When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I can see how people would use a very strict definition of "restore" to mean bringing the car back to original condition. But the work described in the original post could produce a corvette that looked very stock. Even a new crate engine can look very stock. So with new paint (as original) and suspension and engine if the restored (or restified, or "fixed up") vehicle looked like new, I don't see how you could call it "hot rodded" or "modified" .... maybe "restified" but I couldn't really object to calling it restored.
Most people would never understand the difference anyway. Call it what you want, just know that when you get to the few that do understand you might be told off for using the wrong word. When it comes to selling the car parts selection isn't always as important as quality of work. Fantastically modified car in pristine condition is worth more than poorly done car with original parts.
Restore.....the use of that term is tricky. Restore means to make like new again. It does not connotate that the part being restored be originial! An aftermarket automotive part can be restored (mean to make like new again) but not be CORRECT or ORIGINAL.
The problem is that most of us have associated the term RESTORED to infact mean to be like original. I believe that we need to clarify this term with additional wording such as "restored to original condition" to clearly state that the process this car or part has gone through to mean.
Last edited by early shark; Jan 9, 2006 at 02:08 PM.
Hey DZRick, you're way too hard on us owners of originals. There's undoubtedly a lot of mods and alterations out there, but how about us legitimate "original" owners? Labor-of-love when we get appraisals and NCRS evals and we confirm numbers correct components. Your claim needs rebuttal.
Carl,
I meant no offence as I stated I like an original car, but unless I bought it new I'd have doubt. For my own piece of mind and my money I'd much rather build my own. That's the only way I can be positive without a doubt what I've got.
Awhile back I read (believe it was in CorvetteFever) a story about a Japenese businessman that bought some vintage car for some 7 million dollars only to visit the manufactor and find his vehicles numbers on the manufactors personal vehicle.
I'm sure your happy with yours and it is a beautiful vette and I hope it is original.
I'm also very happy with mine and I know for sure it's not original but it would take someone to look at my motor to know as the outside looks every other "original 68" as does the interior.
My initial thought of 'restore' is to redo a car back to the way the factory built it using genuine factory parts when available.
If someone buys a vette that has been severly neglected and decides to repair it so that it is usable, I see nothing wrong with his wife using the term 'restoring' it even though its not going to be original.