Peter Weigle (I think it was my esteemed friend Peter) suggested that each owner in the Cirque show declare whether his bike is "original" vs. "restored," to make judging easier. Now, I have enormous respect for Peter, and great love for the bike, his own ride, that he consented to sell me several years ago. But, I like vigorous discussion too, so let's stir the pot.
At first blush, this cut makes sense for production bikes, say a Raleigh Pro, shipped with a full ensemble of parts. Is the finish original, and are the parts the ones it came with? But, all the parts? Can't I change "wear" parts, like chain, cogs, tires, brake lever hoods? Is it still "original" if I change the left crank for a matching one, because the original snapped? So, I'd devilishly suggest that there's some grey in this, too.
But wait, it gets better: What about a custom, that was bought from a builder or shop as a frameset and built up? Does "original" mean that it has the parts it was first ridden with, or only that the frame finish is original? Take my '73 Hetchins, which probably was built up at Cupertino. It came with a Suntour "backwards" FD that doesn't match up with the frame braze-ons, and required a kludge fit to work. Doesn't sound right, eh, not to fix that original build error. Done. Am I allowed to add a "demultiplicator" to mate the barcons to the proper RD?
So, I guess we're converging, by reducing the alternatives to absurdity (like we were mathemagicians), to an understanding that "original" refers to frame finish. So, I have one other Theological Question for my beloved brothers and sisters of the road: Is my Peter Weigle "original?" It wears the paint that it had when I bought it ~2005, as the first buyer of the bike, paint that Peter did. But, it's at least its third painting. The first was by Betsy Weigle, as a show bike in the early '80s. Since then, it's had a new brake bridge, other changes, and been repainted twice by Peter. Is it "original?" Certainly not "restored," since that brake bridge wasn't available when it was built originally...
Having (too) cleverly shown that classifications are helpful but that they tend not to cover every case, I can now sign off. I confess that I once commited taxonomy, and even helped "author" a new species of long-dead microfossil... :-)
harvey sachs
mcLean va