# what is acceptable?



## 37fleetwood (Jan 28, 2012)

in this hobby, we are taking old bikes and either restoring them, or at least cleaning them up. usually it's clear that what you are doing is acceptable.
but what happens when more is required, or wanted? or even when someone goes outside the box and reproduces something?
this brings me to the heart of my question. what if you can't find something, and you alter an existing one to make what you are looking for? what is "going too far"?

I've seen so many bikes that were most likely originally lower end plain-jane bikes, decked out with all the options and goodies, and it's usually passed off as correct. I've seen countless psople buy a frame and build the model they want without regard to what the bike started life as.
I myself have bought broken or otherwise damaged bikes and done the repairs on them because they are so rare that you have to take whatever comes along if you want one.
I currently have a '37 Huffman that I had to change 2 bars in the frame to repair it, is it still acceptable? what if I had taken the rear end off of it and re-welded it to a regular '37 Huffman frame, would that have been acceptable?
where is the line that if we cross it, a bike is no longer acceptable?

I have a project bike that I'm working on that started life as one thing, and is now on the verge of being something entirely different. I used all the original pieces of the original frame, with some small modifications, and added a couple pieces. so it would be fair to say that the frame is 85% original, however it isn't what it started life as.
is what I'm planning, as acceptable as taking a cheap bike and adding some deluxe parts to make it a more valuable model?
please consider this carefully and answer, fully explain what you think and why. expect that I may counter, not as an argument but to probe out what you are thinking more fully. if you are one of the few that know of my project please input your opinion but not any of the particulars of the project, I'd like to save the surprise until it is finished. you can all hate me then.


----------



## militarymonark (Jan 28, 2012)

I think your thinking to hard about this. If you bring a bike back to life and its rideable good enough.


----------



## MrColumbia (Jan 29, 2012)

This is all opinion of course but I will start with what is mine on what is not acceptable. Misrepresenting what you have done. Either for sale or for bragging rights tell exactly what you have and what it was. 
 That being said I have never had a problem “upgrading” a bike model during a restoration. The act of restoring is change and adding new, such as paint, chrome, rubber and so on. There were far more “plain Jain” bikes made than deluxe models and everyone loves the deluxe model. To bring this argument a step further consider the fact that everyone gets mad if you restore a deluxe model anything,  (YOU RUINED A PIECE OF HISTORY!) they say. So we start with a plain Jane model that needs help and would not be worth much of anything anyway. The result is an example of what the deluxe model would have looked like from the factory without all that patina that everyone loves so much and no deluxe original bike had to suffer. A WIN-WIN! Just tell the truth about what it was and what parts were added. 
 Were it all gets muddy is if we are not restoring. Is it ok to add accessories? We’ve all found bikes with accessories added over the years by previous owners. If it looks like it was added when the bike was new we think..WOW an original period accessory and may leave it on the bike. What if the bike is 75 years old and the accessory looks to be added 5 years later…not original? Take it off or is it a sacred piece of the history of this bike? How about 10 years later? Say the bike got long years of use and 15 years later?
 I spend a lot of time trying to identify bikes for people and more often than not there is never an exact match in any catalog. Often it is because of factory substitutions or midyear model changes. A different chain ring or having a chain guard when the catalog says it should have none. Maybe a different headlight than it should but the light looks to have been there its whole life. What did this bike start life as?
 All just opinions and ramblings of a mad man. 

Cheers!


----------



## dfa242 (Jan 29, 2012)

While I prefer my bicycles, vintage cars/trucks and pretty much all antiques as original as possible, I fully appreciate the need/want/desire to upgrade any of the above when necessary.  As I think was expressed by some folks in the parting out thread, I think everyone should be able to do whatever it is they want with something they own.  We all have different tastes and while we may not agree with someone's choices, seems to me they should be free to make them.  All I ask is that honest descriptions of any changes are included with any offer for sale.  And I have to say, there are some very creative people out there who do make major improvements on all sorts of objects, causing me to smile and say "Wow, how the heck did he/she think of that?"

What I find completely unacceptable however, is the increasing number of snake oil salesmen who knowingly misrepresent their "upgraded" items as the real deal, looking to fool unsuspecting newbies.  This practice is as old as dirt but I think the anonymity of the internet is breeding these scoundrels exponentially.

And while we're on the subject, when did "NOS" become synonymous with "reproduction that I'm trying to pass of as new old stock?"  I think the same principal probably applies here as well.  I guess it just makes us focus a little harder, making the true finds a little sweeter.

Okay, I'm done - can't wait to see your suprise!

Dean


----------



## jd56 (Jan 29, 2012)

Dittoing Dean's opinion....I'm new into the bike collecting hobby and when I started out I bought a bike that I didn't care what original was. Then I started researching what was or should be correct when I had a potential buy. The first three bikes I purchased were quickly assessed by experts as "frankenbikes" ie...wrong pedals, rack, chainguard, seat, handlebars etc... but never an alteration of the frame. 
I, as a novice to the hobby, would be concerned that I was misled on the originality of a particular bike. But only for the investment value. 
When bike frames are altered, for whatever purpose, aren't they then classed as RatRods? 
However if the alteration was to replace damaged components to as original as the factory intended then it would be a considered as a restoration, in my opinion. 
Adding or changing the "plain jane" to an upgraded model then would be and should be conveyed as a model upgrade, provided the added components didn't waiver from the manufacturer's cataloged upgraded look and structural intergrity.

For the newbie in the hobby, buying a bike for it's originality, and told it was as it was when it came off the assembly line is important and possibly the deciding factor on the purchase. 

There is my opinion and just to mention....as a young boy I remember adding parts to my ride as the rich kid accross the street had on his cooler looking bike. That's what we did. Took apart bikes added parts to make it look cooler and faster. Making a RatRod as it is deemed today. But, I never considered my ride an investment back then.

JD... and I can't wait to see your finished project either.


----------



## dxmadman (Jan 29, 2012)

*In One Accord*

Im glad to see some people ask questions like this, I thought some times it would be an inapropriate or amature question considering some of you guys are profesionals. I see it through two sets  of eyes,The first is the one who are bringing back a part of their childhood. Maybe restoring a memory ,maybe it gives a person the breath of air they took one day fifty years ago. Some of us are preserving history. The whole reason i got into restoring, or "correctly rebuilding" when i found a magazine  call Mortorcycles in retrospect" maybe some of you heard of it. In there  i saw the link of Vintage bicycles with vintage motorcycles and the passion of restoring them. I saw a 1906 reading standard and fell in love, not just with old motorcycles but the love of the bike," i was already a sting-ray fanatic". I found an article of a restorer by the name of Mike Parti, I will always remember his words "The machine isn't yours, nor does it belong to the current owner or restorer. It is the creation of men long gone. Out of respect for them, You shouldnt modernize or upgrade the bike, either in engineering or cosmetics" There is only one kind of restoration,and its not an over-,under-, or inbetween, Its a correct restoration". When i read those words it hit me. Yet it set my mind strait about wonder. As far as redoing a rusted bent frame, you do what you have to do,If its refabbing the whole thing,do it . As far a rat bikes and customs i love those with the same love and respect.


