Here's something I've been curious about. As I've been fixing up my bike, I get worried about riding it and possibly causing irreversible wear or damage to my new/vintage parts. Part of me says, if I'm going to spend all this money on making my bike look and ride nice, I should ride it as much as possible. If you've got it, flaunt it as the saying goes. Then the other part of me says that nice bikes are to be admired, not ridden. In the end, it's only money.

So how many of you guys fix up your bikes to actually ride? How many of you would rather see it on display? And how many of you guys just fix them up just because you want to turn a profit (or maybe you just like building bikes)?

All but one of my bikes (see signature) are "riders." Capo #2 will be, as well, as soon as I finish rebuilding it.

Bikes are made to be ridden. Unless you have a rare, historically significant bike, like Major Taylor's or a Tour de France winner, you aren't going to change the value much by riding it. Even if I had one of those rare bikes, I would still ride it on occasion, just to show it off.

I ride everything I own, but also buy bikes just for resell.

Currently I have a 1984 Cinelli SC and a 1983 Merckx Professional in MI. In AZ I have a 1987 De Rosa, 1985 Merckx and a 1984 Rossin. They all get ridden.

All of mine get ridden. The Colnago is almost done and that will be my number one ride...that is until I finish the early Merckx.

All of mine have been riders, or bought w/intent as ~$200 flips. Of course my keeps/riders have been more second tier rather than the top offerings from the builders (Gitane TdF, Trek 760, etc).

Less individual bike component wear is one of the advantages of having multiple rides.

My bikes fall into all three categories. I have three or four I ride, ten to twelve that are destined for the market place and the balance that represents my "collection". Since many of my bikes are smaller frames it's not practical to ride them.

All of the above. I ride mine in moderation to preserve them, but I see no point in owning them unless I an ride them. Now if it was an NOS example of a famous team bike like a DeRosa painted for merckx in the Molteni years or some such thing I might see a point in only looking at it.

Ride your bikes. If stuff wears out, replace it. I will never understand having a bicycle that you don't ride.

Ride 'em! It makes them much happier.

Neal

Unless it is something worthy of, and demanding of, public display, ride it, or sell it to someone who will.

Ride, ride, ride, let it ride.

I put down "sell" - until I realized you meant "fix" as in repair, not as in "fixie"

I ride and admire, with neither being mutually exclusive of the other. I've ridden everything in my collection, and I won't keep something that does not fit me either.

-Kurt

I ride all of mine. If I can't ride it, I either don't buy it or buy it to sell.

It depends greatly on the bike. Bikes whose parts (or even frames) are easy to replace, I ride; the rest I curate.

Some of us don't have the luxury of having a place big enough for bikes we only look at

If you keep it, ride it. If it doesn't fit, sell it or give it away, but those tend to not get the quality of parts I'd put on something for myself.

All of the above. I fix up what I find, and if it is nicer than what I currently ride, I upgrade and sell the lower end bike. If it is not as good, then it goes onto Craigs List to help feed the hobby. So far this year, about six bikes have gone that route.

I also fixed up my old college bike (1975 vintage) just to look at. The frame size is way too big for me, 34 inch standover with a 30 inch inseam. I call it the nutcracker. Interesting that the LBS hosed me on this one size wise.

I would never put this much effort into something just to sell it or look at it.

If this was my size, I'd be tempted. I might hang it on the wall,
https://cgi.ebay.com/1988-De-Rosa-35t...QQcmdZViewItem



After I ride it.

How could you not?