Serious Discussion : Painting/Powder Coating C&V Frames
 

Hey guys, I am on the fence about this issue. What are your opinions on the subject of painting/powder coating your c&v frame? I own a 1984 miyata 912 (silver and red) and the paint doesn't look bad...just not super nice ya know? But I'd like to get the frame powder coated black, and blue on the down tube (I have a blue vette saddle and blue toe clips). Do you feel a fresh paint job takes away from the authenticity or is it merely a way to make a great ride look fresher?

If you can get new stickers it will look like a new bike. If you can't get stickers the bike ends up looking home'y. If you use custom decals the bike looks custom. As far as authentic, that only happens once, authenticly beat or well cared for. Have you seen Robbie Tunes Ironman for sale, red PC with new decals, looks better then new.

A 912 while a great frameset isn't something historical or highly collectible. Most people, and I'm one of them, think that if the paint is good why do it. However, if there are serious rust issues to deal with, the paint is absolutely horrid, or whatever sure, why not.

How about a pic or two, you'll get some real opinions then :)

Do remember it is your bike to do with what you like regardless.

If the paint is reasonable, do not paint the bicycle. Doing so will cost you money and lower the value of the bicycle. More detail contained in Should I Paint My Bike?

Hope that is a help.

a wise man once told me

"old paint with lots of scratches is cool. new paint with one scratch sucks." your call:)

Do I ever like that!!! I do hope you don't mind if I start using it.

I recall, years ago, I had just finished the paint job on a 1970 Triumph Bonneville (I used to restore motorcycles and even wrote a book about it, believe it or not). I had just set the newly painted (and dried) gas tank on the frame set, complete with tank badges mounted. I turned my back to do something or other and, to my horror, heard my son, about four years old at the time, banging the business end of a screwdriver on the tank. It got scratched, I kept my temper (after all, I have only one son) and told him it was OK.

And, it was. I never again worried about scratching the motorcycle. These days, again believe it or not, I put the first scratch into a paint job, just so that I won't feel bad when the first accidental one shows up. Go figure, but it works for me.

There is no sense having something so nice that one is afraid to use it, as was the case with my best friend and his eighties something NOS Bianchi Trofeo.

That first scratch(and one will happen) always hurts, that's why I like to buy used cars. One of the reasons why I like vintage bikes too.

I'd only PC a bike that was going to be my rainy day/snow commuter.

I don't see a problem with painting a bike if you want to. I mean it was painted by the manufacturer. I personally do not unless the paint is beyond hope or someone had painted it before I got it. It would be tragic to paint some of the C&V bikes out there and I love the patina on older frames. The paint is pretty beat up on my Schwinn Speedster, but it earned every scratch. I think painting it would destroy any character it has.

I think some people are wired so they have to have something new and shiny looking. For instance, if 2 used mountain bikes are sitting side by side, a shiny box store express and an older (cosmetically challenged) Specialized, you just can't convince some people the Specialized is the better deal.

+1

It will get some scratches by the time you get it reassembled. It just happens. To me, anything vintage that looks totally NOS is an oxymoron anyway.

Depends on what you want out of it. If you hope to sell it someday as a classic, vintage bike, then you won't be doing yourself a favor by painting it. If, on the other hand, you like the bike, and just enjoy riding it, and you have a vision of a new color scheme that would bring you some happiness, and you can afford it, then IMO you should go for it. I have an old bike myself that wasn't ever going to be a true C&V worth $$, but it had sentimental value for me, so turning it into a fixed gear bike became a project for me that I really enjoyed and learned a lot through. Oh, and more to the point, I had it powder coated, and think it looks great!

I'll clean and touch up 90% of the bikes. That's all 90% of them need.

After that, I rationalize.

As for an '84 912. I'd see how good at masking the powdercoater is, and what it costs.
I'd go $100 - $125 with PC and decals, and be prepared to own it.
The improvement is not market value, it's protection and longevity, and simply may look better.

That needs to end with the sound of a gong. Wise words indeed.

PAINT IT!

miyata's decals are ugly anyway, and their paint isn't the best either. however, wouldn't go black/blue with a powdercoat. i just don't think that would turn out well.

I've had the following bikes powedercoated:

1984 Peugeot P18 mixte
1988 Schwinn Voyageur
1985 Trek 620
1990 Schwinn Paramount OS (still at the powdercoater)

I haven't regretted a one.

JoeBat3, If you want to change it, do so. I'm not familiar with your model, but if it has lugs I'd paint rather than powder coat just to keep them 'sharp'. If you're going to apply new decals, whether NOS style or maybe a Hottamiyata made up decal, put them under a clear coat.

Brad

I've had a 710 from the same year as yours, and I agree the paint is only fair. Lots of scrapes down to the primer. btw I have also had one from a few years later and it was much improved. Seems thicker, shinier and more durable.

I wouldn't fret about it if you plan to keep the bike. For resale, I think you'd be taking a risk.

If it were a highly collectible bike or one with significant historical provenance I'd leave it with the vintage patina. If not, powder coat it and don't look back.

I have yet to have had a frame powder coated. I guess I will do it someday. If the paint is relatively decent, I consider it patina, clean it up, polish it, and maybe do some minor touchup. If the paint is really bad, I use it as a donor bike. I have enough decent framesets laying around looking for parts.

I really like the look of the original decals, the definition of the lugwork (PC jobs I have seen lose some of the depth/definition around lugs), and I can't justify the financial cost (with little or no improvement in the value of the bike).

I've got to admit I have a handful (more than a handful) of frames that could use a repaint right now. One in particular was rattlecanned by the PO, and all of the original paint and decal work is long gone (and the rattlecan job is terrible).