----------



## OldRider (Jan 29, 2012)

Whether it be cars, trucks or bicycles I absolutely hate seeing anything modernized , upgraded or altered. This was the way it was born, leave it be. I almost want to cry when I go to car shows and see the 40s and 50s trucks turned into lowriders and all decked out. Having said that if you are going to "rebuild" your classic CWC, Huffman or Schwinn and start altering things even in a subtle way be honest and upfront about it, don't pass it off as something it is not. When all of us are long dead and buried the new fanatics are going to appreciate that we kept accurate records and accounts  of our finds.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Jan 29, 2012)

to set the record straight, I'm not making a custom, or rat rod, what I'm talking about is making something that will be indistinguishable from an original by even an expert.
here's an example or two of what I'm talking about, say I take a damaged Elgin Robin frame and make all the necessary changes to it to make it into a Bluebird, or say I take an early girls Schwinn frame and made an Aerocycle out of it. say I did this so well that once done no one would be able to tell, what then? what if all the other parts were original and the only thing wrong were the changes I had made and done such a job that no one would know?
don't worry, I have no intention of selling my creation, or cheating anyone, my concern is what impact, if any, would it have on the value of existing bikes? would people be suspicious of anything they wanted to buy from me, I have a whole slew of what if type questions.

here's the really big one, what if people wanted me to make bunches of them, or other rare frames? what if I did? should I make them different from "real" ones? or would the world be a better place with more of certain models of extremely rare bikes?
the bike I'm building isn't cheap, nor is it easy to make, but it does prove that with time and attention to detail, any bike can be replicated from almost all original parts, and can be made in such a way that no one would know unless I told them.


----------



## scrubbinrims (Jan 29, 2012)

Often the difference between a standard plain jane bicycle and a deluxe of the same year is just in the accesories so if you add a tank, a rack, etc... to create a deluxe of original period parts, so what?  
This is not much different than what was originally done at manufacture.
Standing firmly in being correct has it virtues, but not what kids do with their bikes or at least I didn't adding cooler parts along the way...never crossed my mind to maintain it as it arrived for Christmas.

Recently, I had a decision to make, whether to blend these two bicycles for a more deluxe approach.






The thing is that fluted fenders never coexisted with the "Hiawatha" style tank, strictly a Shelby Airflow approach, so I decided against it.
At the late release of this bike, a horizontal airflex saddle wasn't still made, but I put it on there anyway, also had some red shelby rims around, so I am using those as well.
After all it is my bicycle, but my choices could be reversed quite easily.

So, it comes down to your motivations, but let's say you are assembling a deluxe bicycle from parts collected for a more valuable result...it's the parts that make it that way, where is the deception if true to the source material?

Chris


----------



## barracuda (Jan 29, 2012)

37fleetwood said:


> to set the record straight, I'm not making a custom, or rat rod, what I'm talking about is making something that will be indistinguishable from an original by even an expert.
> here's an example or two of what I'm talking about, say I take a damaged Elgin Robin frame and make all the necessary changes to it to make it into a Bluebird, or say I take an early girls Schwinn frame and made an Aerocycle out of it. say I did this so well that once done no one would be able to tell, what then? what if all the other parts were original and the only thing wrong were the changes I had made and done such a job that no one would know?
> don't worry, I have no intention of selling my creation, or cheating anyone, my concern is what impact, if any, would it have on the value of existing bikes? would people be suspicious of anything they wanted to buy from me, I have a whole slew of what if type questions.
> 
> ...




Thsi is known as a reproduction, right? In my opinion you will have reproduced a bike that was not a Bluebird on the production line and, realistically, could not have been upgraded to one even on the factory floor. This is significantly different from adding period-correct deluxe parts to a period-correct frame, which I feel is just as valid today - if properly done - as it was on the salesroom floor.

On the other hand, your Super Streamline project is an honest restoration of a bike someone else damaged. You are returning it as closely as possible to what it was in some form at the factory.

The question becomes less important with the addition of longer spans of time: If you purchased an ordinary produced in 1870 which had been extensively repaired in the 1930's, that is an older restoration which has certain historical interest of its own. If the resto was performed well and properly painted and detailed, you would never know. Nonetheless, the resto is part of the history of the bike.

Much of history is, in fact, hidden from us. Most of it, really. We aren't permitted to know, in most cases, what has come before with the certainty that comes from first hand experience.

Ususally, if I discover upgrades or even customizations of bicycles which have identifiable period interest, I appreciate it. Keep in mind that some great bikes, such as the early pre-1964 stingray-type rides, were strictly customs.

"Forging" a bike like a Bluebird is a damned expensive proposition. More power to you if you can pull that off without people being able to tell. But it shouldn't be misrepresented in any case, of course. But at some point all that goes away, and what is left is a cool bike.


----------



## STUPIDILLO (Jan 29, 2012)

*What is? acceptable*

I see it this way. Some bikes are best left as found, others might need a total restoration, by a competent restorer, others may be so far gone that it does not matter what you do to it. But, then again it IS your bike, so go ahead and do to it what ever you damn well want!!! If you really want a PINK Panther, what's wrong with that?


----------



## redline1968 (Jan 29, 2012)

what is acceptable?  isn't that what hitler said to the people.


----------



## Larmo63 (Jan 29, 2012)

*My thoughts on this.....*

I couldn't ride my Mead Ranger without modern (wood) wheels and tube type tires as easily as if I had left the hard, pneumatic, and crappy original tires. I did my modern upgrade modifications in a tasteful, esthetic way nevertheless. Is new wood different than old wood? We have to recover old seats so we can ride our bikes if the old leather isn't there. So, if you fix or even change a frame, if you aren't doing it for nefarious reasons, I say "full steam ahead!" These are pieces of history that we only will own for a time, and we should strive to be good stewards of American ingenuity and style. Like someone else said before me, something restored in the thirties may not ever be detected. We could put paper inside frames, bars, and /or seats indicating when the rebuild/restore was done for future curators, but that may be taking things a bit too far. Just have fun, use common sense, and doing the right thing is always acceptable. You know in your heart when you are on the right path.


