[TR] To restore or not restore, that is the question

[Kinderlehrer]

There's an interesting video on utube taken at a Haggerty sponsored 
seminar in Scottsdale about survivor, or unrestored,  cars. There is 
even some guy in the audience that keeps asking questions about British 
cars and Triumphs. Maybe he owns a TR250. Maybe he's on this list. Maybe 
he's back from Triumphest..

The video is at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WlNWVhOUMI&feature=player_embedded

Bob

On 9/21/2011 3:04 PM, terryrs at comcast.net wrote:
> I would add just one element to what's been discussed.  That's the definition of "restored."
>
> The automatic assumption is often that when a car is "restored," followed by any number of adjectives suggesting immaculate attention to detail, the car is like new.  Don't be surprised by the shakedown bugs you'll find as you drive it for any length of time.  These are often invisible to concourse judges, but can leave one coughing distractedly into one's fist at the side of the road when one finds, for instance, that one should have used a pliable red wire instead of bigger rigid stranded wire from the alternator conversion, to find the wire broke because of vibration.
>
> When one finds one, one fixes one, then two, then three.  My sister describes my experience with my '68 MGB in college as "his torso under the hood, his butt in the air."
>
> Three-quarters cool, one quarter embarrasment.  But I'd rather be embarrassed with a cool car than yawning in a modern compact.
>
> Terry Smith, '59 TR3A
> New Hamsphire
>
>
> triumphs at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe/Manage: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/triumphs/kinderlehrer@comcast.net