[CR]To Restore or Not to Restore

(Example: Framebuilding:Technology)

From: "JEFFERY Pyzyk" <appraisalresourcegroup@msn.com>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 11:29:51 -0600
Subject: [CR]To Restore or Not to Restore

This topic has probably been hashed around on the list more than Blond Lebanese in Madison during the late '60's. However, given some of the recent E-bay prices for unrestored "rats", I think the topic can safely be revisited.

I've got a late 60's/early 70's Cinelli SC with original decals and what's left of the original silver paint. It is an early drilled lug frame with the old-style long campy dropouts, and also still has the fender eyelets. It is ratty as hell. "Patina" is not a word that comes to mind. The paint is worn through all over the place with some pitting of chrome in the usual areas under the lugs. Looking at it, you would say that it obviously needs to be stripped, re-chromed, and re-painted.

However, it is authentic! Decals and color bands, lettering, and the Columbus SL decals are honest and original.

After seeing what one old battle worn Cinelli recently sold for on E-bay, I have some doubts that a restored bike would be any more valuable than a ratty original one. Like most of you, I'm in this for love and not for money, so the decision is not really based on economics.

My personal preference is for my bikes to look as near to new as possible. It's probably from some Freudian anal retentive stage I never got through or something, I don't know. However, in this case, I have some trepidation about restoration.

Jeff Pyzyk
Milwaukee, WI