----------



## Wcben (Jan 29, 2012)

This whole thing kinda reminds me of when Carroll Shelby suddenly "found" his "retirement plan".... 33 original 1965 427 Cobra frames that were serialized but never built into finished cars, they were completed 30 years? Later....identical but new components... Original owners were very upset but now, they are the first of the "continuation cobras".... They don't get passed off as originals, that's where it's important, don't try to pass your creations off as originals and no-one should question your integrity.  Also reminds me of when Ralph Lauren's Bugatti won the Pebble Beach Concours although it was finished unlike any original Bug had ever been done... Original purists were furious... The argument was that it was done with materials that were available at the time the car was completed so...why not?.....

My feel... Enjoy your creations just label them as such.... Bike by: you, inspired by:......


----------



## Bicycle Belle (Jan 29, 2012)

As a collector of girls bicycles I often get them with parts missing or worse..as just a frame. I have no qualms whatsoever checking my sears books and building the model up as I wish. I don't sell my bicycles but even as a buyer I don't go into a purchase thinking everything on that bicycle is original. There is NO way anyone can be 100% certain that the bicycle they have/bought is. Unless it's their childhood bicycle and even then there is a margin for error with memory.
As long as the parts on them were offered that year as either accessories or original to the bike then I'm good with it. This hobby has so many variables with the main one being that these were mainly owned by children who took parts off and put different ones on. To me that is not an issue...it's still original in a sense and represents that model (providing again that the particular parts are period correct)


----------



## Larmo63 (Jan 29, 2012)

*Funny.......*

"mainly owned by children who took parts off and put different ones on" 

Reminds me of all of us!!!!!!!! (all growed up children)


----------



## MR D (Jan 29, 2012)

Upgrading anything is just a way to show what you are capable of doing. Never worry about other peoples opinions about your creationism/creativity. Show it to them...let them ride it. Sharing what you've done is what makes this hobby so great. If you see someone that was lucky enough to have had access to original parts, then it's complimentary to what THEY'VE accomplished...tell them so. It's what we all want...that little pat on the back for doing a good thing...making an object better. Whatever you DO will change a bike. Be it restore, clean up, fix, attach parts...anything. Change is good...it's makes the bike YOURS!

I also agree that when and if you decide to sell, make sure that it's represented for what it is at that moment of sale...YOUR bike. If they buyer likes it enough, he will pay for it, then it becomes HIS bike to do whatever he wishes. Just as we all do. 

Purists are looking for correctness. Hobbyists aren't afraid to do different things that may not be correct. Riders buy their bikes for $1.50 at the flea markets!


----------



## pgroah (Jan 29, 2012)

*If you have to ask*

If you have to ask permission, absolution it is probably wrong. You can find an argument to rationalize anything.  Are you collecting or creating, figure it out already. Stop beating around the bush what are you building PICTURES


----------



## jwm (Jan 29, 2012)

Here's my '61 Jaguar:





See anything non-original ? Probably not, except for the button for the horn, and the bar-end reflectors.
 The front rack came from another bike.
The rear rack came from another bike, and so did a couple of the reflectors.
So did the grips.
So did the seat rail.
The gooseneck also came from another Schwinn.
The rear reflector is a genuine NOS replacement (not a re-pop)
The tires, brake cables and pads were replaced, and so was the chain.
Someone with a real eye for detail might spot the newer cable housings and chain, and of course, the Kenda whitewalls, but all rest of the parts I listed  are the right ones, and are in the same state of wear as the rest of the bike. No one could possibly tell that that the bike wasn't a near perfect barn find with just about the right amount of wear and tear for a fifty one year old bike. 
So if I were up front about the chain, tires, cables, and horn button (which is pretty obvious) would I be dishonest to say that the rest of the bike is all original?
Just for the record- Those of you who attend the Cyclone Coasters ride, or other bike events around So Cal have seen this machine, and I've never tried to pass it off as anything it's not. Same with my B6, which also took a lot of years of parts gathering. The parts gathering is part of this bike's history, and it's a testimony to many years of patience, work, and just plain good luck invested in getting this thing as close to right as I could. I would never conceal any of this from a potential buyer.
Schwinn parts are fungible. That is- if you disassembled three green Jaguars just like this one, all in a similar state of wear, mixed all the parts up, and then reassembled three green Jaguars you'd still have three green Jaguars with all the right parts in all the right places. Would that make them three non-original bikes?

Now I do draw a distinction between the hypothetical that I just proposed, and taking a Typhoon, and trying to convert it to a Jag or a Corvette, or trying to turn an 80's Spitfire into a Phantom- which wouldn't really be_ wrong_ either, unless it was done to try to deceive an uninformed buyer.

JWM


----------



## 37fleetwood (Jan 29, 2012)

well, it appears that, as I was thinking, as long as I don't pass it off as a "real" one, no one should be too upset about me building a couple of these. for quite a while now I've been working on this. the plan was, and is, to sell the real one and keep the phony ones for myself.
I worry that it will somehow cause a stir among people who think more will hurt the value, but realistically there are less than 10 known and if I make one or two are there really so many more that they become less valuable? I don't think so. my plan as it stands is to build one of each type, so 5 max, all different so I'm only diluting the population by one of each style. this one is first and the tankless is next.
let me know what you think...

the red one is obviously the original, and the other one is just tacked together and not finished, but you get the idea...













and here is what I started with. I removed the top "seat stays and had them shortened and adjusted to match the  lower set on the real SS frame. I had a friend who does metal work and is a genius rework the rear drop outs and they're perfect. I made from new material the rear swooping bars and the flat extensions. technically the rear swoops and extensions are the only parts not original to the bike, everything else is real 1937 Huffman, so the serial number will pass scrutiny and everything. so sadly, the yellow bike has ceased to exist as a men's regular frame Huffman.


----------



## Larmo63 (Jan 29, 2012)

*I didn't see anything....*

I wanna see how you extend that chainguard. 

Well done!!  (and, don't tell anyone)


----------



## partsguy (Jan 29, 2012)

For now, I'll reply. I'll read all these replies another time.

But those of you who have been on this site long enough or have met me in person, I often compare the Classic Bicycle hobby to the Classic Car hobby. Our serial numbers are indeed like a car's VIN, yet ours are often much more difficult to decode. I know that certain bikes would be VERY hard to duplicate, because I trained and well seasoned collector can read the serial number like the VIN of a car. Murrays especially! I know the Murrays of the mid 60s to the mid 70s had the store, options, and year in the serial numbers. theres a chart somewhere around here.

