[CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 6, Issue 121

(Example: History:Ted Ernst)

From: "Stephen Barner" <steve@sburl.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <CATFOOD27kBnccYTjr8000005a2@catfood.nt.phred.org>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 12:27:06 -0400
Subject: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 6, Issue 121

I liked the treatment done too the saddle rivets as well, but this thread begs a question. When do we consider it ok to alter a product and when is it not ok? Do we base it on age, historical significance, number of surviving examples? Personally, I adhere to the philosophy that, if you own it, it is yours to do with as you will. Still, I cringe whenever I see a classic car that has been hotrodded, or a classic bike that is parted out in an attempt to bring a larger financial return to its current owner.

But what about a product that is of current manufacture? Many people see marketed products as simply being in one phase of manufacture, ready for further alteration and re-engineering. A person who has a new bike, or one that has been ridden a few years, custom painted, or who swaps out the saddle or some other part for one that suits them better is continuing the manufacturing process, as is the person who drills out a part or adds brazeons to the frame. Does anyone really care of someone buys a brand new 2003 Raleigh Pro and makes changes in it? If not, then wouldn't it be inappropriate for someone 40 years from now to comment that it is a shame that the change was made?

So, if the person who bought that saddle chose to customize it, how can we criticize that decision now? On what basis does one bemoan the modification of a frame that came equipped with an awkward shifting system to take advantage of new technologies current to the service life of the machine? That's just the historical record, as evidenced on the product. I think you can argue that it would be inappropriate for someone to modify an old Cambia a Bacchetta bike to accept 130 mm click-shift components today, but the best way to keep this from happening is for the bike to be worth enough that the owner recognizes loss of investment that such a change would incur. It also doesn't hurt to try to make people aware of the historical value of such pieces. This awareness often accompanies knowledge of financial value.

Steve Barner, who rides all his bikes and therefore changes them constantly, Bolton, Vermont


----- Original Message -----


> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 12:12:59 -0700
> From: Jay Sexton <jvs@sonic.net>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR]Modified Colnago saddle
> Message-ID: <3EFDE8BB.2040606@sonic.net>
> References: <CATFOODZneAzdfTVSxz00000579@catfood.nt.phred.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: list
> Message: 1
>
> Andrew Gillis wrote:
>
> >Regarding the 'Ideale 90 Colnago Saddle' on eBay...(AKA Ideale 90 butchered
> >with Colnago logos)
> >
> >Moron: IQ between 50 and 75
> >Imbecile: IQ between 25 and 50
> >Idiot: IQ below 25.
> >
> Take your pick, they all apply!
>
>
> I though it was pretty creative....go figure, eh? Maybe not comfortable, and it deducts points for spoiling an original saddle, but creative nontheless.
>
> Jay Sexton
> Sebastopol, CA