original vs. restored

[rwm]

ride it when you can

[Sandman]

So as a newbie with an original 1970 bike with 3900 miles on it, what would you say is an acceptable quantity of riding. I want to ride the thing as much as possible with as minimal effect as possible on historical and monetary value. I was thinking about 500 miles per year. Is that reasonable? if not, what SHOULD be my target?

[Magic]

either neither nor

Parkerize I couldn't say it any better and I enjoy looking at restorations myself just not my cup of tea. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Merlin in Pa.

[parkerize]

Not for nothing but you would be surprised how much work goes into original paint machines. Nothing against restored bikes but I have only been interested in orig paint machines for over 20 years and I can tell you I never stop working on these things. Nothing takes short time to do it right and correct against a judging scorecard. Just because a bike is original paint in no way means that the rest of the machine does not need serious attention- original paint bikes that have sat for awhile need tons of painstaking work and research as well, especially against the fact many of these jewels have sat untouched or loved for many years. It is also painstaking to find original paint parts with the right patina where invariably parts get changed over the years. Some parts also take literally 5-10 years to hunt down and just the "hunting" is tons of time with meets, phone calls, classifieds and the newest source, Ebay. Reworking original mechanicals in my view is also harder than starting with fresh aftermarket parts. Also worth noting that some of these cash strapped owners save countless cash to pay the prices rare original paint parts fetch, which again comes down to the owners sweat equity in many cases (although I understand some guys are more fortunate than others in the cash department!!). Again not at all knocking restored bikes and the amount of time needed to complete some of these beautiful restorations. I'm just pointing out that it is seldom you find an original paint bike that scores 95-100 points without a TON of effort on the part of the owner. Sure there are instances where you get lucky and find a true untouched gem that needs little time, but that really is a needle in a haystack.

[exeric]

I don't disagree with the current judging standards. I believe the AMCA judging position has to be at a very high standard (i.e. the motorcycle has to look new if it's to be considered for high points in the restored catagory.) You can't have used or worn looking parts on a motorcycle that looks fresh everywhere else. In other words, you can't have it both ways. If you're going for high points and correctness your bike is probably going to be somewhat of a trailer queen for a little while. After you get the awards you want, ride the snot out of it. Kevin answered my question and I should have know the answer. Each bike is judged on it's own merits and it's score has nothing to do with the bike next to it.

[kval]

First thing, the bikes are not judged together. they are each judged on their own merits.
second, we do not deduct for slight blueing or road dirt on either an original or restored bike.
and last, there should be no such thing as a "trailer queen". once a bike makes it to Winners Circle it only has to maintain 85 points to stay there.
the whole idea is to ride them

[felthamw]

I am entirely new to the AMCA and had my eyes opened after my first judging attempt in Eustis. I guess I didn't understand at the time that you could have an "original" untouched entry OR a fully "restored" entry and for it to be exactly as the MoCo sold it in either case. I don't have a problem with original or restored in the same classes as you are trying in both cases to be as close to the "real thing" as you can be.
My issue is that I want to ride the bike, as they were intended when they were built. I am sure I can get my two Junior firsts and ride the daylights out of it. BUT, when I again go through it and repaint it and fix the what I would called "normal road damage" to get the Senior first and Winners Circle - at that point it becomes a trailer queen. Unfortunate, but necessary. I was thinking a class for bikes that are 100% as original - but allowed to be ridden was more in line with increasing the interest levels and adding to our sport.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy this hobby and the chase for the correctness. It is great fun. But much more work and much more costly to do than I originally thought.
So to sum up, how about a class for 100% "untouched-as original", a 100% "restored to new condition" and one that would allow us to ride the bikes and be 100% brought back to as delivered status (without discounting for road wear)?

Wayne E. Feltham
AMCA #4328

[Chris Haynes]

I feel thare should be a class for "Preserved" motorcycles. One that has not been restored but has maybe been repainted or upgraded during its 35+ year life and is no longer "Original".

[Glenn]

my 50 while almost all there and was sitting since 1964 had the frame and sheet metal painted so it was a easy decision to restore. If it was all original paint I would have gone another direction because original could only be once in a lifetime.

jmho

[Rooster]

I am restoring a '52FL, and it will never be original.

[c.o.]

I would think seperate Eric........for all the reasons you mentioned.

[exeric]

I was talking with a friend yesterday about judging with regards to "original" bikes. The topic of "original" bikes being judged with restored bikes came up. Just curious how the membership feels about "original" bikes being judged with restored motorcycles. The point being; a restored bike takes research, tons of work, lots of money, and lots of time. In other words, a great deal of devotion even if you don't do most of the work. An "original" bike is usually a matter of luck, inheritance, or truckloads of money. "Original" bikes are a treasure and a touchstone for restoration but there sure isn't much work on the part of the owner. Again, should they be judged with restored bikes or be judged and awarded seperately.