Original Condition, Unrestored - Your Opinion, Please

[EMS]

Ever so often I enter one of my classic bikes in a show. Some of them are very close to the description/classification in the title and I wrestle with myself if I enter them there.
What would you guys consider "Original Condition, Unrestored"

I know, most consider items like new tires, chains and batteries not to be "restoration" items. But what about other "wear and tear" items:

- a clutch or throttle cable (original broke or frayed)
- a petcock (original leaked)
- a sidecover (original flew off or tabs broke)
- spark plug cables (they don't last forever)
- exhaust (original rusted out)

Where would you draw the line?

[cbxtacy]

paint

[alimey4u2]

"Original condition, unrestored" I agree with George, paint has to be "original." All other repaired/replaced items should be factory original spares....

[steve murdoch icoa #5322]

From what i gather, the rules or criteria change at each event. I do not know enough about the details of the CBX or any other bike for that matter, so i just try to take in the overall beauty of the entrant.
Mike, you mention exhaust. If the original needs replacing for any reason, does "original condition, unrestored" mean that it has to be replaced by a used mint condition and not an n.o.s. system? Same for the other items you mentioned?

[EMS]

It doesn't really matter what you replace it with. A NOS part is only NOS as long as it is off the bike. You put it on and ride around the block and the part is "excellent condition, used".
But I will disagree with the opinion that only the paint condition qualifies as "unrestored" or not.
I have a 1978 BMW R100S right now. Original paint, including a few minor scratches and a small dent in the tank. The pinstripes on these bikes were hand-painted at the factory. I had the pinstripes redone but left the paint alone, put a new exhaust on, redid the front forks including cleaning the aluminum sliders to their original luster, reworked the brakes, installed new brake lines and rebuilt the carbs. While this is far from a "restoration' I would not dare to call this bike "original condition, unrestored"

[Don]

I know, most consider items like new tires, chains and batteries not to be "restoration" items. But what about other "wear and tear" items:

- a clutch or throttle cable (original broke or frayed)
- a petcock (original leaked)
- a sidecover (original flew off or tabs broke)
- spark plug cables (they don't last forever)
- exhaust (original rusted out)

So long as all of those items are replaced with like items (nothing aftermarket of course) I have no problem with calling it 'original, unrestored'

What I have a problem with is the '2600 mile bike' currently on eBay with a starting bid of $5K - It has not a scrap of the original paint (not even anything remotely resembling stock paint) the turn signals and tachometer are incorrect items, the included 'original seat' obviously isn't 'original' . . . . it's been recovered and not with the correct covering. It's sporting a well worn, very blued set of Kerkers. There is just nothing about this bike which would make anyone think for a moment that the 2600 miles showing on the odometer could possibly be correct . . . . yet the seller doesn't see anything wrong with trying to pass it off as a low miles bike - I could be wrong of course, but I doubt there's a single thing there with as few as 2600 miles on it . . . . not even the replacement Corbin seat

Don