Re: [CR] colnago on ebay

(Example: Events:Eroica)

From: "Eugene Powell" <radfin@SpiritOne.com>
To: Charles Andrews <chasds@mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <F88745C6215342F3B857352064868743@DELL>
References:
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:55:36 -0700
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR] colnago on ebay


Wow, slow down guys.

Let's start with some perspective,

Is this frame historically significant? Probably not........

Is it rare? Not judging by the numbers seen rolling through this list, craigslist and eBay on a daily basis.................

What is its "best use" or "highest purpose"? Some will differ, but I'd say it's a rider to be enjoyed out on the road. That's just my opinion, but I think it's defensible.

So if it's a rider, has Mr Anderson damaged this frame and/or it's future owners enjoyment/investment? Hard to say without some "before and afters", but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for several reasons,

I've been painting frames awhile now (since '83) and I can tell you thick paint will chip easier, crack easier, and generally not hold up nearly as well as thin (but sufficient to cover) paint. As Keith has been painting frames for a while too, I trust him to know that and apply the paint properly. I'm going to guess that the frame was photographed to make the most of that wet look and it may look a bit different in person (ever seen those "glamour" photos then met the person that sat before the camera)

If this were a historically significant frame (that for whatever reason HAD to be refinished) or something very rare and wonderful and destined to spend its days gathering dust in a museum (or Charles garage) then it would be important to duplicate the original finish as exactly as possible (that is the only reason they still make black nitrocellulose laquer, so you can refinish your model-T). But as a bike to be ridden, in my opinion it would be foolish not to protect the paint and decals as best is possible and nearly all modern paint systems are designed to do that with a clear coat. You could of course use an older paint system, omit the decals or make any number of other choices or compromises. And as long as you understand those choices I'll stand by and cheer you on. And if you don't understand those choices I hope you're somebody else's customer or I haven't done my job.

In a few months I hope to have a new shop and a working spray booth. It's gonna feel real good to get back to spraying. Among my first projects will be

a mid-70s Colnago Super, originally from Amsterdam, presently in rattle can red

a possible Louis Bobet (still doing some research on this one) also in rattle can red

a '76 T.S. Isaac, according to an interview in the Rivendell Reader it may have been for the '76 Olympic team, more homework to do. Presently wearing the worst powder coat black I've ever seen, thick and pealing.

and a '60ish Higgins Ultralight Trike, needs decals and a headbadge, presently in rattle can gray primer.

By the standards I put forward above I'll have some hard decisions to make.

The Colnago is easy, it's a rider. No original finish so nothing is lost.

The Bobet is a little harder, uncommon yes, but rare? And the original finish is long gone (and perhaps the fork as well) I'll have more questions for the list when the time comes.

The Isaac may have some history, now we're in museum territory, HMMMMMMM

And the Higgins, again is it rare or just uncommon and collectable.

None of these has the original finish so I trust there won't be any fainting when they go off to the strippers. But I do plan to post pics as the restoration/refinishing goes forward and I'm looking forward to hearing your strong opinions.

Don't use up all your tar and feathers on Keith, there're a bunch of us painters on the list I'm sure we've all sinned a time or two......................

Gene Powell Rad Finishes Portland, Oregon USA

On Jun 29, 2009, at 8:44 PM, Charles Andrews wrote:
> Tom wrote:
>
> "In 200 years that Colnago will be in a museum and if the curator is
> knowledgable he/she will describe it as a "contemporary" refinish.
> The original
> finished bikes will be sadly rusted through and recycled as soup
> cans by
> then. Would you care if someone had polished up King Tut's mask
> within 30 years
> of his burial? Perhaps put some thicker gold on it? Heck no. "
>
> *********
>
> Sorry Tom, but I must disagree with you categorically. That Colnago
> is a sad piece of work, and no collector would go near it. You want
> it, by all means, go ahead, but before you start dissing collectors,
> you might want to do a little research first. There are a lot of
> "bug collectors" on this list, and they might know a wee bit more
> about all this than you do.
>
> Not to mention the fact that any clean original will likely be well-
> taken-care of at this point, so it's highly unlikely it'll end up
> "rusted through." Us "bug collectors" tend to be pretty careful
> about that.
>
> Original paint is always more desirable. In 200 years that colnago
> will be laughed at--and trust me, a number of us are laughing at it
> now--and originals will be in museums. That's how it goes. Hardly
> the same thing as Tut's burial mask. For a true collector the only
> thing that frame is good for is as a rider (though it wouldn't give
> much pleasure in use, looking the way it does, not if you know how
> it could look), or as raw material to buy, strip, and restore in
> more rewarding fashion.
>
> and if you can't have original paint, something that evokes the
> original is the next best choice. The painter and client in this
> case decided to do something that draws attention to the fact that
> this is anything but original.
>
> My own feeling is that this kind of paint looks crummy even on KOF
> frames. All details are hidden by thick paint and thicker clear-
> coat. There's no art in it. It's crude, frankly. It takes a lot
> more skill to do it right.
>
> Let's put it this way: put that frame, and a totally original frame
> in clean condition, on ebay, and see which one fetches more money.
> Care to bet? That's the bottom line, and by that measure, original
> nearly always comes out ahead, all other things being equal. Not to
> mention that original, or plausibly original, is far more rewarding
> in use or to show. Subjective? Yup. Ask most people who've been
> around this stuff awhile though, and they'll say the same.
>
> I'll be posting pictures by and by to compare that frame with an
> original, and anyone can make their own judgement.
>
> Charles Andrews
> Los Angeles
>
>
>
>
> "everyone has elites; the important thing is
> to change them from time to time."
>
> --Joseph Schumpeter, via Simon Johnson