Schwinns are pretty much set in stone too, at least date wise (I'm referring of course to the post-factory fire Schwinns). So the bike you replicate had better match the date code on the frame, to the very month!

But whatever you do, just be honest. Thats all I ask. If somebody wants to reproduce something, say a Bluebird or an Evinrude, then they at least add some small subtle difference to the bike, to seperate it. But small enough that real collectors will know, yet people can still enjoy the site of it. Lets face it, even if you don't sell it, we all pass on someday. I don't want my work being passed off and being the subject of counterfeit controversy. Some legacy to leave behind.


----------



## Iverider (Jan 30, 2012)

Some people would be thrilled to own a "replica" and others will bag on it forever. It's like that in every hobby. From GT350 Mustang Clones to 21/23 window VW busses that started life as panel vans. Some people won't care because they're into the look, and some people will disapprove because it's not the bike that came from the factory the day it was produced. Early Porsches are being reconstructed from VINs and a low percentage of actual body as are many other cars, but they are usually made back into what they were from the factory. Still, the bulk of the finished product is technically NOT ORIGINAL but they are generally accepted.

I do feel that if done well, everyone will at least appreciate the craftsmanship and time that goes into such a project. It'll also be fun for the purists to pick it apart. Full disclosure would obviously be important. Maybe stamp your initials somewhere before or after the serial number. If you're only making 2 they'll forever be known as the 37fleetwood reproductions.

To this point, I'm going to someday build a Arch-bar roadster frame that is very similar to my Iver frame. I love the lines but it's heavy and I don't have the ability to use modern hubs, cranks, or other components I'd like for daily use. I'm also going to build a motorbike style mountain bike at some point with a sheet metal tank for storage. I'll never try to pass them off for anything else and will likely own them until I can no longer ride.


----------



## chitown (Jan 30, 2012)

Is it acceptable to use a Messinger rail/spring frame with a Troxel pan and saddle cover?

View attachment 40194

At least that's what I'm seeing here. In fact I believe it to be a ladies spring and frame at that. I accept it as an awesome saddle. I would love to own it and would have it on one of my Silver Kings any day. I don't have a problem with it unless it was up for judging at a show.There should be some distinction between correct and acceptable. Acceptable to who? As it's been said, if you can live with yourself, then obviously you have accepted it. If not, good luck sleeping. If the judges are fooled and is accepted, shame on the judges for not catching the re-welded girls bike with a sex change and accessory/cosmetic surgery (lights, horns, bells, whistles). 

Do what you feel is correct. We're all grown ups here... right? Oh yeah, we all collect kids bikes... so ahhhhh... errrraaaaaammmmmm...  carry on!

BTW if it is a correct Troxel frame, my apologies for confusing everyone... and also I'm not just a critic, I'm guilty of this very offense:

Did it to get my bike ready for the show that week, as the nose spring on my Troxel was broken so I used the frame off my Ladies Ranger:

View attachment 40198 

Heres the same saddle top with the correct Troxel bottom it came on:

View attachment 40201

And yes I know there are several "questionable" parts on that Silver King... But that's the way it was in 1938:

View attachment 40207

So I accept it. Others want to get their panties in a bunch over it, that's not my issue. But it is fun to think of how many times accessories have made their way onto these bikes and taken off, and put on again.


----------



## mruiz (Jan 30, 2012)

It is the same story going on at the Barret- Jackson car auction. The vin # tell it came with a V-8, but not what V-8. Clones are everware now. Now a built sheet will help.
 But bikes don't have built sheets. Maybe a bicycle protecto plate ? Hummmm.
 Mitch


----------



## redline1968 (Jan 30, 2012)

blasphomy!(spelling)!  better destroy the repop frame.


----------



## bud poe (Jan 30, 2012)

most of the issues brought up here were covered in this thread...
http://thecabe.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?13751-What-would-you-do&highlight=daytonia
Although not exactly the same situation, I think the potential for the repop/tribute/replica to someday make it's way back into circulation and mistaken for "the real deal" is what concerns the true "die hard purists"(not me)....That being said, I think it could be argued that Redline's plan for his Datonia-HD build is a bit more "authentic" as the bones (frame-set) literally could have been given a HD badge and sprocket at the factory....


----------



## 37fleetwood (Jan 30, 2012)

Thanks for the link Bud,
Actually I think the other thread addresses the exact same topic. making one model out of another. it's funny to me that it only becomes an issue if you're making something rare out of something common. the HD example is heightened by the value gained by adding the HD parts. if you took something like a BFGoodrich Schwinn and changed the badging and moved from skip tooth to 1/2" pitch most wouldn't even bat and eye. I've had numerous Huffmans that came without any badge and I've added whatever badge I liked, and no one would even flinch at it. it's just what's done all the time.
the HD situation is especially complicated since both bikes basically came off of the exact same assembly line and were built by the exact same people but because of the badge it is assumed by too many ignorant people out there that there is a difference, and that HD built their own bike. I have a similar situation with the Huffman built Indian I recently acquired. the badge is the main difference between it and the much less valuable though more deluxe Dayton I bought within a week of it.

it is my opinion therefore, that strictly speaking, any time you buy a frame and build it into a bike without regard to the exact model it was from the manufacturer, or any time you buy a complete bike and restore it as a higher model, or add any parts that it didn't come with, you have made a bike as "phony" as the one I'm building. however, in the real world, this type of thing is done every day and no one even blinks. what I wanted to get at in this post is the shades of grey in building or repairing a bike. in a very real way, the original red frame has had more added to it than the other one. it is in a sense less original.
in the end, what I have done to this rather mundane Snell, (Schwinn example) is to move it from being a regular  1938 B507 to a much more deluxe B707.
for the sake of argument, I would say my new Super Streamline is as original as many of the deluxe Autocycles out there. I'm using the Schwinn example not as a bash against Schwinn, but as an example of taking a less valuable plainer bike and portraying it as a much more valuable higher end model. I know for a fact because I've seen the parts fly that many of the double duty Autocycles out there have had their forks added to them. some of them are re-worked girls forks. tell me what's original about that? I think this is all the same argument. add the DD fork to a Schwinn and it raises the value. fail to disclose the fact, and you are just as guilty as I would be passing my bike without full disclosure.

I'm surprised that no one has really substantively argued the issue of this type of license affecting the value of so called "real" bikes. speaking of the DD Schwinn forks, I have seen collectors find an original paint DD fork and then start looking for all the rest of the parts to build a bike in matching original paint. the bike at that point is usually accepted as an original paint example of that very bike. no one questions that it is real, they are, after all, original parts, and in original paint, so it's an original paint bike.
I would like to argue that for the most part, none of this really affects the value of originals. one or two more Harleys in the world isn't going to kill the market. one or two more SS bikes won't make a difference. my main concern is that if ever I sell this bike, it won't be long before it gets sold as a real one. while that's a nice brag point, it is a moral dilemma I'm wrestling with. I suppose, after all is said and done, if it is exactly like an original, what's the difference?


