Re: [CR]to restore or not, and how? the endlessly debatable question

(Example: Racing:Jean Robic)

Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:36:12 -0400
From: "Mike Schmidt" <mdschmidt56@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]to restore or not, and how? the endlessly debatable question
In-reply-to: <907066.682.qm@web35605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
To: "thomasthomasa@yahoo.com" <thomasthomasa@yahoo.com>
References: <907066.682.qm@web35605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
cc: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>

I don't think there is any right answer, we just have two philosophies.

That 1963 chrome Herse I bought from the March family has crappy chrome but I wrestle with a decision to re chrome or not.

If a frame is in danger, then preservation is a must.....ATMO!

Mike Schmidt Stirling, New Jersey Sent from my 3G iPhone

On Jul 18, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Thomas Adams <thomasthomasa@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear List:
>
> All of this, of course, has been debated several times, again and
> again on
> this list, live at Cirques and Velo Rendezvous-es, and at other
> meetings.
> The disagreement (mild) I have with the preservationists (thou shalt
> not touch that original finish) is that concentrating on the paint
> finish
> to such a degree distorts the purpose and function of the paint
> itself and
> the bike as a whole. The bike is a tool, and the paint's functional
> pur
> pose is to keep it from rusting. Once that functional aspect is
> compromi
> sed, the owner is fully justified in renewing the protective
> finish. Pai
> nt is a consumable item like tires and brake lever hoods: when they
> wear
> out, get new stuff.
>
> Will the new paint be the same as the old paint? No. Why should it?
> That's not what paint is for. No builder intends a bike's finish to
> be eternal. If he did, he'd powder coat it. (Or blue it, maybe, in
> th
> e old days.)
>
> And then this focus on the surface finish tends to emphasize what is
> to m
> e the least important aspect of a collectible bike. What's importa
> nt about a bike is how well it's designed to accomplish it's goal,
> how we
> ll it fits the rider, how well it's assembled and how the builder
> worked
> on the lugs. The paint finish is a very distant 5th, or even 6th or
> 7th
> once we consider parts selection and rider modification to suit his
> visio
> n. These are the soul of the bike. It's still there unchanged even
> if
> resprayed in Imron metallic.
>
> Now, contrariwise, on the other hand, and playing devil's advocate,
> I do lo
> ve to look at old bikes that show their battle scars, where paint
> has fad
> ed, bar tape has frayed and saddles are well scuffed. I've got a
> '50's H
> oldsworth Sirocco I showed this year at Cirque that I probably won't
> touch
> even though most of the paint had faded and the top tube has
> transformed fr
> om the original green to a sandy brown. But the bike doesn't have
> signif
> icant rust issues. If it did, ooh, I don't know.
>
> The closest analogy I can make, as it seems to me, would be like
> owning a
> collectible knife or tool with a cutting edge, and then refusing to
> reshar
> pen it after it grew dull on the grounds that it would alter the
> tool from
> the way it came from the original maker. That's not what the original
> intent was for this item.