But is it the correct definition? Or just an opinion? Where is the line for
what restored means? By the way, I like the definition also, but still is it
correct. Could this car go to Pebble Beach as a fully restord car? Hell, are
any of those cars fully restored?
In any case, this has been fun and has gotten some chatter going on the list.
mayf, out in Pahrump
----- Original Message -----
From: Larry Paulick
To: Stephen Waybright
Cc: DrMayf ; tigers@autox.team.net ; 'Alpine's Peak'
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 4:55 AM
Subject: Re: Restoring a Car or other Vehicle
Stephen, this is a good definition of fully restored.
Larry
Stephen Waybright wrote:
To me, "fully restored" speaks to the extent of the restoration, not to
it's originality. It says that everything is restored, rebuilt or
replaced to like-new condition and that the body was probably stripped
to bare metal before applying the new paint to make sure all panels are
as new. All chrome and trim pieces have been polished if possible, and
replated as if not like new. I would always ask for additional
qualifiers from the seller to clarify the level of originality.
As example, I consider my car to be fully restored, possibly
over-restored since much of it is better quality than the factory ever
delivered, but I'd be the first to point out that it is not to original
specs. In fact, I say that it is "fully restored to much higher than
original performance and safety specs" and then detail those departures
from originality as long as inquiring minds care to listen.
I think there is a lot more confusion when a quick re-paint, and a
little mechanaical maintanance is positioned as being "restored", even
if it's all original specs.
Stephen
--- DrMayf <drmayf@teknett.com> wrote:
However, what exactly does "fully restored" mean?
Check out the new British Cars Forum:
http://www.team.net/the-local/tiki-view_forum.php?forumId=8
|