----------



## redline1968 (Jan 30, 2012)

WOW....first let me say that the work is excelent on the new frame.  but if one can be done then more can come its way. so what if anyother type of rare frame can be replicated to exact specs. where is it going to end.  when reality set's in,  this could bite you in the future. granted the datonia would be a simple change but a complete recreation of frames is dangerous. should be considered a threat whitout some type of identification of such a recreation.  this should be clearly marked and impossible to change without damaging the integrity of the frame.


----------



## Iverider (Jan 30, 2012)

Scott, what someone does with it after it's out of your hands is THEIR problem. That's the only reason I thought stamping your initials before or after the serial number would let someone know it was not factory. More of leaving your mark on your creation. It does seem that with some of the rarer bikes, that people pay attention to where they reside after they are sold even after a few times of being sold. I'm sure people will recognize your bikes for some time after they're sold. What would be cool is to keep a build album of the project and sell that with the bike if you do end up putting them on the market.


----------



## cyclingday (Jan 30, 2012)

I think that the first thing everybody misses, when the reproduction topic pops up, is the title page of this forum.

 THE CLASSIC AND ANTIQUE BICYCLE EXCHANGE.   Key words; Classic and Antique.

The only reason this stuff is collected and considered cool, is because they are Classic and Antique. Slylishly built and not available on every street corner.

Anything that was built before, can be built again. Anything! At least that is, until we run out of the materials to do it.

Retro bikes are fine for the folks that don't care about the history and just want the look. That's why Nerve and Electra have been so popular.

At the Christmas parade this year, one of our more creative members took bits and pieces from the coolest looking bikes in the history of cycling, and built the most beautiful bike I have ever seen.

Right away, I'm thinking, that thing should be sent to Taiwan and mass produced by the thousands. I think it could be the most popular selling bike in history.

But, you know what? That's not why he built it. He did it, because he loved the lines, and just wanted to do something that had not been done before.

If you are going to reproduce a bike, then do one that has been lost through time, where no, or very few surviving examples exist, or do something totally unique, that really blows peoples mind when they see it.


----------



## oldwhizzer (Jan 31, 2012)

*What??*

Its funny in other related Hobbies such as Antique Automobiles and Motorcycles Have many major Parts reproduce such as whole bodies, fenders, frames, tanks, and about any part you can think of with no negative reactions. I can't tell you how many times over the years Ive seen original bikes that have parts on them that we thought were not correct but were original to the Bike. Horrace Huffman Jr told Pat that they were building Transportation not collectables and if they ran out of a part they substitued what ever they had on Hand. Anyone building bikes at that time was not going to stop production and send everyone home. I disagree with Mr Rim Scrubber Shelby Made many Bikes with mismatched parts and frames. I have seen original fluted fenders that never had a badge rivited on on Arrow. I have also seen the frames flip floped between Airflows and Arrows. I could go on forever with things Ive seen but I hate to type. I have a 1939 Roadmaster catalog that states in the back you can special order just about any color you wanted. I also talked to a man who worked at the Emblem Bicycle Co. that they would build Bicycles for anyone who bought enough of them to there spec's. He also told me that he Assembled all the Evinrude bikes when he was a kid...


----------



## Bicycle Belle (Jan 31, 2012)

Well said Oldwhizzer!
As I said before...if it was available in the catalogue for the year and model I have as an accessory then I consider it to be original. That is what I'm ok with and you bring up some very good points about car restoraion as well. I've seen whole parts fabricated and the car is considered a restoration and no one seems to have a problem with.
As I pointed out in my earlier response...you can never be 100% sure if ANY bicycle is as it was right out of the factory.


----------



## dougfisk (Jan 31, 2012)

37fleetwood said:


> ...but it does prove that with time and attention to detail, any bike can be replicated from almost all original parts, and can be made in such a way that no one would know unless I told them.




This is why you should assume that a "restored" bike is a pieced together expression of the creators desires, imagination, and research.  This is why many of us would rather have a lesser model with 60% of its original paint than a restored high-zoot whatever.   It's not something that everybody gets, but it is becoming more common I think


----------



## greenephantom (Jan 31, 2012)

Wow. Well done. Mad props. That is some clean metalworking. Beautiful lines.  About a year ago I thought about doing the same thing, re-working the rear triange on a lesser frame to make it into a clone of the high dollar bike. Flipping through the Bicycle Blue Book gives one all sorts of ideas.  Love the lines, but not going to throw down the $$$ for a real one. Not enough days in the week, too many other projects, no space, gotta fill up the oxy-acetelyne tanks, etc, so this was an idea that never got off the ground for me.  But seeing how decent this one turned out, might have to hack up a DX model Schwinn and braze up a longtail fantasy frame.

Acceptable? Yes. With the provision that the frame is somehow marked in a subtle way.  I like the previous idea of initials after the serial number.   

Cheers, Geoff


----------



## 37fleetwood (Jan 31, 2012)

so... what if I do the same thing with this project?


----------



## redline1968 (Jan 31, 2012)

i see nothing wrong with creativity.  cars have been cloned and they are clearly marked on them and changing them is fraud.  this is to protect the consumer and the collector values of originals.  i say do it but beware of the consequenses on not marking them as such.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Jan 31, 2012)

I don't care about the value of this project, I just kinda want to turn an '80's Huffy into a 1941 Deluxe Autocycle, and do it in a way that even the most ardent Schwinn fanatic couldn't tell. all I need is someone to tell me not to!


----------



## dougfisk (Jan 31, 2012)

37fleetwood said:


> I don't care about the value of this project, I just kinda want to turn an '80's Huffy into a 1941 Deluxe Autocycle, and do it in a way that even the most ardent Schwinn fanatic couldn't tell. all I need is someone to tell me not to!





I'll help you out - Don't bother.


----------



## bhando (Jan 31, 2012)

There are always going to be "hot rodders" and purists. Look at Model A clubs and having to have all there parts date coded and 100% correct,then look at hot rodders who take parts from what ever car they like and adapt it to suit their taste. It's all about how the bike appeals to the owner.

People recreate things that they can not have due to rarity and availability. There are thousands of more 1932 Ford roadsters on the road then there were ever built by the Ford factory, because people want them and there aren't enough to go around. Thus supply and demand. People want bicycles to be the same way, so they create their own. 

