triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Preserving vs. Improving

To: triumphs@Autox.Team.Net
Subject: Re: Preserving vs. Improving
From: Tom Tweed <ak627@dayton.wright.edu>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 14:48:54 -0500
Hello Clark, saw your post :

 >I have a Triumph 3A that has been in the family for over 35 years.  It was
 >driven until it was about four years old, then stored in warm dry garages in
 >California ever since.  I'm planning to move the car to Massachusetts this
 >spring and start restoring/fixing it.
 >
 >I have a philosophical question for the group.  This car is unusually
 >unaltered from its state as it came from the factory.  What approach should
 >I take?  Should I (a) try to preserve as much as possible of the original
 >parts and paint, (b) restore it to the condition it was in when it left the
 >factory, or (c) use the car as a base and add nifty modern parts to make it
 >a fun, racy, driveable car?
 >


My own 2-cent suggestion would be to Preserve it as much as possible
in its `stock' condition, I think that would definitely help it retain
its highest $ value, and make it useful to other restorers as a good
point of reference.  `Factory new' would be good, too, if it's worth
it to you to spend the time and money that way...but then it may be
too nice to risk driving !  From what I've seen in Hemmings Motor
News, nothing is more exciting to a potential buyer than an original,
unrestored, dry-stored low mileage `cream puff' of a car, and it
sounds like yours may qualify as such.

By the way, are you related to the Wiedemann family of Newport, Kentucky,
brewers of fine beer ?  (brewery has lately moved to Evansville, Indiana
after being bought by G. Heilman's of Wisconsin)

Best regards,
Tom Tweed
SW Ohio
'72 TRident 750cc  basket case


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>