Topic: If you don't know it for a fact, don't presume it to be true

[Hope]

oh, by the way, here are some more ALL STOCK ALL ORIGINAL CB550s on ebay right now....

                      I HAVE TWO 550 HONDAS FOR SALE, 1.CB550 ALL ORIGINAL A COMPLETE BIKE  WITH RC HEADER , 17,000 MILES , HAS BEEN SITTING SOME TIME MOTOR IS GOOD NEED CARBS GONE THRU AND A TUNE UP NICE BIKE ( GOOD TITLE ) 2. 1975 HONDA SS 550 NEEDS SIDECOVER AND MUFFER AND SOME TLC MOTOR IS GOOD HAS 15,000 MILES,  ( HAS NO TITLE ) PARTS BIKE, BUY THEM BOTH AT ONE PRICE, MUST BE PICKED UP AND CASH ONLY.    THANKS T.J.

Item 150238950040

Enjoy!

I especially like that original front wheel.

[hopterfixer]

Have you ever thought that, just maybe, some people have no idea what they are listing?  Some people may just write all original because that is what is looks like, or their uncles neighbors buddy who they are listing it for told them it was and they just don't know any better.  Just a thought. 

[Terry in Australia]

Yeah, I agree. I don't think that an incorrect description should necessarily be assumed to be proof of a intentional deception, anyone can make a mistake, and a lot of sellers are selling things that they know nothing about. Cheers, Terry.

[Gordon]

If you don't know anything about what you're selling, then you should say so, but most people don't because they're afriad the knowledge of that fact will hurt the final selling price.  Claiming something is factory original when you don't actually know whether it is or not is just another form of deception.  But again, that all falls under the Caveat Emptor thing.  If you don't know anything about what you're buying, you're at the mercy of the seller. 

[Hope]

Original can also mean unmolested..

 

Which is why I appreciate this listing:
   Unmolested Classic Original CB550 F, Pristine!  #280221092581

[Terry in Australia]

If you don't know anything about what you're selling, then you should say so, but most people don't because they're afriad the knowledge of that fact will hurt the final selling price.  Claiming something is factory original when you don't actually know whether it is or not is just another form of deception.  But again, that all falls under the Caveat Emptor thing.  If you don't know anything about what you're buying, you're at the mercy of the seller. 

That's true enough Gordy, but Hope has already demonstrated earlier that even an enthusiast with a good knowledge of a particular marque can make an honest mistake, so for someone to describe a bike as being "Original" because it's essentially complete after 30 years, wearing original body work (albeit with perhaps a non original paint scheme, or 4 into 1 pipe, electronic ignition, aftermarket shocks, handlebars and seat cover) should not necessarily be considered deceptive.

In most cases, those items would have worn out many years ago, and would have been thrown by a PO. If I was buying any SOHC4 other than a CB750K0,  I think I'd rather have a bike with newer, better replacement items than a rusted out, leaking  (but original) exhaust, worn out (but original) shocks, cracked (but original) tires, split (but original) seat, chipped, faded and dented (but original) paint, etc etc.

Just my opinion of course, but just replacing the OEM tires might be considered "Not original" by some "Train spotters" out there. Cheers, Terry.

[754]

I used to hang around a few of the ebay forums...

 Its pretty common practice, if you are not sure of a description, to, "Just list it and let the Market sort it out"

 Now to some folks, this mean changing your listing.. (you CANT change TITLE after it has recieved a bid), and to others it may mean  posting Questions asked by ebayers, and to some..nothing at all..let the auction run.

 Some sellers list hundreds of items & really dont spend much time on any of them..

 So, just cuz someone  screws up a description, is it really that important to mount a campaign to CRUCIFY them??

[Gordon]

In most cases, those items would have worn out many years ago, and would have been thrown by a PO. If I was buying any SOHC4 other than a CB750K0,  I think I'd rather have a bike with newer, better replacement items than a rusted out, leaking  (but original) exhaust, worn out (but original) shocks, cracked (but original) tires, split (but original) seat, chipped, faded and dented (but original) paint, etc etc.

That's why we have qualifiers like the word "mostly", as in "mostly original".  I don't think anyone has claimed that there's anything wrong with replacing worn or damaged parts. 

To claim that a motorcycle is "original" when you don't actually know if it is, is not being deceptive about the motorcycle, it's being deceptive about your level of knowledge about that motorcycle. 

