Recently I bought a 1960 Austin-Healey Bugeye Sprite. This was after
searching for one for the better part of two years. Southern California may
have rust free cars but there is also no shortage of cars that have been
through innumerable owners and many modifications. But I was lucky. I found
one that was original in every way and that the PO had been restoring for the
past 14 years. Let me put that another way. He had stripped it down and
primed it 14 years ago and it has been sitting in a garage for the remainder
of the time.
My question is this. Except for the engine and transmission, every two pieces
that could come apart have been dismantled. Some of the parts are labeled but
the majority of them are not. My first inclination is to put it all back
together as quickly as I can so that it is a car rather than a collection of
parts and then drive it for a while so that I can get to know it. On the
other hand, why not take the time to do it right and restore it while it is
all apart?
Has anyone out there run into this dilemma? Is there some philosophy that
says that one way is better than the other? I'd be thrilled to hear peoples
opinion about this.
Joe Burruso
FrogEye56@aol.com
|