Paint or patina?

[phssthpok]

…….anyone who has glanced at my meagre contributions to this site will have read about my quest to have a fully restored Puch VZ50 on the road. After a good deal of searching I finally laid my trembling hands on a 1974 bike with 7000 miles on the clock and complete apart from an exhaust system. I bought it as a non-runner, but a quick check of the very basic wiring loom had the engine running in no time; much to the chagrin of the wife who didn’t seem to understand why I would a) want to house my Puch in her pristine conservatory and then b) start an unsilenced bike in the afore mentioned conservatory; which also caused my daughter’s two pet guinea-pigs to immediately have myocardial infarctions. Luckily, I managed to whip off the Puch’s spark plug cap and use the HT lead as a make-shift defibrillator and revive the 2 comatose pigs before the daughter caught onto the medical drama that was being played out in the conservatory. Emergency over, and trying to ignore the smell of burnt gerber fur, I turned my attention back to the Puch.

……..as I said, my original plan was to strip the mighty Puch down to its last Austrian nut and bolt then rebuild the engine/gearbox/clutch/brakes, replace the wiring loom, cables, chain, grips, footrest and rubber work. Then blast off all the paint and have the frame powder-coated, the tank painted and the chrome work all rechromed. Once the alloy was all polished up, I would then reassemble the bike into what would be ostensibly better than new condition. But, the more I look at the mighty Puch, the more I see a 34 year old bike that wears its age as a fine patina of road experience. Now I have a quandary: do I perform the mechanical equivalent of plastic surgery and give the Puch a facelift, botox and skin peel so it ends up looking like a freakish 55 year-old Hollywood star trying to pretend she’s still 30 with a trout-pout and immovable face or do I leave it to grow old gracefully?

……..this is a genuine dilemma for me. Should I rebuild the mighty Puch’s engine/gearbox/clutch/brakes, replace the wiring loom, cables and chain then just clean up the rest of the bike with spit and elbow grease so it looks and runs like a well looked after 34 year old bike? Or, should I do the fully-monty so it looks and runs like it’s spanking new? I’m sure many of you have had to deal with this self-same dilemma and I would like to know you’re conclusions and thoughts on the matter. So, what is it to be folks, patina or paint?

[Mrs T]

Looking at the pics. definately patina
Otherwise you will strip it of it's character
IMO(don't do humble)

[Phil]

It is hard to tell in the photos Mark, but it looks pretty clean & flaw free?

With a thorough clean & detail, I would go with the as is look.

At seven thousand miles there should not be a real need for a mechanical rebuild. I wouldn`t be surprised at a couple of leaks from perished seals.

A good strong ride should re-seat the piston rings.

She is a beaut

[Chiefy]

Patina wins the day for me.

[SalTheWop]

Agree with Chiefy

[45Brit]

patina, definitely. You get a bike which is worth more at less cost, and it just looks better that way

[phssthpok]

........thanks guys; I agree, by tarting up the mighty Puch I'd just be stripping it of its character. Now, all I have to do is sniff out wannabes on their FS1E's and SS50's and see who has the fasted 'ped in town.

[Tony Cross]

Not the sort of bike I would seek to own but my rule for any old bike or car is simple. If it is in VGC or better keep it as it is. Signs of use are a bonus. If it is rough but complete restore it. From what you have said it is better kept clean and given a bit of use going to vintage rallies.

[kevscrivener]

It's far too nice to restore. Well-used original wins over shiny restoration every time in my book.

My old VS50D was 6 years old when I bought it in 1976; one thing I do remember was that it polished up well, build quality was rather good on those old Puch's.

[Mike Benis]

What they said. But I reckon you knew that anyway.... :-)