[CR]Re: Period Correct

(Example: Events:Cirque du Cyclisme:2007)

From: <BobHoveyGa@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 14:53:05 EST
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: [CR]Re: Period Correct

In a message dated 12/24/03 12:38:17 PM, classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org writes:

<< I have to throw my two cents worth in here. To "upgrade" a classic bike with

more "modern" components, is like dropping a fuel injected 5.0 liter Ford

V-8 into a 1954 Jaguar. Certainly it would be faster and more

"user-friendly" than the original engine, but what is the point? If I wanted

new iron, I'd buy it. >>

I knew someone years ago who did one of these conversions (but it was a much later Jaguar and I think it was a 350 Chevy). Not to my taste, but here were his reasons: He loved the look, inside and out, of the Jaguar and the way it handled. He also hated the fact that nobody in town was very good at tuning the V-12 that came in the Jag, to say nothing about the waiting time on parts. And we won't even get into the unmentionable English electrical system. So in the end, he was happy overall, and seldom missed the glorious purr of that V-12.

When somebody tells me that they love the incomparable ride of old steel and the craftsmanship of lugs... but they also want dual pivot brakes, hands on the bars shifting, spare parts that are stocked on the LBS shelves, sealed bearings, a seat with a slot in it, clipless pedals, whatever... well, I guess I gotta give 'em credit for being both honest and practical, regardless of how I may feel about the overall look of the bike. I only pray that if they're gonna attempt all this, they pick a LATER steel bike instead of trying to spread a classic old 120mm frame.

Bob Hovey
Columbus, GA