Re: [CR]Rebuild/ restoration: Where do YOU draw the line?


Example: History:Ted Ernst

Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:57:18 -0500
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
From: John Betmanis <johnb@oxford.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]Rebuild/ restoration: Where do YOU draw the line?
In-Reply-To: <033201c824db$241c6ea0$0300a8c0@ourlaptop>


At 10:21 PM 11/11/2007 -0500, Dr. Paul Williams wrote:
>How far is it worth going to ensure that parts are absolutely period
>correct - to the year and, in the case of some parts, to the exact
>month? And will they still be functional? After all isn't this a bike to
>be ridden?

I would tend to agree with Dale on this. Unless you're trying to recreate an absolutely period correct example for display in a museum, there is nothing wrong with building a bike up the way the original owner might have upgraded it over the years. Would it be a sin to use approximately period correct alloy rims on a model that was originally sold with steel rims? What about using 36 spoke wheels on an old British bike? I'll soon be embarking on a Claud Butler restoration project and have been pondering all these things. My plan is to build a functional bike, even if I have to use some incorrect parts and then change them to more appropriate ones as time goes by if I find them at a decent price.
>I do have the nicely
>chromed headlamp and am currently looking for a suitable matching
>bracket. Yet, I haven't a clue whether I can get the right batteries to
>run the lamp! Is a fitted lamp which does not work little more than a
>pretention?

If it's one of those flat 4.5 volt batteries, I believe they're still available. However, batteries are consumables and unless you're going to be regularly riding the bike at night, why bother? There's nothing wrong with having an antique car with an empty gas tank.

John Betmanis
Woodstock, Ontario
Canada