Not meaning to sabotage this thread, but I've been watching TV coverage of the annual Barrett-Jackson collectible car auctions broadcast from Scottsdale, Arizona during the past 2 days and there were many concerns which crossed over to our collectible bikes.
One frequent (and truly On-Topic) mention was the prices achieved for: 1.) completely correct and all-original cars, 2.) painstaking frame-off restorations using all correct parts and, 3.) the lower prices sometimes found for "too-good" better-than-original restorations.
Very much in line with our own restoration concerns, it was interesting to hear the commentators note that sometimes, in other car show venues, more than 100 points were taken off (from a 1000 point grading system) when a cars re-finish was in fact SUPERIOR to the way an auto may have originally rolled off of the assembly line. During this coverage, there were several highly appreciative mentions given by the commentators regarding cars which were re-finished with INTENTIONALLY inferior care given to the paint under the hood of the engine compartment. This was recalled as precisely the way several cars would have originally been sprayed (in typical haste) at their factories.
There was also the repeated refrain that "Original means original - and only that" and even perfectly correct and factory new vintage replacement parts could detract from a restoration when a slightly used part would have been better suited - even to a complete and extremely costly restoration.
There was also mention of certain cars which began as a slightly llesser model but were now enhanced or upgraded, using all the appropriate and factory original correct components to now re-build a car into a perfectly authentic and correct higher model - precisely as the factory would have done to originally offer such a premium model. With cars, there are often codes shown in the stamped serial numbers which can indicate the specific component package for a factory assembled car. Correctly restored lower tier cars had now sometimes received higher prices than later enhanced offerings.
With cars, the frame (body) and engine numbers are often easier to confirm as perfectly original by comparing the two serial numbers (which should match). Cars in which these did NOT match commanded lower sale prices, even though a new (and correct) engine for that specific year and model was now present.
With bikes, it would be easy to sneak in a full NOS Campagnolo gruppo to a re-finished frame which was originally equipped with lesser components. Some models had framesets which had been otherwise identical. Perhaps an easy grasp example of such a newly upgraded bike would be a restored Peugeot frameset from the early 1970s, rebuilt from a PX-10 E model to now create a PX-10 LE model. Does such a selective enhancement matter? - No, not in my opinion.
However, this is one area where NOS components can actually cloud and ultimately detract from the value of a bike. On the other hand... once that crankset rotates a chain, that component is no longer NOS. So, apart from bikes which will be kept forever under glass, why should one bother with NOS when a lightly used but essentially perfect component would suffice?
One last car parallel: Many cars presented in less than perfect "show" condition, yet completely original, were considered to be very well-bought bargains. And much appreciation was shown for such unrestored cars which could now be ridden daily and much enjoyed precisely as they were now purchased, even with all their technical "points-off" flaws - due simply to their age and actual use.
BOB HANSON, ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO, USA