The recent debate about precisely who is the real Mr Hetchins and Mr Gillot is, I would submit maybe a bit controversially, totally irrelevant.
Whoever is building these frames is not making a Hetchins or Gillot. We should stop attaching so much importance to these replica frames.
A chair made by the finest carpenter around and in the style of a Chippendale or Heppelwhite is not a Chippendale or Heppelwhite.
A copy of a Monet, indistinguishible to anyone other than an expert, is still a copy.
A car plant tooled up to produce a very close copy of a Type 35 Bugatti would be fooling no one.
The thing that gets me is that these fakes cost more than the originals! Why would anyone want a copy when they can have the real thing for a lot less, even allowing for the cost of shipping the frame around the world?
Look through the classified ads of just about any UK cycling mag and you will find fine examples of these old, original bikes on offer for quite reasonable sums.
That's not to say that the replica frames aren't well made. Guys like Clive Rodell would not get involved in producing anything other than an excellent product.
However, the frames made today by Brian Bayliss and Richard Sachs and many other fine American-and European-builders have, in my submission, far more integrity than these replicas ever will.
Personally, having checked out the McLean marque following recent discussion, I now lust after my first American bike. Got any going cheap, Dale?
Cheers,
Bruce