Something different again : a bike that COULD be ridden practically as is. But it would be a shame to ride it into the ground :
http://www.reneherse.com/
I personally am keeping it absolutely as is. Any future custodian will have the choice of what he wants to do with it.
I really think both approaches are needed : the vast majority of bikes shou ld be kept "alive" and ridden, but not repainted unless what is left is bey ond conservation (or there are already a mass of identical bikes in better condition available, cf Colnagos). A minority of bikes, the "ultra-rare", b ikes with a history, bikes in fabulous "patina" condition, should be left " as found"; and not ridden.
Certainly if you look at other fields, the general consensus is that over-r estoration has done great harm. Take architecture for example : an unbeliev able number of romanesque churches here in SW France were irremediably ruin ed in the 19th C by disciples of Viollet-le-Duc (with less talent than the master) trying to put the monuments back into "an ideal state that may neve r have existed".
To come back to bikes : so many early bicycles that had good original finis h, transfers, etc, have been ruined for ever by repaint re-nickel jobs (poo rly done most of the time) where a careful clean/wax would have done wonder s.
Certainly here in Europe the general move is away from restoration/repaint/ rechrome whenever possible.
Alexander March Bordeaux France
______________________________________________________