Jon, I'm definitely of the "made to be ridden" school, and I won't have a bike I'm not going to ride. It only seems logical to me to keep a bike unridden if one plans to sell it in the future, and if you're only interested in classic bikes as an investment, you can do better in any decent mutual fund. There are those who see these things as works of art, and I guess I agree to a point, but to me they are functional art whose real beauty is in the using.
Regards,
Jerry Moos
Jon Bridges wrote:
> Here is the question which I have been pondering lately. Say you had a classic bicycle which had never been ridden, would you ride it or not ride it? How many of you guys do ride some or all of your really pristeen bikes? Are there some bikes you would ride, some you would keep nice?
>
> The reason I ask is that I am just about to finish making up my first classic bike - Colnago Mexico 1982 with Super Record. It is all NOS, so it has never been ridden, and I am really divided between keeping it perfectly mint, or taking it for the occassional ride. I am certainly not planning to sell it ever, but it seems odd taking all this stuff out of the boxes and sitting on it on a dirty road!
>
> I guess there is the 'made to be ridden' school and the 'preserve history' school. Any comments would be appreciated.
>
> Jon Bridges. Auckland, New Zealand.