Restored or ...... ?

w124man

To quote the Mercedes Benz Classic Centre ....

'A fully restored car should not look restored, it should look as new as it left the factory'

I agree. How say you?

kev1.3s

Depends on weather you want to go back to standard or not, I once read that ferrari daytona's are on there second or third rebuild at this stage and are far better finished than when they were new. I suppose the above ideal is easier to implement with Mercedes's legendary build quality of the past but not all manufactures could offer the same.

swarlb

w124man wrote: »

To quote the Mercedes Benz Classic Centre ....

'A fully restored car should not look restored, it should look as new as it left the factory'

I agree. How say you?

Well, seeing as a lot of cars left the factory with no rust proofing, or in some cases bare metal on the inner panels, I think if I was to restore an old car, I'd want it better than when it left the factory.
All that is, is a fancy slogan....along the lines of 'we strive for the best, perfection cost a little more':rolleyes:

Capri

Here's something that was lightly restored/improved http://bringatrailer.com/2014/07/10/bat-exclusive-mild-street-build-1972-datsun-510-sedan/

At Terenure the MB 540K was a classic example for all to aspire to ( and it was on the Jaguar stand too :rolleyes: ) but it had 'improvments' too, like the rear light setup. IF I had the bobs I'd go for a MB Classic resto/upgrade (tho' I don't find their site's photos have the quality the co. aspires to,maybe it's the silver background or is it my browser? )
http://specials.mercedes-benz-classic.com/en/vehicles/#fellbach
http://specials.mercedes-benz-classic.com/en/vehicles/?cid=197

w124man

kev1.3s wrote: »

Depends on weather you want to go back to standard or not,

But if it isnt standard it isnt restored, its modified. All the big restoration names will say that a restoration is bringing a car back to how it was when it left the factory.

swarlb

w124man wrote: »

But if it isnt standard it isnt restored, its modified. All the big restoration names will say that a restoration is bringing a car back to how it was when it left the factory.

Modifying is altering from the original, like fitting an add on to an engine, such as different sized carbs, or similar. Stripping back a bodyshell to bare metal, replacing metal where required, and giving the shell protective measures in the form of modern anti corrosion substances, and possibly 10 coats of paint and primer, where it originally had 1 or 2 is 'restoring'.
Say for argument sake, back in the 1960's someone bought a brand new Ferrari 250SWB from the factory, and then went racing, along the way they upgraded things like brakes, carbs, suspension, possibly even body work. And along the way possibly won races.
50 years later someone finds the car in a shed and restores it...
Do they restore it to the condition it left the factory ? and in doing so lose all the 'period modifications' and it's inherent sporting history. Or do they restore it to the condition it finished its last race ?
There is no 'correct answer'. There are cars that are restored and used, and there are cars that are restored and spend their days as show pieces. Each to their own, I suppose.

kev1.3s

swarlb wrote: »

Modifying is altering from the original, like fitting an add on to an engine, such as different sized carbs, or similar. Stripping back a bodyshell to bare metal, replacing metal where required, and giving the shell protective measures in the form of modern anti corrosion substances, and possibly 10 coats of paint and primer, where it originally had 1 or 2 is 'restoring'.
Say for argument sake, back in the 1960's someone bought a brand new Ferrari 250SWB from the factory, and then went racing, along the way they upgraded things like brakes, carbs, suspension, possibly even body work. And along the way possibly won races.
50 years later someone finds the car in a shed and restores it...
Do they restore it to the condition it left the factory ? and in doing so lose all the 'period modifications' and it's inherent sporting history. Or do they restore it to the condition it finished its last race ?
There is no 'correct answer'. There are cars that are restored and used, and there are cars that are restored and spend their days as show pieces. Each to their own, I suppose.

You won't get very far with that arguement in here I'm afraid, some people have a very defined ideals. I think it's a subject where no two people will share the same opinion and every ones opinion is valid.

red sean

For me, a restoration is returning the car to the spec and condition it came out of the factory in.
A complete re-build but with alterations made, I'd see as customising. That would include replicating other versions of the same model ie: putting a 1600ohc engine in a 73' Mk1 Escort which originally had an ohv engine, putting Lotus livery and running gear in Mk1 Cortina that was originally a 1500 DeLuxe. It's just not the same car so therefore it can't have been restored, it was re-built instead.

I know as Kev1.3s says, it's all things to all people! A bit like peoples differing opinions of what's a classic!

swarlb

red sean wrote: »

For me, a restoration is returning the car to the spec and condition it came out of the factory in.
A complete re-build but with alterations made, I'd see as customising. That would include replicating other versions of the same model ie: putting a 1600ohc engine in a 73' Mk1 Escort which originally had an ohv engine, putting Lotus livery and running gear in Mk1 Cortina that was originally a 1500 DeLuxe. It's just not the same car so therefore it can't have been restored, it was re-built instead.

