Re: [CR] Caminargent #1 and now #2


Example: Production Builders:Cinelli

In-Reply-To: <987855.80629.qm@web26601.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
References: <987855.80629.qm@web26601.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 06:37:34 -0400
From: Edward Albert <ealbert01@gmail.com>
To: alex m <alexpianos@yahoo.fr>
Cc: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR] Caminargent #1 and now #2


Thanks Alex, but certain individuals just love to exhibit their "certainty" about things when there is very little certainty to be had. A claim of objectivity does not insure objectivity and, at times on this list, motives are frequently unclear. Present company excepted. Re decals....we shall see about postings. I know some who will use such knowledge for ill. Sorry I feel this way but that is the reality of this list. I feel that there is a bit too much schadenfreude about for my taste. But that is just my own feelings. It is time for me, as others have, draw back from this forum a bit. Edward Albert Chappaqua, New York, U.S.A.

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 5:33 AM, alex m <alexpianos@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Congratulations Eddie on the new bike, sounds absolutely wonderful. I've
> never yet seen a bike with Caminargent decals... Photos please please
> ASAP...
>
> Concerning the red paint, there is a misunderstanding, I never contested
> the fact that Caminargent bikes had paint in those places (I've seen several
> with remains of paint), it just seemed to me that the paint in the eBay bike
> was modern, the wrong match and quality, and showed signs of dribbles, so it
> should be removed and possibly redone correctly (if a "shiny" restoration is
> the aim). I could be wrong about this, that's just what the photos seemed to
> show. It really is difficult to judge a bike correctly from photos...
>
> I know that everyone is touchy about criticism of their bikes (I am
> myself), but one of the reasons for the list is to try to help improve
> knowledge and understanding of classic bikes, and so long as the criticism
> remains objective and not personal, I think we should try not to get
> offended. Not easy, as past debate has shown... Should you not criticise a
> friend's bike? I am friendly with both Eddie and Jaouen, but I don't feel
> that should stop me giving a reasonable judgement of "their" bike. I trust I
> have offended neither of them...
>
> Concerning the cranks, I agree with Jan that the round flutes are pre-war,
> but there is no proof that pointed flutes only appeared post-war... And I
> have seen a number of bikes with mismatched logos (different shapes,
> "marque" on one side not the other etc...) apparently fitted originally in
> this way (you of course never can tell for sure that a crank wasn't changed
> in the bikes history). I think makers just used whatever same length cranks
> they had to hand without bothering too much about matching logos, something
> maybe modern collectors get too neurotic about.
>
> My hunch would be that the eBay bike has one original crank (round flute)
> one more modern, but without any certainty. And that is not a major problem
> of course.
>
> The high value of the eBay bike was the apparently structurally sound frame
> with a super early serial number, not so much what came with the frame.
>
> Alexander March

> Bordeaux

> France