Whether to restore or renovate a vintage bicycle
One man's junk is another man's treasure; some ruminations on restoring and renovating follow.
Jim Cunningham of CyclArt defines "renovation" and "restoration" as follows: "to restore is to return to the original state." To renovate is to upgrade or modify, and to refurbish is to clean up whatever is still there. Restoration of a frame means repainting, rechroming, and fitting original transfers. Renovation of a frame means repainting, rechroming, refitting transfers, as above, but also modifying the frame (adding braze-ons to take modern components, spreading the dropouts to take newer hub widths, etc.). Restoration of components is usually limited to finding replacement screws, as no one is prepared to pay a machine shop or foundry to duplicate a complete 60- or 70-year old derailleur. As far as components are concerned, NOS (new original stock) is the most desirable (but rare and getting rarer); failing that, refurbishment is second best (cleaning up the old parts).
For purists, "restoration" means putting the frame back to as-sold condition in every sense, including period-correct components and period-correct colors. For example, no flamboyant colors allowed on a 1930s frame. Fanatics, and I have known a few, can spot modern spokes on a 1950s wheel from across the room.
Please refer to the following page for what kit to mount on a vintage Hetchins: click here.
Please refer to the following pages for paint schemes available in different decades:
1935-1959.
1960-1999.
2000 to present.
When should a vintage bicycle frame be restored (repainted, rechromed, transfers refitted) or renovated (modified), and when not?
If a frame has some feature which will be destroyed by restoration, such as the single surviving exemplar of an original transfer or a special finish no longer available, then do not repaint/rechrome,
UNLESS
failure to do so will allow/cause the frame to deteriorate (rust away).
For an example of when not to rechrome, see this frame. It features a spectacular original gold-chrome finish (now scratched and faded), and a full set of transfers which were believed (until we checked the serial numbers on this frame) to have been introduced 2 years later.
|
If a frame is to be resprayed, the next questions to be asked are:
1) Should it be returned to original condition (restored), or brought up to newer spec (renovated)?
1a) Corollary: how close to original counts? I.e., are you a purist (period-correct paint) or a fanatic (period-correct spokes)?
2) What is the cut-off date for vintage components?
3) What is a frame worth in (un)restored/(un)renovated condition?
The answer to the first question depends in part on whether the original spec can be ascertained. If a frame has been renovated before, it may not be possible to determine original spec, unless a builder's card can be found for it. Sales records seldom give details of finish, though this can sometimes be inferred from the price (indicating whether a frame had single color enamel, or chrome, for example). Furthermore, even if original spec can be determined, it is not always possible to duplicate it.
Generally, if a frame is to be displayed and only seldom ridden, then restore to original spec. If a frame is to be ridden, consider renovating to newer spec: i.e., have the dropouts spread to take wider blocks and indexed gears, add braze-ons for mech, cables, gear levers and so on. Several makers produce retro-components for such bikes, for example long-reach dual-pivot brakes and indexed gears.
But note this exception: if a frame has already been renovated, i.e., modified, by having braze-ons added, do not have them removed. Reynolds tubing gets its strength from tempering (heat treatment) and every re-heat weakens the tubing.
Now comes the vexed question: what about mixed vintages? What about modern components on an old frame? My answer is that it depends on several factors. First, whether one has acquired a vintage frame with a fair amount of period correct components extant (see title photo above), or a bare frame with possibly only a headclip. Secondly, how many other vintage bicycles one has in the stable. And thirdly, where, how, and how often one intends to ride.
Assuming one has acquired a frame with a fair amount of original components still with it, it makes sense to retain the components, get them cleaned up, polished or re-chromed, and continue to use them. It is easier to clean up and re-chrome extant parts than to source parts in possibly even worse condition.
For the collector: if one has several vintage frames, then one has the luxury of returning some of them to original spec with original components, where available, and to renovate at least one frame to newer spec with newer components, such as dual pivot brakes and indexed gears. There is no doubt that modern components are not only easier to ride, but safer in modern traffic conditions. Ride the latter with confidence, display the former with pride.
Where, how, and how often, one intends to ride also bears on whether one is prepared to spare no expense to source and refurbish period-correct components, or go the easier route and upgrade to modern components. For example, if one intends to use a vintage frame as a daily rider, then I recommend upgrading to modern components, which may mean having the frame modified to widen the dropout width and add braze/ons for cable guides, mechs and gear levers and so on.
Below: a 1940 Brilliant with original headclip, otherwise thoroughly modern kit.
|
On the other hand, if one intends to trundle the bike out only occasionally for special tours and events, such as L'Eroica, where original components are mandatory, then one should go for restoration to original condition.
