So having had a genuine LM1 “back in the day”, I have bought a well done (in my opinion) replica which started life as a G5. Muzzi Moto and Nigel Billinglsey did the work, and apart from a few points, engine and frame number, main stand etc. to my eyes at least, it looks the business.
Now, in other classic forums and owner groups I frequent the rivet counters pull stuff apart, because the left handed gangle pin is not Olive green, or the mirrors are not stamped with an “S” and the like, are the cognoscenti in here as fussy ?
I’m interested to read your views. Picture below, so you can pick at it !
LM1 EPR blue Nov18 9.JPG
I have no problem with replicas unless someone tries to pass one off as something it is not. (I’m not suggesting you are doing that)
My bike started life as an 850T now it looks very much like a 750S but as I am not trying to fool anyone it says 950S on the side panels.
I agree with jmee if it is nice to ride and it makes you happy, sod the rivet counters!
Is it about context?
If it’s someone’s pride and joy then rivet counters stand aside.
If people have a show bike or offer a bike as an exemplar it has to be right.
This then begs the question of ‘What is original’? Moto Guzzi and a few other manufacturers are known to have mixed and matched parts to complete production runs.
I’ve lost count of the Guzzis that I’ve seen, heard of and worked on that had ‘incorrect’ parts; examples include T3 with 36mm cards and a hot cam, MkII LM with 40mm carbs, LM1000 with 15mm longer swing arm. All these bikes were a one owner from new and unmodified. Stories from the factory give an idea of how this occurred.
I’ve has a few comments about the Mongrel. “I bet you think that’s a proper T3 don’t you?” was the best!
Enjoy your bike
I remember Titch Allen VMCC founder said similar, he was against restoring bikes to factory spec, as the modifications made over the years would then be lost. None of my bikes are standard, even the Stelvio has been modified to make it easier to maintain or better to ride.