Tom Adams wrote:
I tend to feeel that any frame that is starting to show rust should be repainted as a matter of proper maintenance (if the ride is nice enough to warrant the money).
******
I can see Tom's point in some circumstances. But in most circumstances, removing an original finish because of a little corrosion is a bad idea, and not necessarily because of any concern over market value (although that's certainly a consideration at times).
We've been over this numerous times, but in light of Tom's--and other--posts, I wanted to stick my oar in one more time: original finishes have a spirit to them. And once it's gone, it's gone. Original finishes give a bike its personality. Removing a bike's original finish and repainting because of rust, would be like taking a 5000 year-old egyptian statue (like one I saw recently at a museum), and painting it to match what it looked like originally. All that impressive history would be gone, and what would be left would a fake, modern (if period-correct), sterile (or worse) finish. An unspeakable thought actually.
I've taken away exactly that impression from innumerable repainted frames. Even nice ones. Original is always best...except when it has to be sacrificed for repairs, or when it just looks so crappy you can't stand it...and that line is different for all of us.
Of course, when the original finish is long gone, in a previous repaint or from extreme deterioration, then the fun begins...
Charles Andrews SoCal
that's the puzzle of what has happened to the automobile world: feeling safe has become more important than actually being safe.
--Malcolm Gladwell