bricklin
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: acrylic versus fiberglass

To: bricklin@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: acrylic versus fiberglass
From: GLCurley@aol.com
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 13:42:45 EST
>There's almost no point (in my opinion) in trying to keep a
> car "mostly" original.  Once you've modified a car, its value
> as a collector plummets quite quickly, so if you have to 
>change anything, you might as well change everything you 
>want to, and be happy with the car.

Phil,
Taking this part at face value, I have to STRONGLY disagree.  It very much
depends on what you do to the car to alter it from original.  There is a
distinct difference between reversible and non-reversible alterations.
Changing the wheels, seats, radio etc. are things which make the car no longer
stock.  However as long as nothing is destroyed in the conversion process, and
the original parts are retained these changes should not reduce the car's
value.  Painting an original acrylic body, or cutting vents in the fenders or
hood on the other hand is a different story.  As long as the acrylic is in
good shape, it would be short-sighted and ill-advised to paint or cut it up.
There are a number of people who would buy a donor car just for a piece of
good replacement acrylic.  So anyone that has good acrylics and wants a
different color is better off to sell the car and get another one that is
either already painted or has unsalvageable acrylics.  They will probably come
out ahead in the transaction.
By the way, there are only a very few cars that are 100% fibreglass bodies.
Many cars have a mix of a few fibreglass parts, usually the doors and roof.
These parts are so much trouble to replace, and so difficult to keep in
pristine condition, that it usually does not make sense to replace them with
acrylic (assuming it is available) when they wear out.
George Curley

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: acrylic versus fiberglass, GLCurley <=