Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?


Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 16:15:25 +0000 (GMT)
From: gholl@optonline.net
Subject: Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?
In-reply-to: <3.0.6.32.20070603100323.01340c80@mailhost.oxford.net>
To: John Betmanis <johnb@oxford.net>
References: <8801bb250706021147u5d03634ane43fe8f8e1ad82a2@mail.gmail.com> <461455.61341.qm@web82211.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <e653b20f14e4d.4661d19d@optonline.net>
cc: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>

Dear Mr. Betmanis: The short answer to your question is yes. A good restorer can do almost anything. Furthermore, as many have pointed out some of the original makers of the bikes we covet are still around and some are only too happy to help the collector with their bike restoration (conservation if you will). George Hollenberg MD Westport, CT, USA


----- Original Message -----
From: John Betmanis
Date: Sunday, June 3, 2007 10:03 am
Subject: Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org


> At 09:20 AM 03/06/2007 -0400, Dr. Paul Williams wrote:

\r?\n>

\r?\n> >In the case of a vintage bike, a restorer would likely remove

\r?\n> the old finish

\r?\n> >and repaint whereas a conservator would clean the bike

\r?\n> (including removing

\r?\n> >corrosion) maintaining the original patina and inpainting where

\r?\n> needed. You

\r?\n> >would be able to see - if somewhat subtle - that the inpainting

\r?\n> was

\r?\n> >distinctive from the original finish. They do try and match as

\r?\n> closely as

\r?\n> >possible though! The idea is to show that an object has its own

\r?\n> life-story -

\r?\n> >including use and abuse!

\r?\n>

\r?\n> That's very interesting. So if you had an old frame with the original

\r?\n> finish, but scratches and rust here and there and some rust

\r?\n> spots bubbling

\r?\n> from under the chrome, you could remove the rust with oxalic

\r?\n> acid, touch up

\r?\n> the scratches and chips, apply a coat of wax and it would look

\r?\n> like it had

\r?\n> been well cared for from the beginning.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Something I don't think I've seen in vintage bikes is what they

\r?\n> do in the

\r?\n> car world. Fully restored bikes usually end up with a finish far

\r?\n> superiorthan the one they originally had, including clearcoat

\r?\n> over the decals when

\r?\n> they never came from the factory that way. While many cars are also

\r?\n> restored to better than new, there is also a school that makes

\r?\n> sure they

\r?\n> look just like they left the assembly line, complete with

\r?\n> orangepeel paint,

\r?\n> overspray here and there and even reproduced crayon marks as

\r?\n> would have

\r?\n> been made by line inspectors. Would a bike restorer ever try to

\r?\n> duplicatean original substandard finish with dust specks,

\r?\n> crooked and damaged decals

\r?\n> with no clearcoat over them just because that's how those bikes

\r?\n> originallycame from the factory?

\r?\n>

\r?\n> John Betmanis

\r?\n> Woodstock, Ontario

\r?\n> Canada