Period Correct, Whats Proper?

[Blackbike]

This is a question that has been on my mind lately... What is "period correct"? And what is a "stretch to far"?
I know a complete factory bicycle can be restored to period correctness to a time frame of about 6 months based on serial numbers and component date codes and this is fine, but its not where this question is pointed.
Specialty manufactured race frames might have kit on it 5 years older than the date of the frame, or up to 5 years newer if the bike had a racing lifespan of 5 years.
So how do you guys play this game, whats "Period Correct"?, and whats a "Stretch To Far"?

Thank You: Mike

 

[Excel]

depends on if you want the bike to be equipped with the same original components it was used with initially that have now long since worn out (tyres, chainwheels etc.) or just of the era.....I have a couple of bikes in my ownership since the early 1960's and a good while back changed derailleurs to Nuovo Record that I still regard as period correct even tough originally it was supplied with the earlier Gran Sport......not too sure if this answers the question though?

 

[Chapeau! Velo]

Re:

In my opinion period correct would be a frame built up with equipment that was all available at the time of the frame's manufacture - this would apply to builds that tended to be available as frame only BITD. There are also race replicas that are faithful to a particular racer's famous race bike spec - Greg Lemond's 89 TVT for example. This would ignore 'period correctness' if the racer used an older (or prototype) parts on their original bike. Finally, there is the catalogue build - if a bike was available as a complete bike then there is the faithful restoration to that spec in a given year - as per the catalogue.

 

[mattsccm]

Re:

If you are fussy and want it right complete bike should be as catalogue. If it was a custom build then parts as catalogued by maker for that year. Practically speaking parts should match style of bike and close if year of bike obvious. However good steel frames cover a huge period, datable mostly by angles and braze ons. A 531 frame doesn't look wrong dressed up as a 60's or 90's bike.

 

[NeilM]

Re:

Interesting question.

There are those, especially in the MTB section that do not consider a bike period correct unless it is wearing exactly what it would have done when new, right down to tyres, chain, cables brake blocks, the lot.

There are others, like me, who are happy to have modern replacements for consumable parts, brake blocks, tyres etc on an otherwise 'period' bike that uses wheels, running gear, saddle, bars etc available at the time the bike was new.

 

[legrandefromage]

My 'new' Zaskar was catalog correct for a whole ten minutes but has been period correct for many builds.

Catalog correct and period correct are too different countries.

 

[The History Man]

Ok, now let's define 'period'. No, not one of these. And 'at the time'?

Catalogue spec is simpler with full bikes but other than that I sense a coach and horses approaching at speed.

 

[pigman]

Re: Re:

There are others, like me, who are happy to have modern replacements for consumable parts, brake blocks, tyres etc on an otherwise 'period' bike that uses wheels, running gear, saddle, bars etc available at the time the bike was new.

Just how I see it also

 

[fettler]

Re:

I find catalogue correct a bit boring, Ikea - Legoland same as the others whatever. Surely the first thing most people do when they buy a new bike is upgrade it? Improve it as it wears out. For me, period correct bikes should should feature upgraded components from that year & the next couple of years after. This is how you would have seen bikes BITD.
Everyones different though.

 

[foz]

I think most decent or at least high-end bikes were built up from parts, rather than bought of the shelf, certainly up to the mid to late 90's. There were some high end bikes available, but up until that time I think it was a lot more common to have frame built (or buy a good off the peg one) and hang whatever you wanted on it. Even if you bought a full bike, who didn't change the saddle and maybe bars and stem straight away anyway? My bikes always had a mix of parts that was constantly changing, as they wore out and got replaced/upgraded. As for now, I really can't be bothered with the time and expense of finding period correct chains, brake blocks (which might be hardened and no use anyway), tyres (same for those), etc. I ride my bikes, so want everything to work. If I were building a museum piece then it might be different.