"respray" was Re: [CR]1952 Ellis Briggs Frame & Fork (typo corrected)

(Example: Framebuilders:Cecil Behringer)

Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 19:34:45 -0400
From: "HM & SS Sachs" <sachs@erols.com>
To: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>, joebz@optonline.net
Subject: "respray" was Re: [CR]1952 Ellis Briggs Frame & Fork (typo corrected)


Joe Bender-Zanoni is a man of great integrity and excellent taste, even if he is still recovering from an engineering career. :-) Still, once or twice a life-time I might find myself disagreeing with him in matters of taste (but never about facts). In this case, Joe wrote:

Aargh! That 531 respray decal. Better to have no decal at all.

If you have to have that or restorer's decals - put them on the bottom of the bottom bracket. +++++++++++++++++++++++ I'm not saying that I have always liked CyclArt's work, but I believe that their chainstay emblem on repaints is entirely appropriate. Not just pride, but accepting responsibillity and branding the bike as not in original livery. Indeed, when my '38 Paramount was refinished by Waterford, I asked Richard Schwinn if he would add a "Waterford painted" decal. Such they did not have. The bike looks great (pix with Ken Toda's on the CR site), but Waterford's work is part of its history now.

To me, and I don't want to overdo this small difference of opinion, the "respray" decal is part of the history of the bike, the "provenance." It says clearly that someone cared enough about the bike to "renew" it, and that is worth noting.

Not to start an argument, but just another perspective.

harvey sachs
mcLean va