Maybe the best way to decide where you stand would be to consider some real life examples and see how you react to them. I'll use my own bikes, so as not to offend other owners with implied ciritcism.
1. My Ephgrave # 1 is approximately a 1949 model. Sometime in the 80's the then-owner "updated" the bike with Campy short rear drop outs, BB cable guides, DT shifter bosses, metallic paint and bottle cage braze ons. I don't know if the work was done as part of a crash damage repair, so lets assume he did it because he wanted to. The reactions have varied from: "Great idea, the bike is now more usable with readily available components and has an increase level of function" to "the vulgarian who did this totally ruined the mojo of the frame". The effect on value was fairly large, as I got the frame for the opening bid of $375. I assume the changes scared off the serious collectors. My own reaction is mild annoyance: I'd prefer the frame in original condition and I'd live with the difficulties of getting parts and making it work, but I'm happy the price dropped to such a reasonable level. I won't part with it, except in a trade for a comparable frame more my size.
2. My '75 PX10 had a blip with something in the past as the fork was misaligned when I got it. Also, the fork paint was gone in several places and rust was starting, but the rest of the frame was okay cosmetically (with a bunch of touch ups). I sent the fork to the painters for a respray and realignment, and while it was there I had an english threaded steerer fitted. So mow the fork has new paint and ultra non original parts, while the rest of the frame is factory stock. My rationalization was: this is a bike boom Puegeot, one of the most common frames from that time, so there is not a high level of collectibility here. Function is more important on this bike and finding french headsets, bars and stems is a pain. As long as I'm getting it painted, it's okay to make things easy on myself and get a new steerer fitted." If the bike was rarer, a PY10 or an actual team bike, I doubt I would have done anything other than fix the alignment. If it had been something super rare, say Thevent's actual 1975 bike, I'd have started a petition drive to prevent the owner from fixing the smallest sweat/rust stain. Do you agree with what I did, or are you burning my effigy?
3. I've got a mid 70's Tom Teesdale built Cirrus 7 touring rig. It came to me as a NOS frame but someone in the past had taken the fork for their own purposes. The lug work is tremendous in the extreme tapered and filed long point American school. In order to get it rideable, and to match the geometry, I used a Surly cyclo cross fork which means I now have an aheadset fitted with a clamp on Salsa stem and LX cantilevers (mis)matched to a Universal centerpull rear brake (no canti bosses on the rear). The ride is just fine, and I've been complimented on the appearance, but that fork nags at me. This is a rare frameset, as Tom only built a dozen or so of the Cirrus badged frames. I would really like to get a "proper" fork fitted. And not just any fork: I have to send it to Tom and have HIM build me a replacement fork. Then he also has to reset the rear brake bridge from 27 inch tires with centerpulls to standard reach sidepull with 700c. Which of the above actions do you think are acceptable, heretical, or a waste of good money?
Of the three listed critera, value, proveneance and mojo, I'd say value was the least important, provenance second and mojo third. I rank value last because no bikes appreciate enough that they should be bought as an investment. If you're primarily worried about buying collectibles that won't lose value, buy stamps or coins. Of course it is nice to buy something at a fair price, and that you will be able to get at least most of your money back from if you decide to sell, but don't ever count on it. But as we saw with the Ephgrave, major changes significantly depress the value.
Provenance (is it all original/factory specs) gets more into the emotional aspect of these bikes. I think it's nice, but it's only crucial if the bike itself is historically significant. Ratty paint should be replaced unless the TT rust was caused by Gino Bartali's sweat. Significance will also vary from person to person.
Finally mojo if highest if the bike is original, but again everyone differs on how original it must be. I don't particularly worry if a period correct freewheel and chain is fitted, and the brand of brake cable clips don't have to match. I'm more impressed by how well the bike rides, and how well it serves the purposes of the rider. If a tube must be replaced, I'd like it better if the original builder did the work, but even then, the repaired bike isn't the same. I like to ride the bike the way the original rider had it.
So that's my non-answer. I prefer originality, but I'm not fanatical about it. Hope this contributes something to the discussion.
Tom Adams, Shrewsbury NJ
>From: "richardsachs@juno.com" <richardsachs@juno.com>
>To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>Subject: [CR]NOW: Value WAS: Original run Carlsbad Masi
>Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 16:10:45 GMT
>
>
>on the coat tails of the recent thread, i am interested to
>hear what folks think about this. if this frame or one as rare
>as this is re-tubed owing to an accident, how is the value/
>mojo/provenance affected? the same question goes for the
>fork if a new steerer is installed.
>
>if you're a masi-phile or just a CR sycophant, where are
>your bounderies on this issue?
>
>e-RICHIE
>chester, ct
>
>_______________________________________________
>Classicrendezvous mailing list
>Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>http://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvous
_______________________________________________
Classicrendezvous mailing list
Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
http://www.bikelist.org/