[Terry in Australia]

Well if that's the case Gordy, half the folk here (including myself) are probably guilty of that "deception".

I've been owning and riding CB750's for 30 years this year, and I'm learning new things all the time, mostly thanks to this site.

I don't know if that really makes me deceptive, just still learning. Cheers, Terry.

[Jonesy]

In most cases, those items would have worn out many years ago, and would have been thrown by a PO. If I was buying any SOHC4 other than a CB750K0,  I think I'd rather have a bike with newer, better replacement items than a rusted out, leaking  (but original) exhaust, worn out (but original) shocks, cracked (but original) tires, split (but original) seat, chipped, faded and dented (but original) paint, etc etc.

That's why we have qualifiers like the word "mostly", as in "mostly original".  I don't think anyone has claimed that there's anything wrong with replacing worn or damaged parts. 

To claim that a motorcycle is "original" when you don't actually know if it is, is not being deceptive about the motorcycle, it's being deceptive about your level of knowledge about that motorcycle. 

How deep do we want to dive? I've replaced parts on my CB750, and while they are "Genuine Honda" parts, they are new production. So if one really wants to get technical, my bike is not "factory original", despite being 100% Honda-made parts.

-The mufflers are HM 300's, but they have the paragraph stamped on the backsides RE it being against the law to use them on a bike newer than 1982.

-The clamp bands on the carb boots are connected to the same part # as in the 1973 CB750 Parts breakdown, but they are black with hex-head phillips screws. (Originals were silver-colored.)

I could go on, but the point I'm making is what really is "factory original"? We all seem to have different definitions of this. When Vic world builds sandcast biikes, he only uses parts manufactured by Honda in the late 60's- he's that picky. Whereas, some of us are just happy to have a complete functioning motorcycle that runs well and gets us where we want to go reliably.

Personally, What I'm looking for in a bike for sale depends on what I want to do with it. If I plan to take it to bike shows with the intent on winning "Best original", I'm looking for a bike with everything there- correct paint, yellow paint marks on the bolt heads.. you name it. If I want a cafe bike, I'll get a rolling frame since most of the body work will be replaced anyway. No matter what you're doing, as others have already said, you have to know about what you're buying. Sadly, eBay in general seems to breed suspicion that the sole purpose of sellers is to screw the buyers (with eBay gladly taking a cut of the profits).

I'll stop rambling now...

[mystic_1]

Fortunately for me, my bike wasn't anything near original when I got it, and probably hadn't been for over thirty years.   

I don't think the HD fenders I'm currently fitting are helping things, either

mystic_1

[Gordon]

Well if that's the case Gordy, half the folk here (including myself) are probably guilty of that "deception".

Oh well, so be it. 

Doesn't really bother me either way, I just like debating topics like this.  I don't put too much stock in what someone says about a bike they're selling.  I prefer to do my own research.  Along the same lines, though, I'd do the same amount of research before labeling a bike I'm selling as "original".  Maybe you would, too, or maybe you wouldn't.  To each his own. 

[loonymoon]

If I were to list my bike I'd probably say it's 95% original or something like that. The paint is all original etc The pipes are as original as I could get them, i.e. replacement 4-4's. It does have a tranisitorized ignition, but would just take a quick switch of connections to get it back to points driven.

The purists may argue that the percentage should be lower though as the front indicators are in the wrong place (the original owner had a screen attached) and it has an aftermarket rack (also added by the original owner..) but to me I like these as they are part of the "story" of the bike. I could move the front indicators back to their correct position but I don't because I feel like it's part of the bike's history.

[Terry in Australia]

Well if that's the case Gordy, half the folk here (including myself) are probably guilty of that "deception".

Oh well, so be it. 

Doesn't really bother me either way, I just like debating topics like this.  I don't put too much stock in what someone says about a bike they're selling.  I prefer to do my own research.  Along the same lines, though, I'd do the same amount of research before labeling a bike I'm selling as "original".  Maybe you would, too, or maybe you wouldn't.  To each his own. 

Yeah, you're right Gordy, you and I probably would, but as I've previously mentioned there are people out there selling bikes who might honestly think they're "original", with no deceptive intentions at all.

Like Jonesy says, not all sellers are out to screw gullible buyers, and not all "experts" who contact the sellers to correct them about their listings are always correct, either. Cheers, Terry.