John Crump,
I am with you, my friend. Some of us are no longer in "NOS" condition, either, but we are still very much "rolling," despite our "used" condition. Our bearings may be a little stiffer and/or more worn and our "headsets" a bit brinelled, , but we have achieved a certain "patina" that goes very well with no-longer-pristine bikes and parts. Every brand-new bike I have ever owned only stayed that way for a few minutes once I bought it and rode it. (And why else would one ever buy a bike, pray tell, except to ride it, love it, and care for it as a partner?)
I do not understand why anyone outside of a museum (and I love and support museums as wonderful and appropriate institutions) would want NOS parts to hang on an historic bike that is itself no longer NOS and will (or should) be ridden into "patina'ed" shape in any case...
I think the comparisons to stamp and other "collecting" only works part-way, especially for those of us who own bikes to ride them, not preserve them in amber like some fossil. There is great value in restoring bikes according to historical standards with era- appropriate parts, but the idea of stashing parts away for years simply to make money leaves me cold, as it is not connected to the riding of bicycles itself.
In fact, one of the major "gulfs" between various members of this list may be why we are involved in old bikes. Those who approach buying and selling bikes, frames, and parts as just another way to make money may never understand rants like this one, while those of us who are passionate about riding bikes (with all other activities arising from that passion) may never be able to understand those who simply want to make money and be good, successful merchants who just happen to have bikes and parts in their inventories.
Jon Spangler in Alameda, CA USA, where the rain is lighter this afternoon and the sun is almost trying to illuminate our very soggy corner of the planet
On Jan 19, 2010, at 12:00 PM, John Crump wrote:
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:26:49 -0500
> From: <crumpy6204@aol.com>
> Subject: [CR] NOS the TRUE value?
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Message-ID: <8CC67547B3C460B-2470-3C2F@webmail-d044.sysops.aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> WHY? WHY? would someone pay 10 times or more for something that's
> NOS? This has puzzled me for some time now. UNLESS you are
> building a machine that is going to hang on the wall, as a shinny
> lump of metal, ONLY to gaze at in awe and NEVER be used for the
> purpose that it was made for, WHY WHY WHY buy NOS? I have always
> avoided NOS parts. I do not want a clean shinny bit on my built to
> RIDE bikes, especially if the costs is way out of line. PATINA a
> word that is used to describe all antiques including ME, cant use
> that word on anything NOS! Many list members have machines that
> have been ridden the way they should have been, in ORIGINAL
> condition, NOT NOS, they now have glorious PATINA, I know many will
> disagree with me, Lets have your take on this. Cheers John Crump
> OldwithlotsofpatinaBrit, Parker. Co USA