Topic: When to Restore & when to conserve

[Sunlitgold68]

What is the general thought on conserving an original car as opposed to restoring it. For example, you find an all original 68 convertible with 45,000 miles, of course it is not perfect, the engine bay looks 40 years old, paint has problems, interior, ect. Do you try and conserve a mustang like this or restore it?

[gtamustang]

I believe alot has to do with the overall condition of the car and perceived value. Perkins cut up a 800 mile 69 coupe and on the other spectrum, I have seen 65K+ mile mustangs that looked well preserved.

I think some factors to consider include: is the Mustang something special (a 69 6-cyl coupe in an ugly-a$$ color with a crappy green interior is not special). Has the mustang been repainted, partially or completely. What is the condition of the body (and top), interior, engine bay, and underside (I know one of our MCA assistant head judges is an expert at removing grime and undercoating from one of his unrestored 65s).

Basically, mustangs with replaced body parts, significant repaints, worn interiors, any rust will move the needle away from conserve to restore.

Regards,
Pete Morgan

[rockhouse66]

I'm not promoting the Bloomington "survivor" program, but they use language that makes sense to me in answer to this question;

"We suggest restoration only if the car is already restored (altered) or has deteriorated to a point where finishes such as paint, fabrics, or plating are no longer useful as references."

This makes sense to me, and my '69 Mach 1 "used car" will remain that way while I own it.

[zray]

my car is a vote for the survivor. If a car has most of it's original equipment, it becomes more rare than a restored car. More valuable ? Others more plugged in to the market than me might know.

Z. Ray