of the production time span (i.e. a model produced for 1 year would have 2, codes, a model produced for 2 years would have 4 codes, a model produced for 3 years would have 6 codes, etc.). However, this does not appear to be the case. With the above exceptions, the number of codes either equals the production span or is one more than the production span. This n+1 result is consistent with the practice of commencing model year production just prior to a calendar year.  

So, how can 1966 frames be explained on 1968 models?  If CCM were building frames to marketing forecasts and the sales did not materialize, these frames would be put into stock. It’s very possible that CCM overestimated the sales of the new hi-riser models and had frames left over at the end of 1966. When they started building the 1967 hi-riser frames, they may not have taken the time to rotate the stock, pushing the leftover 1966 frames to the back of the stockroom. Consequently, it’s conceivable that some 1966 frames may not have been built up until a year or two later. Since most of the hi-riser models used a common frame , they would probably have been built , serialized and undercoated before being stockpiled. This maximizes flexibility, with the eventual model being defined by the colour and decals, which are applied only after dealer orders are received. 

There was one other anomaly that cropped up during my analysis. There were a handful of cases of boys’ Juvenile and Junior Imperial 700 in gold. According to my literature, these were only catalogued in  Mountie Red and/or Electronic Blue.  The Mens’ and Ladies’ Imperial 700 Sports did have a Golden-Glo colour option but the ledger prices are consistent with the smaller non-Sport models documented, so I’m assuming it was not a transcription error and more likely a painter error or perhaps a special run.

Based on the analysis and the large sample size I’m confident in the 1964-1968 codes. It’s interesting to note that this only skewed by one year from Don Farmer’s  version as reported by Wayne Gillies. Of course the biggest problem with this is that if we extrapolate it backwards on a one letter per year basis, then A = 1958 and this does not mesh with the commonly accepted serial number interpretation for 1921-1960!

Thanks Tom. What a wealth of great information! Nice to see you back on the Forum.

John

I have an internal hub Elan, but can't find the serial number. I was under the impression that after the 60's they were on the bottom of the down tube. Where should I look?

Don, the Elan was produced from 1973-1977 inclusive. The standard location during this period was the bottom of the seat tube, on the non-drive side, 2-3 inches above the bottom bracket shell. Having said that, I have seen some bicycles from this period in some other locations, but always on the seat tube. I've seen some on the drive side, obscured by chain guards and chain rings. I've seen some at the back, so you had to remove the wheel to find it. I've seen some at the top. I even had a Targa 10 with it in the upper, middle section of the seat tube, partially obscured by the decal (see photo)! The workmanship on CCM was getting very shoddy during this period and the varaition in serial number locations was probably just another example of the growing apathy among workers.

If you still can't find a serial number. there are a couple of things you can do to narrow down the model year range. The hub, assuming it is OEM,  should have an open format, two digit year indicator stamped on it.  Also, the 1977 models differed from the 1973-1976 models by having the model name on the down tube, as opposed to the chain guard, and the head emblem had a laurel wreath surrounding a smaller version of the rectangular CCM logo.

I have a mustang with a metal headbadge and the serial # starts with H. It is (or was) identical to the1965 CCM Mustang advertisement. 

A green Mustang with a metal head badge should definitely be a 1965 which is the first year for the Mustang. Nice one to have!

The early 60s seems to be the hardest to pinponit when it comes to the serial numbers, but an "H" sounds logical.

Unfortunately the bike was in very poor condition. I had to get it repainted and replace all the components. The only parts i was able to reuse were the bottom bracket, cog, crank setup and the chain guard.