Re: [CR]re: real or fake panto? now where did they come from


Example: History:Norris Lockley

Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 12:59:00 -0500
From: George Allen <jgallen@lexairinc.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: Re: [CR]re: real or fake panto? now where did they come from
References: <73F7DA62F63543D8B596F1FB42DFE164@DELL>
In-Reply-To: <73F7DA62F63543D8B596F1FB42DFE164@DELL>


I've never owned a bike with any pantographed parts so I am totally ignorant on this question. But here goes. Were panto'ed parts available as separate components? I've seen plenty on bikes but I've never seen a panto'ed part for sale in the display case of a bike shop. And, with no Internet, how exactly did one procure spare panto'ed parts back in the day? Write a letter to Ernesto or Faliero? Is it possible that nearly all panto'ed bikes were delivered as such from the manufacturer. And thus any panto'ed parts now for sale are either authentic parts wrenched off of authentically panto'ed bikes or mere counterfeits? Kind of sad either way. One other thing: being in the manufacturing business and fairly knowledgeable about manufacturing costs, I find it almost impossible that anyone could make much money from counterfeiting panto'ed parts. Doing it the old fashion way would require a large tooling investment. Doing it with CNC machine tools would be cost prohibitive. Also, it seems the value of the item might actually decrease. If an oval logo 1A stem is panto'ed for Colnago then all the Masi, Cinelli, DeRosa, etc owners would have no interest in it. It would just be all the Nago-nuts bidding against each other. No offense to Nago-nuts, really.

George Allen Lexington, KY USA

Charles Andrews wrote:
>Based on some experience with the originals of some of these items, I
>would have to say that both Alexx and Casanova are having their parts
>pantographed in the here-and-now.
>
>The stem with the Colnago sig on it, in particular, is not correct. The
>signature is too big, and the script is not shaped right. It's a pro
>job, just not original.
>
>The De Rosa stuff seems obviously reproduced. For one thing, I have a
>hard time believing that Gran Sport stuff would have been panto'd, and
>I've never seen those patterns on any original De Rosa panto'd stuff,
>from any set of years. They look recent to me. Nice, but recent.
>
>I've written to Casanova about his parts and their provenance and I
>found his answers mildly evasive.
>
>Doesn't mean I wouldn't buy some of them. Some of the stuff looks
>plausibly period-correct, and sometimes that'll float my personal boat.
>Most of the time though? Not interested. The stuff from the period
>has the mojo...anything else? Probably doesn't. But, of course, it all
>depends on who's looking.
>
>Charles Andrews
>Los Angeles