If you were doing some serious shopping about for an older bike, would you rather buy a restored bike or one in original condition? Personally, I 'd rather go with an old bike in original condition- as long as it hasn't sat at a river's bottom, or in someone's yard for 30 years, or something like that. I never could understand the tendency to take a sweet vintage bike and erase all the patina, make it shiny, and replace all the old bits with brandy new cheap ass Chinese (or Indian- for Brit bits) junk parts. Worse than simply repainting is when a guy repaints it with HIS favorite color, or some color "scheme" which wasn't specified by the manufacturer for the bike/year. Let's face it- many older/classic/vintage bikes are, for the most part, completely rideable! Of course you might want to upgrade the obvious- wiring, lights, ignition, tires, battery, etc. - life and death stuff that will make or break your world, OK. But to take a sweet old ride and needlessly "restore" it? Just because it bugs YOU to have a crusty old steed? Come ON. Then - worse yet- you restore a cool old bike, and instead of riding it, you SELL IT? A crime, IMO. You fuckin fuck! Why didn't you just go buy a modern bike to begin with rather than fuck up a great classic? Listen- you knuckleheads with more money than brains- leave the great old bikes to us, we who love patina, who don't mind a drip or three of oil, we who don't WANT a shiny bike. Go get yourself a retro-inspired modern motorcycle. You KNOW it's what you REALLY wanted all along.