Years ago only the most rare and correct vehicles were allowed to compete at Pebble Beach Concours, and recently they allowed era hot rods and secondly they allowed era customs to compete.
It's all about trends, and personal taste.


There are always going to be original condition bicycles around, they built hundreds of thousands of them, and they going to be barn finds for 100 +years. The internet has made the world so much smaller and you hear so many stories about everything, so everyone thinks things are "drying up", but its the hunt that makes it fun!!

Build some thing from cast off parts, or clean up an original condition bike, but whatever you do just get it out in the open and let everyone enjoy them!!

You can't please all the people all the time.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Jan 31, 2012)

there are a few things about this project I would like to point out.
1 I do have a few original frames, so it's not because I can't find or afford one.
2 half of the ones already out there are just like this and pass as real all the time.
3 you guys are slipping, usually you guys are constantly pointing out other things in my photos, how has no one caught the frame in the background of the middle photo???


----------



## dfa242 (Feb 1, 2012)

_"...but its the hunt that makes it fun!!

Build some thing from cast off parts, or clean up an original condition bike, but whatever you do just get it out in the open and let everyone enjoy them!!

You can't please all the people all the time."_


Amen to that!


----------



## silvercreek (Feb 1, 2012)

Cloning a particular model bicycle should not be any less expectable than cloning a classic car. People do it all of the time and I wouldn't hesitate to clone an English 3 speed if I knew how.


----------



## PCHiggin (Feb 1, 2012)

*Frankenstein Bikes....*

are always acceptable as just that. Nobody takes them serious, they're just a bunch of rolling left-over parts and hopefully fun to ride.I'm more about riding than being "correct" anyway.I took a nice ride on my '58 girls Hornet yesterday  with an "incorrect" RedBand 2 speed hub,newer h/bars,fresh tires and had a blast.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Feb 1, 2012)

PCHiggin said:


> are always acceptable as just that. Nobody takes them serious, they're just a bunch of rolling left-over parts and hopefully fun to ride.I'm more about riding than being "correct" anyway.I took a nice ride on my '58 girls Hornet yesterday  with an "incorrect" RedBand 2 speed hub,newer h/bars,fresh tires and had a blast.




would you call this a "Frankenstein" bike?






or this one?






or this one maybe?


----------



## 37fleetwood (Feb 1, 2012)

let me set a few things straight, I have correct and original 1937 Huffman Superstreamline parts to put on this original 1937 Huffman frame, this isn't going to be some frankenstein bike any more than any other restored bicycle. it will be a correct restoration with correct pieces using a modified frame. it's not a ratrod, it's not a parts bike, and it's certainly not a clone, any more than a bike that has had a fork switched is a clone.
I'm not sure what the correct term would be but it will be more correct than most bikes out there.


----------



## Larmo63 (Feb 1, 2012)

*It's Your Bicycle*

Maybe you should have just done it and not told anyone. Now folks might wonder about the real ones; are

they authentic, or re-creation. I think it's totally cool and clever what you are doing, but the bike snobs 

and their attitudes.........?


----------



## PCHiggin (Feb 1, 2012)

*Frankenstein Bikes....*

Well,Judging by the pics,I'd say no. I  should have qualified my reply by adding "parts from different makers".Those bikes certainly dont look like they are made that way.I'm guilty of not reading the whole thread,sorry....Just realized I confused this thread with your  one about the Huffy/Schwinn thingy.


----------



## fordsnake (Feb 1, 2012)

Several years ago I did a complete ground-up restoration on a 1948 Ford (woody) station wagon. It was a total rust bucket when I bought it. Eventually it took me 5 years, 5 different donor cars, and new wood to bring it back to life. Every screw, every bolt and every washer was replaced! Even the rusted chassis was replaced! I cut out the serial # and spliced it into a new chassis. By the time I was done the only thing remaining from the original car was the hood and the steering wheel! 

I was thrilled with the outcome…I didn’t deviate from the original factory specs, I just replaced all of the parts with original or NOS parts! The results, a car better than showroom condition!

Consequently, no one frown on my endeavor…no collector, or judge! Instead I was praised for my vision and accomplishment and I received several accolades and awards for the transformation. 

To me, I appreciate all bikes; I love the results of someone’s creativity. Whether it’s the designers of the past, or today’s archivist who consider it their mission to conserve and preserve these historical assets. Even the outrageous rad rodder, low rider, or neophyte rider who have chosen to embellish their rides with a little style or customization! Regardless, whatever you have done or doing to bring life back to these metal derelicts, and prevent them from entering the belly of the scrap yards is ok with me! 

And Scott, perhaps you should live by the words of Bill Cosby, “I don’t know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.”


----------



## scrubbinrims (Feb 1, 2012)

If strictly defined, a "frankenbike" could be the label on just about every bicycle in everyone's collection, a negative connotation that goes against the grain of personalization and practicality.
From my point of view, swapping or upgrading parts is one thing, structurally redefining a frame is another.
I would not buy a superstreamline knowing it was fabricated, but I won't attack you for doing so as long as the intent is not to deceive potential buyers.

When I first got started in the hobby, I came oh so close to buying a 37 Roadmaster Supreme that was a fake...which I did not because of the assistance from Phil in discerning it from an original.
I would feel more strongly about what you are doing if I had plunked down the 3K, but nonetheless the more such endeavors go on, the more potential for deception down the road, intentional or not.

These bicycles are beyond rare, and you have one...why this genesis project?

Chris


----------



## redline1968 (Feb 1, 2012)

i got a severe bashing by every purist on the earth for a simple change with not one hole drilled.  im sure that not all the frames are found and also with a simple photo one could replicate any frame with a lower model of the same year and keep the original numbers on the hangar with the right tools and knowlege.  i right now hve a lower model streamline womens that can be a good doner.  im sure that someday, someone will and then this subject will come back again. HEY! this might bring the womens bike prices up to a great profit


----------



## markivpedalpusher (Feb 1, 2012)

Larmo63 said:


> Maybe you should have just done it and not told anyone. ?




