How original is my phantom?

[busmania]

Found this bike in a local estate auction. I believe the paint is definitely original on the frame. The tank and tail light have definitely been painted as has the rear rack. It has s2 rims, correct pedals etc. the seat is definitely not original. The fork and fenders are either nos, rechromed or aftermarket but comparing features to my other 53’ish schwinn they seem original (rivet's, brackets etc). What do you think? How can I tell 50’s fenders and forks from aftermarket?

Serial number L87096

The fork lock works but I can’t remove the key. Any thoughts on that?

 

[busmania]

More

 

[Freqman1]

Fenders, stem, crank, in addition to seat look repo.

 

[AS-1]

Fork components, yoke, spring, rubber, spring bracket, bumper cup, truss rods, AS bolts, handlebars, etc. are reproduction.

 

[HARPO]

Fenders, stem, crank, in addition to seat look repo.

Repro... not Repo...

 

[blakekennedy]

I gave my two cents back on the facebook post you had. But it is a good question to be had, how do we know some of the stuff isn’t rechromed? I too would like to know some of the tell tale signs. Of course in person, one would be able to tell by feel, but in pictures, difficult. Are we just coming to this conclusion due to the seat and nice chrome bits?

I mean look at those fender braces. Those don’t look like shiny cad reproduction to me. They look like someone painted them. Plus they’re rivet screws, not rivets. Which doesn’t mean much, but they’re a flatter general fastener type, and not the ones that Dan supplies.

These fenders are exactly what I do when I rechrome fenders.

Some reproduction fenders have a soft nickel ring around the holes. Not sure why this is. Attached some photos for reference. Though this could possibly be covered up by a rivet? I don’t own any reproduction fenders so maybe someone else can chime in here.

 

[busmania]

Thanks Blake. I deleted the Facebook thread because I hate that friends and family can see my posts that have nothing to do with them in their feed. I didn’t feel like airing out an internet argument in public.

Appreciate the insights. People keep saying repop parts but I’d love to know why and what to look for. I’m not a newbie to old cars and bikes but not experienced in phantoms. The parts don’t look like cheap reproductions but I know they could be old reproductions. If people could let me know why they say repop, that would be cool.

 

[Wolfmac]

I’m seeing evidence of refinished original components of the spring assembly and the finish on the fender braces looks like it could be Cadmium or silver paint, but definitely not zinc which is how replacement braces are finished today. Easy enough to determine with a bit of acetone.

Fenders in all likelihood are reproduction but the evidence either way should be revealed in the light tray.

Nothing I see appears to be cheap new reproduction, however, not having up close hands on familiarity with the 95 anniversary parts, I couldn’t rule out the potential for some of that getting mixed in.

My guess is that your bars are reproduction ( have a look at the knurling) and it appears you have the wrong stem. It’s a nice looking partial restoration nonetheless.

 

[Wolfmac]

The crank arm profile changed sometime in the 50’s to what you have now. Someone with a parts catalog from this period could identify what year the change was made from the previous model 6000 arm that was used on B6’s and Phantoms and most if not all other heavyweights beginning early postwar.

 

[Archie Sturmer]

What to look for?

Not an expert, but for old bikes sometimes one can look for items that just appear to be newer, or less "aged" than the adjacent ones(?).