[CR]On reproduction parts

Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:30:03 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [CR]On reproduction parts
From: wheelman@nac.net
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

Well I got sucked into this string. Have not read all the postings so if I am redundant then you have my apologies. I really like original stuff but who doesn't. For me there are two real factors I consider with repop stuff. How good does it compare to the original and cost. If it looks good and is available at a substancial savings to an original NOS item then I consider it. In so far as provinance and originality, that stuff goes right out the door soon as the original owner parts with the bike in my opinion. In a lot of collecting hobbies people run their fingers over items in much the same way Ebinizer Scrooge fondled his gold. In reality once there is no direct lineage from the original owner with both photo and notarized, documentation then it is questionable. All original means is that the item is of original origin. It does not mean that it is the way it left the showroom floor. Bikes in particular. The only thing that can really be "original" is the frame and fork (eh!) because all components are subject to changes. Example, a 75 MASI was originally fitted with a 73 derailleur. Is that original? If over time that 73 was replaced with a 75 is that original? If that 75 was replaced with a different 73 is that original? You can take these discussions to ridiculous extremes if you like. I just like working on them, looking at them and riding them. The rest icing on the cake but as my wife remindes me, in the end it is all just pipes.

Ray Homiski
Elizabeth, NJ