uncle uncle

I noticed (while following the KHS Team Pro bicycle thread) that many times, when someone ends up finding a bicycle, the new owner doesn't have a clue if the components on his new purchase are original. I don't consider myself a "factory completest" when I consider my own rider bicycles, but I am always sorta curious to what appeared on the bicycle to begin with. Is there any benefit or interest in possibly documenting that type of information? I realize for some bicycles there were catalogs made, and for popular brands these have been shared to the interwebs, but for something like the KHS Team Pro, catalog data seems pretty scarce. And have you looked at bicycle catalog listing on #bay lately (I horded the wrong things, apparently). Well, let me know your take on the subject, and thanks in advance.

bikemig 

This is not quite what you asked but it is on topic I think. I nearly always list the parts on my vintage builds, both how I found the bike and how I finished them up. That helps me think through how I want to build a bike and any changes I might want to make.

uncle uncle

I think it is on point... I believe I've tried, to the best of my abilities, to list the components on bicycles I've come across too, with the caveat that I'm never really sure if they've represent "factory specs" or not. I appreciate those people who will do this (and have done it in the past), but I guess I always feel a bit like a bit of a bother-er when I've asked people to provide the same type of data in their postings.

JohnDThompson 

Having worked in bicycle manufacturing, I can tell you that what the catalog lists as components isn't carved in stone. Non-catalog components may be slip-streamed into the assembly line due to parts shortages, shipments delayed in customs, problems with original spec component, etc. So I don't see any compelling reason to insist that a bike exactly match whatever was pictured in the catalog.

uncle uncle

I worked at a Schwinn shop for a few years... and yes, we often made changes to customers bicycles, at the point of the original sale. And, yes, sometimes the bicycles, straight from the box, didn't always match what the catalog had listed. These issues will always be there. I guess I'm just curious about how a bicycle may have been originally spec'ed. I don't think bicycles could ever be considered "factory correct" when many people have commented, from their own experiences, that changes to components were often made in the industry.

canklecat

I'm no purist for original components and I just find it interesting to see some info about a bike's original setup. If nothing else it might help identifying a stolen bike. For example, an owner might have replaced the original short cage rear derailleur with a long cage version from another era to suit a cassette or freewheel with bigger cogs. That little bit of info might help identify a stolen bike at a glance, without asking the thief or seller to flip the bike upside down to check the serial number.

Recently I visited the LBS to get a tube and couple other small doodads and enjoyed listening to the owner chatter about my new-to-me early 1990s Trek 5900 (probably 1993). He's been a Trek dealer for 30something years and remembers a lot of Trek trivia, including the kerfluffles over "bad"headsets in the early 2000s when Trek departed from the originally spec'd Chris King headsets, etc., then had to offer free replacements to customers to use the King headsest. That was helpful because I didn't know whether the King headset on mine was the original or a replacement (it's the original). Ditto the White bottom bracket, also original. But I already knew some other components were replacements when I bought it. Not really all that important, just interesting minutiae.

And because web jpegs don't always show colors accurately, it helps to have access to someone's memory bank when you can't find an original catalog or brochure. My 5900 has purple paint, which I think Trek named "Abyss." But in some digital cameras and web browsers it appears blue, which can be confused with Trek's various blue colors from that era. My phone jpegs show the bike's true purple color, but my Nikon raw files need to be tweaked carefully to show the purple color accurately, because the out of camera jpegs show it as blue. Same with some web browsers, which vary in color management. My phone shows it as purple during the day, but when it switches to "night mode" at midnight with a blue-cut filter, the bike appears blue in the same photos. (Same reason why different viewers perceive certain color combinations differently and argue about it online -- it varies not only with human vision, but web browsers and devices.)

And a manager at that LBS used to work for a dealer that sold Univegas, so he remembers details that may not be readily available online. For example, my early 1990s Via Carisma has a Shimano Exage 500 CX group, which is among the few groups not listed on the VeloBase site. I need to clean up that bike, photograph the components and contribute those to the VeloBase site, which has been very helpful to me so it's worth the effort to contribute a little.

Reminds me, I need to ask that fellow about the other Univegas that used their Biaxial Power Oval frames with splatter paint. I kinda like that quirky frame design, and hope to find a touring bike frame with it.

Jeff Wills

Have you tried looking through https://www.bicyclebluebook.com/? I glanced through it- nothing "vintage" to my mind but might help someone researching bikes from the early '90's onward.

I worked in a Schwinn shop in the early '80's and finished my bicycle industry career collecting information at Bike'alog. I know that bikes are infinitely fungible... in my Schwinn days we would modify new bikes at the customer's request and not charge labor.

Ironfish653

If you're buying it from the original owner, I would expect they'd remember if they made some sort of major component swap on it. If it's already secondhand, you're going to have to use some of your own detective skills on it.
If it's got a full, period correct group on it, it's probably OE.
Of course, if it's seen a lot of use, many things may have been swapped out by previous riders, based on what they needed.


Now, if that KHS in the OP had, say 600 Tricolor shifters and brakes, but Alivio DRs and an Origin8 crank, i'd be wary.


For bikes i'm selling, if it has a mostly complete (shifter/dr) group, Ill list it, but, then, I don't really traffic in 'Factory Restorations'

DiabloScott

When I built my dream bike, I had a spreadsheet with every component listed that I would need, which brand/model would be my target, my cost estimate, etc. Very similar to a Bill of Materials that the manufacturers would use. This allowed me to control my total price, make concessions when necessary, and track how much I'd already spent.

I had everything in there including cables and bottle cages... 29 line items. When I actually bought each component, usually one at a time, I'd finalize that line and include the price and model number for each piece. It was a fun and worth while document to use; it doesn't have much value to me any more.

Insidious C. 

There is value in documenting components used. When trying to identify a bike I often include "specs" as a search term.

non-fixie 

+1.

I happen to have (don't ask) two Raleigh Competition 12's. They are from the same MY ('84) and were made just a couple of months apart. The one on the left with the Weinmann brakes is the earliest (December '83), and conforms to what the brochure for the year states. But apparently they switched suppliers shortly after printing and starting production, and the other (from January '84) features Shimano 600:

RobbieTunes

I use Pedal Room to document the bikes I have, including components.

However...

I can't remember to keep it current.
I should be better at entering S/N's, etc.
I should be better at current pics, etc.

In other words, it's there if I was smart enough to use it.