Word power

| 6/23/2009 10:55:10 AM

Alison Green 

It is all in the semantics… “Restoration” invokes images of powder-coated frames and blue-printed motors – the end result being a vehicle that shows significantly more precise and expert attention to detail than the original ever could. I’ve never attempted to go that far with any project…  not really interested in investing that amount of time and/or money in something that will never pay back the effort when/if the time comes to sell.  Old bikes can be a bottomless sump for money and time unless one is prepared to do the work solely as a labour of love.  Love is a viable motive – profit isn’t. 

Now I know. 

My winter projects were not ‘restorations’ at all, but rather ‘rejuvenations’.  I saw this word used in a motorcycle for-sale advert and realized that it was the semantics of my hobby that was causing me discomfort – not the work itself.  I’ve have always felt somewhat of a fraud when using any derivative of the word ‘restore’ – but no other came to mind.  My intent has never been to produce a motorcycle that was perfect in every way – better than original. To my mind, the original tooling on the Airhead BMW motorcycles was generally top-flight. Any yes, there are a few serious oversights on the part of the manufacturer – none of their designs is perfect. With few exceptions however, machining, fit and finish have always been quality – so excessive aftermarket upgrading of old machines seems to be a bit over-the-top.  I am a rider - not a collector, but I can appreciate the lure of the perfectly preserved (rare as hens’ teeth) or the restoration done to perfection. But I can’t afford one! 

So when a tired and abused old bike finds itself in my shop, the aim is to rejuvenate it – to bring it back to life as a functional, reliable and cosmetically acceptable ride. Ergo, the dented tank and chopped fenders and surface rust must be dealt with – but minor stone chips on the down-tubes and wear-burnished pin-stripes on the tank, and innumerable other minor blemishes can be worn with the pride of time and miles. 

If the engine is tight and the electrics all work properly, if the bodywork looks great from a few feet away and the chrome pieces look like chrome – then I am content.  I lean toward function, not fashion. I have never owned a bike that could be considered ‘concours’ as I am just not sufficiently enthusiastic about cosmetic maintenance.  My bikes are clean, properly maintained, mechanically sound and well used.  The stress that comes with the purchase of a new and perfect bike, or concours restoration, is not for me. Minor scuffs and scrapes and marks of miles ridden (on the bike – not me) make for a much less stressful relationship. 

Dan Kilgore
6/26/2009 3:20:53 PM

I Agree with you Alison. I have a 1976 honda CB750 with 50,000 miles on the clock.It has all the little dings an scratches that one would expect of a 30 year old bike,but from a few feet away it looks new.The bike always draws a crowd where ever I go.It runs great. I will never restore it to showroom new,I like to ride it just the way it is. And isn't that what it is all about anyway. Dan

Leigh Ross
6/25/2009 10:35:09 AM

Amen sister! My R90S was never the most perfect bike at the BMW rallies in South Africa but it always had the most miles on it. Percy Blandford wrote a book "100 steps to build a kayak." Step 99 was finish the beautiful paintwork. Step 100 was to drag it down a gravel road for 100 yards and then go enjoy the kayak on the water with no worries about the immaculate paintwork.