I see a lot of vintage bikes here are getting repainted and new decals. My question is, is a perfect repainted bike worth more than the original with some flaws? I know in other collectible items as in antique furniture, fishing lures, etc, original finish is everything.

My observation is that - if you've got a collectable bicycle (i.e. not a Varsity or a Grand Prix or a U-O8, etc), the original finish commands a higher price than a repainted one.

If your prize Stickley rocker was left out in the rain for three or 10 years, then you could probably count on needing to refinish it simply to save the piece. Same with bicycles.

If the original finish is in salvagable condition and the bike is an important collector piece then a refinish is not a good idea. Especially if the bike was used to win the TDF or the worlds or something. Dirt, blood, and other detritus should be preserved for maximum value. But, if the finish is trashed, or is not original, then it's a candidate for a makeover.

I have my Stickley Bicycle (a 78-82(?) Colnago Super) stripped and am in the process of a complete repaint. I'll post the before and afters when I get it done.

My observation is that - if you've got a truly collectable ANYTHING the original finish commands a higher price than a repainted one.

Furniture, guns, bikes - same same. Collectors want original above all else. Only if the item is a total wreck and devoid of a substantial amount of its' collectable value should you consider repainting. With an eye towards preserving the collectible value of any item, careful cleaning and preservation should be your top priority. And with some items cleaning removes patina, which is also highly prized in some circles.

John D.

I agree with USAZorro and luker, restoration is generally not a good idea for important 'collector' bikes such as Team frames and other rare, unusual, or antique bikes unless the finish is already trashed beyond recognition, or some moron butchered it with a can of Krylon before you got it. Same with classic cars, serious collectors prefer an original un-restored vehicle to a full frame-off job, and the big money always goes for the original.

That's why I have steered toward bikes that have been repainted already, then a repaint is the answer. I have them all over the map, some need paint and got it, some need new graphics, biggest problem is when they need chrome...one wanst to ride them but peeling chrome is an open wound.
I try to keep them all riders, even though its a wee bit more risk, but I try to always buy my size. No hesitation to ride period looking new tires, 30 year old tires scare me.

If one is thinking of making money at this, parting out is the only way. Otherwise, build them to ride.

Collecting is an honorable sport, and its taken very seriously (look at classic rendezvous for the limit). But I like to mess with things, so I look for the things that are rattle canned, hot rodded and missing pieces. That is serious meat to goof with. BTW, I have an all original Mannlicher Model L 8mm with a factory side-mounted scope, vintage 1903, patina in place. anyone interested in a reasonable trade?

You're fishing for me with that one - but alas, I have nothing of value to trade. Unles you'd like an all original unmessed with gas-pipe Bridgestone....

maybe we should petition for a "bikes and guns" forum. Sounds like a department in our government, doesn't it?

Hey; I've got some bike stuff I can swap for vintage 22s...

Well...ummm..... I DO have a gun rack on my Gary Fisher. Check out my RAV (Rabbit Assault Vehicle):

Ohhhhhh........ Mmmmmmmmm......vintage .22's........... >DROOL<

I have two 1950's Stevens Fox side by side double barrels; one's a twenty and one is a sixteen.

I just bought (but haven't received yet) a Pogliaghi track
frame with some history (Australia National championship
and Olympics). The bike has a ding and a repaint.
I'm going to repaint since it's already lost any collector
value.
Most of my others I try to touch up as opposed to repaint/refinish.

Marty

Two great outdoor sports, what more does a man need. I knew I was in the right place when I found this forum.

Seeing "restored" stuff makes my blood boil. Check out this nice CCM on ebay, repainted and everything, this was probably a really nice bike before it got all messed up and "restored".

https://cgi.ebay.ca/CCM-1950-restored...QQcmdZViewItem

And of course the selling price is a laugh.

Paint??!! A Stickley would require ammonia fuming.

I'd say that the decision whether to paint or not would depend on the reason for owning the bike. Repainting a Black Phantom would be disastrous. If I could find a good, inexpensive 1970s Paramount, I might not feel too badly about a good paint job since I would be buying it to actually ride.

I have some 100 year old Stanley hand planes that, if I were merely a collector, I would have left in their as-found condition. I actually use them so I had no problem with cleaning them up.

Original finish is always best, but especially so on a really rare/popular bike. If a chipped, scraped, rusty bike's not particularly sought after, has already been repainted, or is just really ugly, I think it's OK to re-paint. BUT, even perfectly re-painted, it's then worth less to a collector than one with good or better original finish.

One frame I just asked mswantak to make decals for ('70-ish Rickert, in this case), had already been buzz-bombed (poorly) by a previous owner, and had no original decals. The frame's straight, and in good shape other than that ugly, runny orange paint.
I figure it's a perfect candidate for a restoration, but didn't want to spend the $400++ to have a pro paint it (It's a Rickert, not a Masi). This will be a pretty, regular rider when finished, so I wanted it to look nice, but not for bike shows. When I'm done with it, unless right next to an original paint Rickert, you won't know it's not original. To anyone who knows the finish isn't original though, it won't be worth as much as one with original paint and some patina.

The case for no refinish gets stronger with ballooners, although a complete rust bucket still should be refinished rather than chucked. Ballooners are owned more often by COLLECTORS, and they hang over the bar downstairs or whatever. I ride my bikes, try to get to all of 'em every month, so they'll acquire a patina of their own before my untimely demise, maybe.

I have two Paramounts, a '73 and a 50th, both have been refinished, both at Waterford. I have a Cali Masi that was a complete basket case - an extensive modernization done in the early '80s, vertical shimano rear dropouts and a complete suite of brazeons. Jack from Franklin Frame set it back to original (well, I left the downtube waterbottle bosses on it) and repainted it. I'm thrilled. I ride it, and I like the ride. I have a Super that I am practicing on...they were all in danger of rusting away.

Hey Lotek, where da pictures of dat pog?

Here's a few pics that I got from the seller, I haven't
gotten the bike yet.
The bike has a ding in the top tube (bondo filled)
The original paint was red, the repaint will be RED
MSWANTAK did the decals (and they look mahvelous!).

I would think that's the one place where refinishing a Paramount would add to the value of the bike rather than detract from it. Richard is a stickler for authenticity when it comes to Paramount restorations.

Cool forks, beef, it whats for dinner.

With forks like that it needs steel bars and stem, #3 drop too for the full on Sprinter effect.

My neck will only tolerate a #1 drop, but when on the track its Steel!

Bought a Pog early this year, sold it almost right away to a friend who wanted a real track bike.

Planning on riding the lumberyard a little later this year. Show thos young guys that you do not have to have a bike creak when you are out of the saddle.

Aaaahhhh; now I see what that 'double-tap' business is about.