Using his own pictures as proof that this appears to be a bogus story. In the b&w photo, you can see the rear axle strap doesn't have a hole, on the
bike in his listing it does. I don't think they started doing that until production bikes were being produced. Next on the list, in the b&w photo you can see how much space is between the nut and where the tube starts to crimp, it almost goes to the inside most part of the outer rim. Again, the bike in the listing has less space between the nut and where the tube starts to crimp. Also look at the front axle nut, in the b&w photo, the flats of the nut are as wide as the crimped part of the fork tube. The
bike in his listing has ample space from the edge of the nut to the outer portion of the crimped part of the tube, even with the nut turned at the points. these aren't tricks on the eye due to angles of the pictures, I really don't think it's the same bike. The height of the forks don't seem the same either, the bike in the listing seems to have taller bars and the bend doesn't appear to be the same either. Not just the amount of bend but where it starts to bend as well. If I'm not mistaken, the first bikes had 3/4" forks, that would explain the nut being as wide as the crimped area in the b&w photo as opposed to the
bike in the listing which appears to have 7/8" forks. Cool story bro, but it ain't worth $12,500 to me.
View attachment 259151
View attachment 259152
View attachment 259153