I know as Kev1.3s says, it's all things to all people! A bit like peoples differing opinions of what's a classic!

Your missing my point completely.
When Fiat 128's left Kylemore Road after assembly, they inner panels were left in 'pink' primer, and not painted or rust proofed. Within a few years the cars began to rust....
So, if one was to restore a Fiat 128 today, do they spend a fortune welding and fitting new metal, then not bother to rust proof the car, so that in a few years it will rust away again (in keeping with the original).
With the best will in the world, in many cases it is not feasible to return cars to 'factory spec'.

red sean

Probably didn't explain myself properly. But I wouldn't regard adding rustproofing as altering the spec. of the car. It's helping to preserve it.
My point was regarding changing the mechanical/electrical/bodywork of the car. (and sometimes acquiring a reg. no to suit)
For instance, a guy was showing me a lovely late 50's Beetle he bought recently that was 12v, but came out of the dealers as a 6v. That to me is not authentic.
I think we need to show future generations what the cars were like new, as some us old fogeys will have remembered them, but in 20/30 years time the younger people will not obviously.

Probably me just being pernickety!

macplaxton

red sean wrote: »

For instance, a guy was showing me a lovely late 50's Beetle he bought recently that was 12v, but came out of the dealers as a 6v. That to me is not authentic.

Probably me just being pernickety!

It's also a long way from being "modded". Did it have radial-ply tyres on? :pac:

kev1.3s

So I assume simple upgrades are categorically ruled out?
Upgrades like electronic ignition, halogen lights, modern radio, or even seat belts and alarms?

w124man

kev1.3s wrote: »

So I assume simple upgrades are categorically ruled out?
Upgrades like electronic ignition, halogen lights, modern radio, or even seat belts and alarms?

Yup!

swarlb

w124man wrote: »

Yup!

That's probably 90% of the 'classics' you'd see at shows around the country...

macplaxton

w124man wrote: »

kev1.3s wrote: »

So I assume simple upgrades are categorically ruled out?
Upgrades like electronic ignition, halogen lights, modern radio, or even seat belts and alarms?

Yup!

So with zero upgrades, we have a very expensive and large paperweight.

Mouldy old cross-plies.
Asbestos friction linings.
Lead in paint.

In 2014, there are consumable items that might be compatible with 1914 cars, but made with modern materials or modern production processes.

There are loads of things that are banned/restricted these days , so if work is carried out as course of a restoration, it will never be "how it was when it left the factory." Only an original unused car could be that.

If you want a factory finish, a lot of imperfections have to be included, such is the nature of mass production.

The question is how close can you ever get to that ideal? (and would you want to if that meant a load of orange peel paint and badly fitting panels?)

Anyway, I'm off to use my car rather than look at it...

John Larkin

macplaxton wrote: »

Anyway, I'm off to use my car rather than look at it...

I second that!

Thinkingaboutit

swarlb wrote: »

Well, seeing as a lot of cars left the factory with no rust proofing, or in some cases bare metal on the inner panels, I think if I was to restore an old car, I'd want it better than when it left the factory.
All that is, is a fancy slogan....along the lines of 'we strive for the best, perfection cost a little more':rolleyes:

Yes to that. Any extensive work has to include a measure of rust proofing, unless someone is a bit masochistic. BMC Farinas (I've one, a Wolseley 16/60) rusted a lot, particularly around the sills. A brochure of the time claimed it had rust proofing, but that might be an exaggeration, let's say.

I've not changed the ignition. A garage cleaned the starter which resolved an occasional starting issue. I went for fresh radial tyres. I'm sure I could get crossplys somewhere, but radials are better and easily obtainable. Rear seat belts were a necessity - there were anchors for it, which I didn't expect. I also went for bulbs instead of sealed beams, which seemed a bit weak for night driving. The dynamo might be too weak for dark evening. A change to take unleaded without an additive might be something, as petrol and the additive is pricey.

Anyhow, my 2 cents is to try to keep it original, with limited and more pragmatic adaptions to enable frequent use.

Tzar Chasm

Surely even the purist would want to restore a car to how it was Supposed to leave the factory,

or would for example a late 70's austin allegro only be considered authentic if it was halfarsed back together with loose bolts, missing trim, questionable electrics and a few crisp packets stuffed under the dash?

CianDon

Im starting off on the road to restoring my Corolla and to me, the term restoring means taking all the knowledge people have gleaned over the length of time the cars been about and then using the right mix of 100% authentic and subtle improvements. I know full well I wont find the Dunlop tyres she rolled out of the factory on as the thread is stopped a long time and other small bits like filters are much better these days than the originals. Other than that, anything thats restored must look standard to the highest standard