In order to set this to rest, the term "restoration" in its connotation with
classic cars is used to denote return to originality. The example of the
Duesenburg is very accurate. No thought would be given to removing the spoke
wheels and bicycle like tires to replace them with 205/45/20 tires for
better handling characteristics and safety from hydroplaning. They pay the
big bucks for the Coker replica tires which are even then original in
outward appearance only, I am sure.
Even in antique furniture, it means the 10 layers of paint has been removed,
a few pieces of rotten wood replaced, then refinished to original, e.g.
boiled linseed oil or tung oil. It should look the way it did it came from
the carpenter's shop, except for the patina.
The problem, like all things automotive, is that this term has been hijacked
by those who would sell something. The very term restoration creates in the
mind of the buyer a product that is "as good as new".
I remember back in the late 70's and 80's how this term was hedged by
modifiers like "90 % restored". Those of us who appreciated classic cars at
the time knew this to be a fresh paint job, the cracks in the upholstery
were stitched up by hand, and it had a new master cylinder. Even cars that
had a new paint job, upholstery, etc, without complete rubber replacement,
etc, if you actually did a mathematical computation of percentage, might
only have been 65% restored
The term "Rebuilt motor" had no definition at all without a receipt because
rebuilt could mean new rings, bearing, and oil pump, and even then, the date
on the receipt was important because cars that actually did have a detailed
description of the rebuild time might have 52,000 miles on the rebuild!
Few cars are ever "restored". Compare an original factory Tiger to a
restoration. Even if restored to original, the restoration is a better car,
with a blueprinted motor, deburred metal, and a high level of attention to
detail, something that factory workers (anywhere) lack.
So, the term restoration really only has one meaning in certain automotive
circles. There may even be a few within our community. The rest of us are
being told this word because there is none created for us to use, and even
if we did create one, it would take 20 years for it to take hold because of
its rampant misuse by the rest of society. The best thing to do is just
accept it for what it is, then try to determine deviations from the term
prior to the car's purchase. We really all do that anyway.
----- Original Message -----
From: "DrMayf" <drmayf@teknett.com>
To: "Stephen Waybright" <gswaybright@yahoo.com>; <tigers@autox.team.net>;
"'Alpine's Peak'" <alpines@autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 10:15 PM
Subject: Re: Restoring a Car or other Vehicle
> Stephen,
> regarding the last comment..."where do you draw the line?" This is exactly
> what I was/am curious about. Again, would the multi gazillion dollar
> Dusenberg benefit from a safety upgrade to the brakes? Probably, but it
> isn't original. I understand the need and have done it myself the need to
> make our cars safer to motor around in.
Check out the new British Cars Forum:
http://www.team.net/the-local/tiki-view_forum.php?forumId=8
|