Worn but not Forgotten (Upd. about The High Altar...)

To agree or not to agree that is the question?
I hesitate to enter the fray on this, as it is close to a discussion or argument about religion…. or politics , both of which I avoid like the plague.
But allow me to offer the following listing of categories (given a multitude of grey areas) that could perhaps allow for a more accurate and honest description of a period vehicle. Of course this would involve agreement on the part of all owners of whatever thoroughbred, or lesser steed, which will never happen of course.

Derelict
Uncared for and left to nature and the elements. (Wreck)
Conserved
Retained in condition as found with minimum intervention to avoid deterioration.
Re-commissioned
Put back into sound working order with minim interference of all original material as it stands and runs.
Restored
Complete /comprehensive restoration with the aim of achieving a vehicle as close as possible to new original in specifications and condition.
Re-manufactured
Total disassembly and renewal/replacement/remanufacturing of all possible components including refinishing of the existing to remove all factory original finishes and impart a “blemish free” glossy exhibition piece. (The Immaculate conception)
Re-creation
An assembly of components from various manufacturers and periods put together with the aim of achieving a facsimile of a type or period the likes of which never existed in exactly that form.
Replica
A vehicle created or altered to appear and perform with the characteristics of the more desirable/valuable original.
I could go on but I think I have probably created enough trouble as it is.

Surely the intention should be to do the minimum required to the vehicle, so that it is respectable. If you have to weld then you have to weld. What upsets me is the fact that some are re-creating cars, from a box of bits from many different cars, making them like new, and getting a provenance, because a certain part of it came from a "well known " vehicle.
I think that the Intention of the preserved class is to try and stop this "Provenance grabbing".
Stuart

Hi I totaly disagrea with those who think To {make a new car out of bits its not a real car anymore} I have the bones of a 1916 colonial body BUICK .What was left was a very sad rotten in every way not worth salvaging by many people in the vintage car movement. But being a person that is prepared to take on the imposible, or maybe a chalenge plus no one tells me it cant be done. Just before I got the bones most mecanical bits han been sold off to scrap merchants , it didn t deter me as the car is so rare {how many of you have a colonial body car?]. I have now restored the chassis have all the woodwork restored ,the body redone in New Zealand and am now rebuilding the mecanicles. I hope to have it running by 2012 so there

I wholeheartedly disagree with the editorial position stated. While I commend its sentiment, many people are not and, often, cannot be so ideologically pure. Ones heart may belong to a specific marquee and to abandon it for the sake of theory alone would be, emotionally, quite unsatisfactory.

That stated, I am appreciative of those committed to doing so. I believe that it is a valuable service to posterity. However, many of those cars, trucks, and motorcycles tend not to be roadworthy, and most people buy a vehicle to use. As Nigel points out, that does require some work, often a great deal of it. Here, I walk the line between the editorial position and restoration. I am not pleased by the appearance of a rusted hulk, nor am I by the pretension of most of what one sees at Concours d’Elegance. I would not mind owning an unadulterated prewar car, but I’d prefer that it still retained its paint, and would, most certainly, object to a small Maple forest growing in the rear seat.

It is undoubtedly a good thing that people are now looking to maintain the integrity of an original unspoilt motorcar, and it would be nice to have the pleasure of owning such a vehicle. However your comment that “the days of the over restored classic car are over” is in its self a dangerous comment and if embraced to its full extent could damage the hobby of restoring cars.

Some of us are not in the position to purchase either and original car to maintain in its originality nor in a position to purchase “an over restored classic car” instead we buy something which needs restoration, something which we can improve and bring back to the road, in the course of the restoration the body frame might need major surgery, and the panel work might be rusted, corroded and need new pieces let in. Do we then just over the repair in primer, retaining what little original paint remains? Or do we repaint the whole?

There is a vast difference between the cars your editorial describes and those cars the majority of us can afford. It would be a great pity if media hype relegates those of us who enjoy restoring cars, that we might not otherwise be able to afford or might never be restored in their original format, to second class citizens below the high altar of the totally original car.


Editorial comment: basically I can follow and agree with your comments. But not in full. We still see cars coming to the very low end of the market which are sometimes surprisingly unmolested and unrestored. However not always the car you had in mind. And then there is no difference with the high end of the market. When you want something very original make that a goal in itself. And forget about the exact type of car you are dreaming of. Just go out and start looking.