Originally Posted by
webike4fun
Question: Is a Joe Bell or Cycle Arts re-paint good or bad? I was under the impression, from the prices they are getting, they were the benchmark of cycling painting AND if you wanted to own a rare and collectable, like the Galmozzi, AND it was re-painted, this would be, obviously not as good a mint original paint, but the next best thing? The bike sold for 2499 and this was based on what I have seen older Colnagos and Cinellis IN WORSE condition sell for.......I would think you guys would try to find some positive things to say too.....It is a cool bike....How often do you see em'
Those Colnagos and Cinellis sold for more because often, worse condition is better, if it's original.
The next best thing to mint original paint is patinaed original paint. Next best thing to that is pretty-well-patinaed original paint (say, 6 on a 10 scale). (This is for relatively rare bikes, not for every 80's Colnago Super out there.) Then we get to a correctly done repaint in the heirarchy of collectable condition. And this one is not original - i.e. at least one of the decals may be incorrect, and it's probably had braze-ons added. Hence, restoring the bike doesn't just involve finding the period parts, but a whole new repaint and braze-on removal. I'm not saying it's junk, by any means. It's a pretty cool bike. I just wonder if the buyer knew what he or she was getting in their haste to grab it, as the description implies that the bike is in substantially original condition, with very little investment needed in order to make it a "showpiece." In it's current condition, I don't believe it's a $2500 bike - which is not to say it's not worth that to the seller regardless. It very well may be. But I don't think that negates legitimate analysis of the bike and/or its sale price. I think it's logical to wonder whether the fact that it sold for $2500 has anything to do with a disconnect between the description and the actual bike in question.