Where is the fun in that LOL


----------



## 37fleetwood (Feb 1, 2012)

first I want to say thank you everyone for inputting your opinions they are valuable to me.
I very easily could have not told anyone about this project of mine, and I also could have just collected the ones I have and never made these. but I think this is a topic our hobby needs to address. just what is acceptable, and how do we come to a consensus on it.
a real SS frame would run in the $1500.00 range, this one has cost near that to build in time and materials. this hasn't been a money making project and I couldn't begin to make them and slip them out. people would simply notice that too many were showing up. but as Fordsnake has pointed out, what I'm doing is accepted in the old car hobby to a certain degree. I have an uncle who may still be the worlds authority on Pierce Arrow cars. when William Harrah passed away in 1978, my uncle bought a 1910 "Model 66X" engine at the auction. technically it would have been an experimental engine but my uncle wanted to build it into a car. with a combination of real but lower model 1910 Pierce parts and self made reproduction parts he restored the car to be the only 1910 Pierce Arrow Model 66 known. like this hobby, when you get into the brass era cars, especially the big ones, the hobby is very small, and everyone knows what everyone else has. at no time did anyone ever say "you shouldn't do that" or "too bad it's not real". I was there when he took it on it's first tour and everyone was crawling all over it. I have photos somewhere of the car if anyone is interested in seeing it. now as another example. there was another old car collector who bought the only known example of a "Great Chadwick" it was originally a barn find in the literal sense (you don't find these in attics, or basements). the car was restored by the time he bought it, and he decided to make a bit of money on it, so he pulled the car all apart and copied everything, mixed the parts together and built two half original cars, so now there are two Great Chadwicks. when people started to object, he asked them what percentage of their cars were original to the car. if you know anything about the early car hobby it's that these things typically come to you as a chassis and engine, maybe a body part or two if you're lucky. the moral of the two stories and three cars I guess is that my uncles car is correctly restored, and didn't take anything away from an original car, where an original piece of history was destroyed in the other cars story.
I would object to the destruction of an original girls SS or a boys Firestone SS frame, which has been the previous way of making one of these, and wouldn't object to the frame I'm making, and I'm not just saying that because it's me doing it.


----------



## silvercreek (Feb 1, 2012)

To determine what is and isn't acceptable, there would need to be a commission created along with strict standards. To ask someone if it is acceptable to a general group of enthusiasts will always have differing opinions and an opinion is all it would ever be.


----------



## PCHiggin (Feb 2, 2012)

*Cool Story.....*



37fleetwood said:


> first I want to say thank you everyone for inputting your opinions they are valuable to me.
> I very easily could have not told anyone about this project of mine, and I also could have just collected the ones I have and never made these. but I think this is a topic our hobby needs to address. just what is acceptable, and how do we come to a consensus on it.
> a real SS frame would run in the $1500.00 range, this one has cost near that to build in time and materials. this hasn't been a money making project and I couldn't begin to make them and slip them out. people would simply notice that too many were showing up. but as Fordsnake has pointed out, what I'm doing is accepted in the old car hobby to a certain degree. I have an uncle who may still be the worlds authority on Pierce Arrow cars. when William Harrah passed away in 1978, my uncle bought a 1910 "Model 66X" engine at the auction. technically it would have been an experimental engine but my uncle wanted to build it into a car. with a combination of real but lower model 1910 Pierce parts and self made reproduction parts he restored the car to be the only 1910 Pierce Arrow Model 66 known. like this hobby, when you get into the brass era cars, especially the big ones, the hobby is very small, and everyone knows what everyone else has. at no time did anyone ever say "you shouldn't do that" or "too bad it's not real". I was there when he took it on it's first tour and everyone was crawling all over it. I have photos somewhere of the car if anyone is interested in seeing it. now as another example. there was another old car collector who bought the only known example of a "Great Chadwick" it was originally a barn find in the literal sense (you don't find these in attics, or basements). the car was restored by the time he bought it, and he decided to make a bit of money on it, so he pulled the car all apart and copied everything, mixed the parts together and built two half original cars, so now there are two Great Chadwicks. when people started to object, he asked them what percentage of their cars were original to the car. if you know anything about the early car hobby it's that these things typically come to you as a chassis and engine, maybe a body part or two if you're lucky. the moral of the two stories and three cars I guess is that my uncles car is correctly restored, and didn't take anything away from an original car, where an original piece of history was destroyed in the other cars story.
> 
> I would object to the destruction of an original girls SS or a boys Firestone SS frame, which has been the previous way of making one of these, and wouldn't object to the frame I'm making, and I'm not just saying that because it's me doing it.




About your uncle,the one-off engine sounds slick. I briefly knew a Pontiac  engineer named Malcom "Mac" Mckeller that designed a one-off OHC Pontiac V/8 back in the 60's.The engine rocked,made tons of power but ultimately was too expensive to produce. GM gave him that engine as a retirement gift and he installed it in a sweet 1963 Grand Prix. You should hear it purr, Awesome!


----------



## 1959firearrow (Feb 2, 2012)

I say go for it just don't put it out there as something its not which you have already stated you're not going to do. When it all comes down to all you're doing is the same thing the shelby mustang cloners do,take a less valuable car and make it in to a clone of the awesome car at way less of the price! Nothing wrong with that just make sure that there is a distinctive feature that can't be easily ground off(some people have suggested stamped initials, way to easy to weld over)Put a note in a sealed baggie in one of the tubes and find a way to make yours slightly different from an original. You know that when you pass these things will possibly end up in the hands of some one who will unlike you want to pass it off as the real deal. Very cool project and very top notch work keep it up!


----------



## Papajon (Feb 14, 2012)

*2nd pic of elgin*



37fleetwood said:


> would you call this a "Frankenstein" bike?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I am learning-what year and model is the elgin with the fluted tank-it knocks me out!-Papajon


----------



## Papajon (Feb 16, 2012)

*Elgin*



Papajon said:


> I am learning-what year and model is the elgin with the fluted tank-it knocks me out!-Papajon




Once again-please say what year and model this elgin is-Thanks 

Am I a thread killer or what?


----------



## Talewinds (Feb 16, 2012)

Hey thread killer , it's a '35-'38 Elgin Robin (someone will know the vintage for certain).
 Arguably the rarest of Elgin ballooners?


----------



## Larmo63 (Feb 16, 2012)

So, what will the clowns that own and are collecting our bikes in a century from now, 

(if we all make it past that Mayan calendar thing,) think?

I want to be a fly on the wall in a chat room about vintage/antique bicycles in one hundred years.


----------



## Papajon (Feb 16, 2012)

*Thread killer*



Talewinds said:


> Hey thread killer , it's a '35-'38 Elgin Robin (someone will know the vintage for certain).
> Arguably the rarest of Elgin ballooners?







Thanks TW-I was starting to talk to myself!


----------



## Hb Twinn (Feb 17, 2012)

*Not a thread killers*

I found my mini Twinn with the riight paint and decals, but the wrong bars and seat posts. When it goes back together, with the right date coded parts, will it be a survivor or a frankenbike?
I think it's a great question and would like to know whAt others think


----------



## Papajon (Feb 17, 2012)

*Hey Hb*



silvercreek said:


> To determine what is and isn't acceptable, there would need to be a commission created along with strict standards. To ask someone if it is acceptable to a general group of enthusiasts will always have differing opinions and an opinion is all it would ever be.