As far as color combinations, I have gotten to where I appreciate the variety and odd colors used on some bikes. I look at the color combination to be a historical snapshot, of what was popular at that time.

And polishing compound can do wonders with tired paint.

I wouldn't blink an eye to paint a Miyata 912. Awesome bike, yes. Super Rare and Ultra Beautiful? hardly.

I think the most intelligent comment I've heard regarding painting came from RHM and went something like "Painting a Bike does not make it yours, Riding it thousands of miles does." His quote was a bit more eloquent I think but that's the gist and I agree wholeheartedly.

I painted my '72 Super Course...partially because it benefited from it, and mostly because I really wanted to. I had an auto body shop do it and it cost me around 150 bux all said and done and looked beautiful. Now it still looks pretty good but only from about 10 feet away... you get close and you can see the scratches and paint coming loose....its not perfect but in 3 years since painting its regained some of its patina of age and once again looks like a bike from the early 70's that was well cared for.

I've always wondered about lowering the value, this past summer I attended a old car show, lots of cars from the 1950's and 1960's, maybe 50 cars altogether, I think it's a safe bet, that maybe one of those cars has the original paint. I think the whole idea of keeping the old paint, is popular in North America, because bicycles are considered toys, so if it's old it must look like a museum piece. Unless I had a rare or special bicycle, I would have no qualms about repainting it, providing I could get replacement decals. Those decals may in fact be from photographs taken before the repaint, that have been custom printed by a sign shop. Stripping the paint allows one to do a proper assessment of the metal underneath and to take care of any corrosion that may be on the frame. I would however use a colour that would be period correct for that manufacturer and time period.

I doubt I would use powder-coat, it's the devil to get off again and it wouldn't look right on a lot of frames that were built before powder coating began, a couple of layers of primer, then a couple of layers of base coat and several layers of clear coat, with the decals going on a layer or two from the top, is suitable though. That might be an option for a patina frame, a good cleaning and then a couple of layers of clear coat to preserve what's there....

I'm pretty sure it's the issue of legitimacy. Cars are one of the few things where a refinish doesn't destroy the "collector" value, chiefly because other things are used to establish that the car is what the seller claims it is. Pick your favorite American musclecar and scope out the prices for a "numbers matching" example vs one that's had a motor and transmission swap.

This forum is really good at identifying frames based upon information other than the authority of original decals, but the "collector" market doesn't really care. Antiques are the same way; without the original finish, doubt is cast upon whether it really is what you say it is.

I keep using "collector" in quotes because with a few exceptions, even the financial argument is a storm in a teacup. It'd be financially foolish to spend $1k to have Waterford do a gorgeous job on a beat up old steel Trek only to have its "value" drop from $200 to $150... but if that paint kept you up at night with excitement about how gorgeous it was, it might be a good buy.

I really like a lot of the things that are said when this topic comes up, especially by randyjawa. To me, the most important thing is to remember that it's not an investment. Every dime spent on repainting has to pay you back in increased enjoyment of the bike, because it's sure not going to pay you back in resale value.

Regarding the "sharp" painted lugs vs. the blurred powder coated lugs:

Yes, it can happen, and just did on one of mine, a powder-coat over chrome. The coater did it twice because he made a mistake.

I'll live with it, because I plan to reduce my rotation to 4-5 bikes and plan on this bike getting a lot more use. I need the durability.

However, "blurring" the lugs does not always happen. I'd put this $60 job vs. the $340 I spent on painting one, any day.
The $280 saved can buy a pretty nice set of wheels.

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...onman-frameset.

I guess I'm trying to make these points:
1-The PC can closely approximate the paint for sharpness on the lugs.
2-The PC is a lot more durable.
3-The cost savings on PC can make or break the decision. $300-$400 is often enough to simply buy a better frame.
4-Painting is definitely worth it if you think the frame is worth it.

I think collector is the real issue, if I buy an old bicycle with the idea that it will be museum restored to be put on display or traded with other collectors, then keeping the existing paint makes sense. I say existing paint because there is no way to prove it wasn't already repainted at some point. In some cases, notably the Italian frames, the original paint jobs were pretty crappy, so the chance that someone stripped and repainted it back in the day is reasonably high if the paint is still in good shape.

If I buy a bicycle with the intent on a functional restoration (where I will ride it), I may replace some components with ones that will work better for me, then the existing paint has no affect on the value, and can actually hurt it, because I then need to worry more about the frame rusting out. The Norco which is a modern AL frame bicycle, may get a partial repaint this winter, if I can't match up the colour. I would guess that most bicycle companies use auto paints, so I will check out the paints at the local auto supply shop first. Think is in 2025 when it becomes C&V will someone think that the then beat up paint, needs to be preserved because it's original?

Wait 100 years. May be worth a fortune. May go the way of the tullip.

Funny thing about collecting. It should be done because you have interest in the collectable. As soon as you make it about money, it is no different than gambling. What is desirable today, may not be tomorrow. And visa versa. Of it may be desirable tomorrow. Or it is crap today and crap tomorrow. Since no one has a crystal ball, monetary value is a crap shoot.

But people value things other than money. I am of the opinion that there are things more valuable to me than money. If I wanted a custom paint job and couldn't afford a custom frame, I would choose a used frame to refurbish. It is the only logical choice. Its a pretty simple choice.

And for the record, a car in mint condition with original paint will always have a higher monetary value than the same car with a repaint. Sometimes that original car doen't need to be in mint condition to command a higher price. Also, if you are considering a muscle car, their heyday is now. With a few exceptions, their value will be gone in 20 years.