Boxerworks.com

A bit of irony surrounding this issue is forefront in my mind any time the subject of "correctness" comes up. I understand the concept that what people are most impressed by is that the vehicle is "the same" as it was when it rolled off the assembly line.

The way the irony plays out for me is to imagine a Porsche Concours. I really dig the 356 Porsche models. Imagine that magically, Dr. Porsche himself could and did drive up in his own car. Even though I can stretch my imagination to that point, I can't imagine his own car being very "concours". His car would have all sorts of refinements, and changes from stock.

I can see that if someone says a bike or car is accurate as representation of factory stock it should be. It is when people automatically denigrate a bike because it isn't "correct" that it bothers me.

I too, like the Blood Clot paint scheme.

Chuey

Chuey wrote:A bit of irony surrounding this issue is forefront in my mind any time the subject of "correctness" comes up. I understand the concept that what people are most impressed by is that the vehicle is "the same" as it was when it rolled off the assembly line.

The way the irony plays out for me is to imagine a Porsche Concours. I really dig the 356 Porsche models. Imagine that magically, Dr. Porsche himself could and did drive up in his own car. Even though I can stretch my imagination to that point, I can't imagine his own car being very "concours". His car would have all sorts of refinements, and changes from stock.

I can see that if someone says a bike or car is accurate as representation of factory stock it should be. It is when people automatically denigrate a bike because it isn't "correct" that it bothers me.

I too, like the Blood Clot paint scheme.

Chuey

There's no such thing as an "improvement" to a collectible investment. "Motorcycles," on the other hand, can all use improvements. Your problem with people denigrating improved machines is that you are not looking at the same thing. You are looking at a machine - to be used. They are looking at an investment, to be placed on a shelf to appreciate.

I appreciate your distinction between appreciation and actual use.

Chuey

Major, you are very right.

I was speaking some years ago to a somewhat eccentric British rider, his bike was a 50s British single upped to 400cc, with hydraulic drum brakes front and rear, he only had one leg, his wife was sorry to miss the trip, but she had just had a kidney transplant........the conversation was at a bike rally in Romania! But to get to the point he spoke of bikes 'falling into the hands of collectors'. When this happens , the bikes don't get used and there is no longer the need for the parts and skills infrastructure to keep the bikes on the road. I do notice that the uk airhead gurus are all getting older..........(I'm not of course)

In the uk you don't pay any tax on the profit you make on old vehicles, so this a tax incentive for speculation in old bikes and cars.

Some people do allow their old cars to be used, my brother races a type 35 bugatti a 1924 grand prix car, he is allowed to race it, but the slight lack of any protection means that he won't won't to roll it.

Major Softie wrote:There's no such thing as an "improvement" to a collectible investment. "Motorcycles," on the other hand, can all use improvements. Your problem with people denigrating improved machines is that you are not looking at the same thing. You are looking at a machine - to be used. They are looking at an investment, to be placed on a shelf to appreciate.

I don't think this thread is denigrating owners who modify their bikes and alter them from factory specification. Likewise I hope that this thread doesn't denigrate those who take pleasure in keeping a bike as close to factory condition as the constraints of regular use allow. With regard to the above quote it's a bit too polarised to be helpful and it misses out a whole middle ground of the "classic" scene whereby some owners of old bikes seek to run them in something close to their original condition. This won't work when the bike in question is needed for all weather commuting in heavy traffic, but its nice when it affords bike and rider an opportunity to go out and enjoy an unhurried ride on an unmolested machine that reflects, in the R90S case, the zeitgeist of the affluent BMW owning motorcyclists of the mid '70s. I have one R90S that I've deliberately kept as original as possible and, despite its idiosyncratic braking and handling, I love the fact that it's pretty much in the same condition as it left the Berlin factory in 1976. If it was my only bike I'd have to fit a Brembo front end, better shocks and an RS fairing. Luckily I have a couple of other airheads (a mono and an LS) that I use for commuting and in bad weather; I ride year round. My other R90S is a '74 bike with a 336 cam, twin plugs, ported and gas flowed heads, 44mm inlet valves, lightened flywheel and a big-tube swingarm...it does have the original footrest rubbers though.

I was once regaled by an expert in originality who was unhappy with the polished float bowls on the Dell'Ortos fitted to my 850 Guzzi Le Mans. I pointed out the Honda switchgear, Agostini rearsets and de-linked brakes as even more significant deviations from stock and he walked off in disgust. Truth was the bike was much nicer to ride when I'd finished modifying it, albeit no longer in original condition, and the guy I sold it to had similar views to me and appreciated the changes I'd made. He also raced an AJS 7R and owned a Vincent Black Lightning thus contradicting the MS assertion by being both a collector of rare and collectable bikes, and using them too.

So I suppose what I'm saying is that if you have an old bike, but want it to go, stop and handle like a new bike, then why not buy a new bike instead? If you have an old bike and want to improve its useability then go ahead and do whever your budget will allow and best of luck - I've seen plenty in this category that were made significantly worse, but so what; it's your money. If you have an old bike in original condition and like it like that then enjoy it but make allowances for thirty-plus year old technology and if you want to buy a factory perfect machine to keep in your living room then that's fine too, just don't get ripped off by unscrupulous sellers cashing in on a rising market.

I guess since I started this thread I'd better throw in my 2 centavoes as well.

As I have no space in the living room for a meusem peice my bikes must have a function. I have tried to restore to "original" in the past and found it to be awfully expensive and resulted in a bike that was impossible to ride as I didn't want to scratch it or get it dirty.

I then went the other direction and took a running, numbers matching /2 and ripped out the engine and stuck in a /5 motor. The result is a bike that I REALLY like.

So now I'm casually looking at R90Ss. But it must be a bike that I can ride (not too perfect or expensive), but I would still like to find one with as many of the hard to find bits on it as I can. Unless I decide to keep my /5 and upgrade the engine to be quicker than an S.

DanielMc wrote:...and the guy I sold it to had similar views to me and appreciated the changes I'd made. He also raced an AJS 7R and owned a Vincent Black Lightning thus contradicting the MS assertion by being both a collector of rare and collectable bikes, and using them too.

Quite the contrary, you have reinforced my point. He was NOT someone who denigrates improvements in a classic machine, and he was NOT someone who merely puts them on a shelf. Thus, he is exactly the opposite of the people I spoke of.

DanielMc wrote:I don't think this thread is denigrating owners who modify their bikes and alter them from factory specification.

I'm not sure you closely read Chuey's and my posts. No one said anything about people on this string denigrating modifications on classic bikes. Chuey brought up people who do that (who are not on this board), and I said that they do not look at the machine the same way Chuey does.

You've made it quite clear that your friend does not look at machines the way those people do either.

Thanks for the clarification MS - I think we're in agreement here.

DanielMc wrote:Thanks for the clarification MS - I think we're in agreement here.

Cool. Now lets all go out and tart-up some R90S's with neon running lights, leather fringe, and spikes!

Major Softie wrote:

DanielMc wrote:Thanks for the clarification MS - I think we're in agreement here.

Cool. Now lets all go out and tart-up some R90S's with neon running lights, leather fringe, and spikes!

I've got a friend who's turning an R90S into all terrain R90gS . It is one ugly bike. 21" front wheel with monsterous front forks and brake, an extended R90 swing axle converted to a mono shock, big ugly off road fenders, a teeny weeny square headlight, solo seat, and a rare R90/6 police gas tank. Not my cup of tea, but what's done is done. Lots of engineering and thought went into this project. Form will follow function. Better than an Airhead chopper or bobber. I've seen those too.