Re: [CR]Pierce Info

(Example: Framebuilders:Brian Baylis)

Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 08:30:44 -0400
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
From: "John Betmanis" <johnb@oxford.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]Pierce Info
In-Reply-To: <497DDB19B4F54386AD26B4451BB60656@JonPC>
References: <MONKEYFOODS4GyY53Cw0000324e@monkeyfood.nt.phred.org>


At 07:53 PM 11/08/2008 -0700, Otis wrote:
>Well, photos on the internet are not always what they seem. And even though
>the bike looks great in the photos (and in person), this is not a concours
>restoration and there are plenty of flaws to be found.
>
>But considering what I started with I'm happy with the results and learned a
>few things that will make any future projects much better.
>
>The polishing of the parts was all handled by a local plater. And I can only
>take credit for writing them a check. They did a great job for the money.
>But with that said it could have been taken to a much higher level for a lot
>more money. Something I wish I had done now, but at the time did it not make
>sense to do.

But would a better polishing job have been as representative of what the bike looked like when new? Many restorations are overdone to where they look better than when they were new, too good to be true. As for what the bike looks like "in person", when I first saw the pictures I thought to myself that nickel would have looked better than chrome, but then I saw that it actually was nickel. I would imagine then that in person it does look more like nickel than chrome.

Looking forward to seeing the future web page,

John Betmanis
Woodstock, Ontario
Canada