Re: [CR]Principles and Terminology in Vintage Steel Bike Collecting

(Example: Framebuilding:Tubing)

Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:23:14 +0000 (GMT)
From: <gholl@optonline.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]Principles and Terminology in Vintage Steel Bike Collecting
In-reply-to: <a0623096cc4a514d9ce1c@[192.168.1.33]>
To: Jan Heine <heine94@earthlink.net>
References: <588685.49153.qm@web28002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <e450ddda36152.487f424c@optonline.net> <BAYC1-PASMTP022A1870A623CB43421E4AE48E0@CEZ.ICE>
cc: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>

Hi Jan: Your questions and concerns can be addressed directly: Can these Herse bikes be repaired without destroying them-of course, and the sooner the better. They're almost destroyed by neglect already. This destruction is continuing beneath the wax. I don't know what "information" would be lost by a proper repair. The current condition of the cycle can be recorded by photographic and other means currently at hand. Whatever "originality" was present here is already very diminished and soon will be entirely gone. What is of most importance here is that the repairs be correctly done. The means to repaint, rechrome and produce decals, parts, etc. is available. Of course, and quite rightly so, the cost of such work work is very high. But, in my opinion, these are just the type of vintage bikes that should be properly repaired.
Regards,
George
George Hollenberg MD


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan Heine"
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:42:00 -0000
Subject: Re: [CR]Principles and Terminology in Vintage Steel Bike Collecting
To: "Dr. Paul Williams", gholl@optonline.net
Cc: "Classic Rendezvous"


> At 9:29 AM -0400 7/17/08, Dr. Paul Williams wrote:
> >George,
> >
> >I agree wholeheartedly. As a former archaeologist of over 20
> years
> >(and married to a former archaeological conservator) I have
> seen my
> >share of bags of iron artefacts which were kept - because they
> were
> >deemed to be part of the site archive - end up as nothing more
> than
> >piles of rust "dust"!
> >
> >Patina is one thing, but active corrosion is another - often
> that
> >nice verdigris on Cu-alloy objects hides more destructive
> issues. We
> >find ourselves in a situation, which was discussed at length
> fairly
> >recently, of whether a bike is to be simply hung on the wall or
> is
> >to be ridden. Either way, corrosion is not a good thing and
> left
> >unchecked can turn a valuable keepsake into a fragile and
> unstable
> >mess. But, it goes without saying that this becomes an even
> greater
> >issue when it comes to a "rider"!
>
> I think the first question is whether you can repair the damage
> without destroying the artefact. On this Rene Herse
>
> http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/herse52-whole2.jpg
>
> the chrome is so rusty that really nothing is left. What you see
> is
> bare steel, unprotected from the elements. The paint has little
> rust
> marks, and has faded. The gold lettering and lining has oxidized
> and
> now is almost olive green.
>
> This bike is not as it left the Herse shop in 1952 - back then
> it was
> shiny, with new chrome. You could argue that it no longer
> represents
> Herse's vision. On the other hand, you can still see what the
> vision
> was, and how it looked originally.
>
> However, a rechrome would require a repaint. And new lettering
> and
> lining. And new Reynolds stickers (which you'd have to make, as
> the
> correct ones are not available currently).
>
> I would argue that restored, this bike might be closer to
> Herse's
> original vision, but retain far less information about how Herse
> bikes looked in 1952. And in my opinion, the historic
> information
> trumps the "show appeal".
>
> Instead of restoring the bike, the owner scraped off the loose
> rust
> with steel wool, waxed the entire frame, and now rides the bike
> only
> when it does not rain. During the past 8 years, the condition of
> the
> bike has not changed, so it appears to be fine.
>
> If, at a later stage, we figure out how to replicate the old
> paints
> exactly, and feel that originality is not worth much, the owner
> can
> rechrome and repaint.
>
> This Herse tandem
>
> http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/HERSETANDEM.jpg
>
> had to be redone. The original chrome was completely rusty, and
> had
> been overpainted with silver spray cans. The bike was too pitted
> to
> rechrome, so it was painted instead. Even though we tried our
> best
> when restoring it in 2003, and spent considerable sums of money,
> the
> result does not look like a real Rene Herse. The paint is too
> thick,
> the lining was applied with a roller instead of a brush, the
> lining
> pattern is incorrect for a 1946 Herse (we thought it was a 1947
> bike
> when we restored it, copied a 1948 one, as we could not find an
> original earlier one)...
>
> This original tandem
>
> http://reneherse.com/40standem.html
>
> shows what we were trying to achieve. The difference may be hard
> to
> see in the photos, but if you put the bikes side-by-side, it is
> very
> noticeable.
>
> During the restoration of the tandem, a perforation of one of
> the
> triangulation tubes was overlooked, acids seeped in during the
> stripping of the chrome, and bubbled up a few years later, so
> we'll
> get to redo it after replacing the tube. We'll try better this
> time,
> with thinner paint, correct lining and hopefully will come up
> with
> something more convincing.
>
> Jan Heine
> Editor
> Bicycle Quarterly
> 140 Lakeside Ave #C
> Seattle WA 98122
> http://www.bikequarterly.com
>

George Hollenberg MD
CT, USA