Silver defines the essence of this great republic here!-It's Your Bike!


----------



## 37fleetwood (Feb 17, 2012)

Hb Twinn said:


> I found my mini Twinn with the riight paint and decals, but the wrong bars and seat posts. When it goes back together, with the right date coded parts, will it be a survivor or a frankenbike?
> I think it's a great question and would like to know whAt others think



technically speaking once you change anything on a bike it becomes a custom, restore or partial restore. my problem, I guess, is that everyone does this and thinks nothing of it but if someone goes a little more than they did, then there's a problem. there are two questions here. what is acceptable, and what should be acceptable.


----------



## SJ_BIKER (Feb 18, 2012)

*..*

Restore=to bring back to its original brand new condtion with all correct parts even if not original but same year/era production.
Otherwise it falls under custom, partial resto, if parts are mixed matched with other brand parts or different era parts.  Thats my opinion.  To preserve means to obvisously maintain original no matter what the condition.  Thats where you see patina bikes with all the age and coolness rustic look.  To each his own i say with your projects.  I can usually spot schwinn frankenbikes....its all the other brands that have me scratching my head.  Its acceptable to do what ever you want to your belongings.  With bikes....however their fate is up to the next person that handles them.  We never trully own them...we watch over them....some of us have the all mighty buck in mind(not a bad thing)...some of us save them(not a bad thing).  Some of us take them way beyond what looked like from the factory(not a bad thing)...in the end we will all pass someday.  So why not enjoy our short time on this planet and just do our thing how we want.....afterall the bike will eventually fall into anothers hand.  And the cycle begins again


----------



## Papajon (Feb 20, 2012)

SJ_BIKER said:


> Restore=to bring back to its original brand new condtion with all correct parts even if not original but same year/era production.
> Otherwise it falls under custom, partial resto, if parts are mixed matched with other brand parts or different era parts.  Thats my opinion.  To preserve means to obvisously maintain original no matter what the condition.  Thats where you see patina bikes with all the age and coolness rustic look.  To each his own i say with your projects.  I can usually spot schwinn frankenbikes....its all the other brands that have me scratching my head.  Its acceptable to do what ever you want to your belongings.  With bikes....however their fate is up to the next person that handles them.  We never trully own them...we watch over them....some of us have the all mighty buck in mind(not a bad thing)...some of us save them(not a bad thing).  Some of us take them way beyond what looked like from the factory(not a bad thing)...in the end we will all pass someday.  So why not enjoy our short time on this planet and just do our thing how we want.....afterall the bike will eventually fall into anothers hand.  And the cycle begins again




       Amen-it's true


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 26, 2012)

Which is Which?






or how about this one?


----------



## dxmadman (Mar 26, 2012)

37fleetwood said:


> Which is Which?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Dave K (Mar 26, 2012)

Amazing work.  Looks fantastic


----------



## charnleybob (Mar 27, 2012)

If you make a rare bike out of parts, or fabricate bike, who will know what is right or wrong 20 years from now?
The car and gun hobbies are full of things like this.


----------



## chitown (Mar 27, 2012)

37fleetwood said:


> Which is Which?




The one in the foreground is in front of the one in the background.


Now if you start stamping serial #'s in them, that would be bordering on the edge of unacceptable. But a stamp showing who made it say like a makers mark or stamping something to identify it as not factory made would be a decent move for the future generations of collectors that may possess that bike some day. But you don't have to wear a sandwich board when you ride it that says "I'm a Phony". Nor should you have to announce it as being built by you every time someone asks about it. You should be proud making a well crafted machine such as the one in the background, or foreground depending on the picture. Full disclosure is recommended if selling an item, but that doesn't help the poor chap who buys this bike in 2087.

Truly nice work though. Carry on.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 27, 2012)

You're right, I did put the tank on the new one. not exactly rocket science there.
since I did use a '37 frame to begin with, it has an original and unique '37 Huffman serial number already on it.
it's my opinion that the world could use a few more of these, if done properly. there are so few of them.

thanks guys for all the positive feedback.


----------



## Buster1 (Mar 28, 2012)

This is a great thread.  One of the best ever.  I mean that.

This is something that has gnawed at me as I finished restoring my '59 Jaguar, and now dive in on a Westfield and an Elgin, both Prewar.

I believe there is a distinction to be made between "correct" and "original."  I've made everything on the old Schwinn Jag correct, though all the parts are not original to THAT bike.  Can I say to folks that the bike is 100% original?  Maybe.  It is 100% correct, but some of the original parts came from other bikes of the same type and vintage.  The parts are original, but not to my bike.

I'm not into Rats, but instead prefer "corrects."  isn't that what this forum is all about really?

Keep it "correct" guys, and I think you'll still have something authentic.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Jul 8, 2013)




----------



## The New Guy (Jul 8, 2013)

Just my $.02.

It's only unacceptable if you are either selling the bikes as something they are not, representing them as unrestored, or in other words creating a forgery that is going to be passed as an original (or if you know the people you are selling to are going to try to pass it off as an original).  If they are for your own enjoyment I'd say do whatever makes you happy.  If you are really concerned that people want you to make forgeries -  stamp or etch, or add a plate saying that it's a custom reproduction, if they have a problem with that you shouldn't be selling to them for both moral and legal reasons.


----------



## 2jakes (Jul 8, 2013)

37fleetwood said:


> to set the record straight, I'm not making a custom, or rat rod, what I'm talking about is making something that will be indistinguishable from an original by even an expert.
> here's an example or two of what I'm talking about, say I take a damaged Elgin Robin frame and make all the necessary changes to it to make it into a Bluebird, or say I take an early girls Schwinn frame and made an Aerocycle out of it. say I did this so well that once done no one would be able to tell, what then? what if all the other parts were original and the only thing wrong were the changes I had made and done such a job that no one would know?
> don't worry, I have no intention of selling my creation, or cheating anyone, my concern is what impact, if any, would it have on the value of existing bikes? would people be suspicious of anything they wanted to buy from me, I have a whole slew of what if type questions.
> 
> ...




I did what you described with regards to a rare bicycle several years back. No problem .

I also bought a Schwinn Black Phantom repo. Which although not rare, was very well made.
Again...no problem.

 And if you were to build a bunch of rare bikes that people wanted...I would buy one.
I could sleep at night...no problem !  Why...?

*Because it's just a bicycle !*


----------

