1. restore - return to its original or usable and functioning condition

2. restore - return to life; get or give new life or energy

3. restore - give or bring

4. restore - restore by replacing a part or putting together what is torn or broken

5. restore - bring back into original existence, use, function, or position

Any one is good for me.

 

Bottom line, -- Who gives a rats a-s. This stuff will give ya ulsers. Just have fun with it. Anybody agree with that ?

 

 

Generally that means "90% of the components of this car have broken at some point over the last 30-40 years and were replaced with new ones"

 

I don't think I would agree with this. The word "restore" generally means to bring back or return something, ostensably to its prior state.

That would infer that, in reference to a car, its original sheen, condition or whatever was "returned" when it was restored. In my vocabulary, to restore definitely means to return to original.

However, in reference to the OP's question, it's simply not possible to obtain agreement within "the industry" or among hobbyists. Terms like "survivor" have been trademarked by Bloomington Gold, so there actually is a correct definitition for that term. Still, people will talk the way they choose to talk, and will use different words inconsistently.

Car people are the worst at this. How many millions of opinions are there when people debate the meaning of "numbers matching," including those who argue about numbers that don't even match? I personally don't think that the simple use of the word "restored" necessarily means that the car has had a body-off. It could be partially restored, restored interior or half-*** restored.

In this hobby, you have to get as much total information as possible and take the personal responsibility to ask the right questions, as opposed to getting too caught up in an arbitrary interpretation of a general term.

 

I guess I'm restoring mine

 

For what little it matters with these opinionated debates the NCRS does not use the term Original to define the state of any part if I recall correctly. The term is RFP. Meaining whether or not it was restored, that it RESEMBLES FACTORY PRODUCTION. Even that in itself can mean different things to different people. Like the Doc (rebuild) says, it was only original once and will never be original again. Even a restamped engine block can pass NCRS judging guidelines and be a restamp.

IMHWO (In my humble worthless opinion), any effort to make the car better then it is and more to your liking, is restoring it. You will never get a consensus on what restored means. When you go to buy a Corvette and the owner stated it was restored, you cannot assume anything.

 

it means that 10% of the car lok like crap. And you shouldent buy it!!

 

I think what some do is try to sell a used car . That's where Vette's come in. They've taken on a class by themselves. BTW, I have to agree with Webster.

 

I think one thing most of us will agree upon is that the term restored is probably one of the most abused terms in the autotmotive hobby.

To me restored means returned to it original as new condition, no better, no worse. This is the way I generally like to see cars however even on my own 71 LT1 vert Ill take the point deduction in order to have the hood pinstriping a consistent width as opposed to the way it was originally done at the factory.

 

I agree, this is the most misunderstood and abused term we have in the car hobby.

The problem is that the definitions above are rest of the world definitions and then the car hobby has their own.

Hot Rods - Look back through Hot Rod magazine and anything that is rebuilt is "restored". That includes LS-1 engines in '32 coupes and so on. A hot rod restoration has nothing to do intentionally with original configurations.

Corvettes - If you are into NCRS or Bloomington Gold, the basic idea is that the car is returned to factory configuration and look, right down to the numbers and dates on the parts.

If you are not into NCRS and Bloomington, then you go along the factory look, but not critical on exactly how close. Like isn't an Edelbrock intake close enough?

Other cars - wow, this can be anything from a rotisserie restoration of every nut and bolt to the car was repainted at Maaco. Here is a great example, a Camaro on eBay. Go look at this car and tell me what was restored.

Item number: 130156576674

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...156576674&rd=1


BTW, I'm not selling, promoting, any connection to, etc this car, just using it as an example of how people thing their car is restored. Check the seats, the radio, dash, chassis, and so on for the fine restoration work.


Finally, are they misleading? YES! I think they are very much misleading and intentionally. Most selling know that if they say that the car has had much work done and refurbished in the interior or the chassis, most will not know or care. Most won’t even know what refurbished means.

However, it they say restored, people will buy it. They well know it isn’t restored, and like this Camaro, the seller says in returned email that “the owner says it is restored”. But even someone who is only slightly car oriented know that ripped seats and a greasy chassis are not restored. So he know this Camaro is not restored, yet he advertises it that way anyway.

And this is not the only example. If you have the time, you will find hundreds of them saying restored when all they are is repainted or new tires or had a recent tune up.


We all know what fully restored means. They worked on it as far as they can and are "finished". Well, 90% means if they had another 105 more money, time, and parts, they could finish. It also is to give the buyer a sense that they don't have to go through the whole thing, just finish some of it up.

In reality, most people don't know the difference between 90% done and 90% to go, and usually the cars they advertise prove that.