The original question really was about ex-pro bikes used by non-famous ride
rs. My own view is that any bike with history is more interesting tha
n one without. But taking a couple of examples from my own accumulati
on of bikes, I am equally interested in the history of a 1955 one-previous
owner non-pro bike with original receipt as I am in the history of a 1969 e
x-pro bike. Fortunately the pro was not that good, so the price of th
e bike is not much increased and it would be no great financial or historic
disaster if I should happen to bend it. I fail to see the value of a
champion's bike for anything other than a museum. The cost of riding
it is potentially too high, in terms of history and money, should somethin
g happen to it. And what on earth use is a bike that you can't enjoy
riding? I have a few bikes with known history and many without.
All other things being equal, I would go for a bike with known history, wh
atever it was, pro or
not, than for one without. What I would not do is spend silly money
on a champion's bike, but that is because I would rather have a bike to rid
e than one to brag about. A question of priorities really.
Hugh Thornton
Cheshire, England
From: gholl@optonline.net <gholl@optonline.net> Subject: [CR]The Collecting of Champions' Bikes To: "Classic Rendezvous" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Date: Sunday, 21 September, 2008, 11:53 PM
In truth all collecting has an element of irrationality. Both vintage cycle collecting and the collecting of champion racers' bikes have something important in common-the appreciation of excellence. The most valued of vintage bikes are those of those makers whose excellence has been appreciated by collectors over a period of time. Their abilities in so me aspect (or many aspects) of construction was valued in their time and thereafter. Since many collectors, especially of vintage lightweights, valued the productions of those makers who were dedicated to bike racing, and since ra cing is in many ways, a severe test for a bike, the bikes of those racing bike builders are among the most valued by collectors. Athletic prowess is also valued in our society and many others. No one who has ever attempted to race a bike cannot appreciate the excellence of the great
champion racers (whatever their other imperfections). Therefore, some collectors attach value to the cycles these men and women used-it is simply a sign of respect for their athletic talent. Now, it can be argued that the bikes used by these champions did not repres ent the best work of the maker. However, no bike maker, no matter how humble wa nts to see his bike held up to ridicule by failure during a race. So, at the le ast, champions' bikes were deemed race worthy by their constructors. This is hardly a small thing. Now whether society should value athletes' talents over others such as farmers, etc., is beyond the scope of this Forum. If such regard is express ed in their earnings, the answer is clear. I might add that the collecting of champions' bikes is very tough-one has to ascertain both the validity and condition of the bike and its provenance-anyone who has attempted this can attest to its difficulty. Sadly, like all valueable collectables, the value of genuine champions' bikes has spawned criminals who specialize in producing frauds, often hard to detect. CR Listers are a very important group dedicated to detecting and identifying these crooks. George George Hollenberg MD
George Hollenberg MD
CT, USA