Between the two poles of original condition and upgraded to modern components, there is a middle way. For a great many cyclists, and I count myself among them, we didn't have enough disposable cash to buy our dream bikes at age 16. We had some sort of a no-name 10 speed bike to start off with. It might have been given to us at Christmas by our parents and did not cost an arm and a leg, it had a kick stand, a wire basket, and weighed the far side of 15 kgs. As I worked summer jobs and saved pennies, I was able to upgrade a few components, one season at a time: I traded in the steel brakes for Mafacs, the steel and plastic Simplex derailleur for a Campag NR, and one day I traded in my steel hubs with steel rims and balloon tires for all aluminum hubs (Normandy) and all aluminum rims with narrow high-pressure tires. I still remember to this day how light and agile that first racing bicycle felt when I upgraded to aluminum wheels with high-pressure tires. Then one day, in my 20s, after having landed my first full-time job and worked for eight months, I had saved enough money to buy a decent frame, my first Hetchins, to which the best components were transferred from the old junker bike, plus new components as I became able to afford them in subsequent years. And so the bike grew over a period of time to carry mixed components, as and when I became able to afford them; this was the reality for a great many cyclists of my generation, and therefore I see no reason to disparage a vintage bicycle which is put into exactly that condition now, with a mixture of components spanning several decades and groupsets. For many historic machines, the fanatic's "as-sold condition" is fantasy; there never was such a condition, so the attempt to put it that way is spurious. Now the fanatic might reply, 'the original owner would have bought it that way, had he possessed the means. The collector does have the means, therefore, bla bla...' Would Beethoven have composed for the Moog synthesizer, had one been available to him? The debate will never end. There is room for everyone in the collectors' scene. Even fanatics have modern air in their tires, modern pads on their brakes, and modern grease in their bearings, so any dividing line is ultimately arbitrary.
While it is a joy to see a historic bike in pristine as-sold condition, its rider astride it in period-correct jersey and leather shoes with a 'tub' wrapped round his shoulders, remember that such elegant and exclusive bikes as Hetchins and Singer were designed and built to last a lifetime. I don't think Hyman or Jack expected a bike they sold in 1940 to be kept in as-sold condition by its owner forever. Hundreds of Hetchins are by now on their fifth owners, and I'm sure nothing would have pleased Hetchin and Denny more than to know that their frames are still being ridden with components from the next century. (Try fitting fuel injection and disc brakes to a Model T Ford and you'll see what I mean.)
Below: the Editor's first Hetchins, from 1972. After 20 years of hard use, the paint was chipped and the moving parts were showing signs of wear. It was stripped and sent to Hetchins in England for a respray (saving original chrome). The original NR mechs, brakes, cranks, pedals, and headset bearing were replaced by then-new SR components and TA cranks and pedals. It retains its original NR seat post, Ideale saddle, Phil hi-flange hubs, and handle bar. Then in 2024 the hubs were re-spoked with modern 622 rims to take new tires. Not a static statue in a museum; this one is actually ridden, with pleasure and mixed components--a frequent participant at retro-events.
|
Below are a few examples from the Gallery showing the full spectrum from restored-to-as-sold condition to mixed vintage to fully modernized. See this bike for an example of a 1951 Experto modestly updated to 6-speed non-indexed gears, assorted 70s components, and a modern front gear changer to take up slack for the triple chainset. See this bike for an example of a 1955 Experto with thoroughly modern 9-sp. indexing and dual-pivot brakes; the only frame modification was a derailleur eyelet on the dropout. See this bike for an example of a 1957 Experto returned to original spec with period-correct components.
Keeping a vintage frame rideable and safe in modern traffic conditions is often a challenge. See below for an example of a drop-bolt to fit short-reach brakes and ERTRO622 wheel on a frame designed for 27" wheels.
|
What is the cut-off date for "vintage" components? The last Campag groupset which qualifies as vintage is the C-Record, successor to the legendary Super Record group. C-Record was produced from 1988 to 1993. The Delta brakes represent Campagnolo's all-time aesthetic high-water mark, but were markedly heavier and less effective than the dual-pivots introduced from Japan at about that time. The C-Record indexing did not function very well, certainly not as well as what was coming out of Japan at that time. Nonetheless, C-Record represents the aesthetic high-water mark for components. The last vintage Campag groupset which really worked well was the Super Record; 1987 was the final year of production. There were numerous other makers of components, of course, such as Specialities TA, Huret, GB, Chater Lea, Williams, Lyotard, Airlite, to mention only a few of the better-known. A complete list is beyond the scope of this web site. Below: C-Record; farther below: Super Record.
Functionally speaking, the cut-offs are:
a) friction shifting (before Shimano and Suntour re-introduced indexing; exceptions are French derailleurs of the 1940s which already had indexing);
b) for brakes: single-pivot side-pull brakes such as Campag, GB, Universal, Galli (before Shimano invented dual-pivots); for non-side-pull brakes, the cut-off is Campag Delta and, of course, center-pulls by Mafac, Weinmann, Universal, etc.; and don't forget cantilever designs (such as Mafac, Singer, etc.) which pre-date the re-invention of cantis and V-brakes by Shimano in the 1990s;
c) toe-clip pedals (before clickies).
In sum, the cut-off is about 1990 when the Japanese stopped merely refining European component designs and started rethinking them.
|
