Read various post that touch on this subject from different angles but did not see anything explicitly asking what kind of thing constitutes crossing the line from "restored" to "over-restored" in the world of early 911s ... I would be interested in hearing viewpoints.
It's all subjective of course. If you could have any (say) early 911, with cost no barrier, what would you choose, e.g., a nicely patinated, and well preserved 67 or 68S, or a fully restored 'factory fresh" version of the same car, with new cad plating down to the bolts and washers? It depends on what the car represents to you. Probably most of us fall along that continuum.
Merv
Member # 2633
Cars:
Porsche '68 - 911N (Sold)
Porsche 356B (T-6) S Coupe
Porsche 2008 C2 997 Cabriolet (Sold)
Porsche 2010 Gen.2 Boxster S
Restored into un-drivable seems to be the current trend.... these cars are a hoot at full song yet many are owned by those more concerned with portfolio value and chips..... so my answer over restored is when you are only comfortable with it on a lawn.......
86 Sport Purpose Carrera "O4"
Thanks Merv.
Agee it is subjective and you are right there are certainly continuum with many scenarios.
To narrow question down, let's say in a scenario where work was actually done to restore a early 911 (so ruling out time capsule never touched perfectly as-it-left-factory original), when does the result of that restoration work cross the line to being regarded as "overrestored". This broad-brush term is used, so my question is: what are the specific examples of sort of things when seen on a car that make folks here think (or the more outspoken say) that an early 911 is "over-restored". Suspect there may be some opinions.
SP
PS. Macroni- good point, your comment landed while I was posting this.
Last edited by 911MRP; 05-24-2015 at 03:58 AM. Reason: Add a PS
For me over-restored can be:
- a soul-less 911 where new reproduction parts are used, modern badges, greyish modern leather on the seats, and most of the time, anachronistic parts..... you see lots of them at Essen. Personally, I'm not a fan.
or
- Spanking new with new plating, chroming, etc..., nos parts, usually better than when it came out of the factory. It can be used as a trailer queen or be broken-in over time and enjoyed, as they are usually very reliable.
I prefer the second type although unrestored or partially restored with patina are the best in my view.
But it's your car, and what really counts is your choice.
Over-restored is when your car looks better than the guys' calling yours over-restored
These were never perfect when built new. To me over restored is when car looks better now than when it left factory. I agree most the modern replacement parts look totally out of place when used. I will never have a car rebuilt beyond what is useful to still drive, no trailer queens in my garage.
Phil
Early S Junkie # 658
Imo over-restored is for me when a restoratiom is done "wrong", usually in details. False in details like body color in wheel wells on a 68 or 70 car, false 67S (side) trim, false interior details, false crest etc.
However I did saw some superb restorations where everything was new or properly restored.
While the car did had some lack of soul (which means essentially patina and slight sign of usage), a superbly restored car does have some beauty. Your eyes glides over the car, your mind ticks all the boxes with yes (trim ok:yes, seats ok: yes, etc etc) and since you find no faults, the car just quietly sits there and gleams on you. And you are saying that whoever did this job, he did it right.
With the increase of value and general interest, patinated-non restored cars do now start to find a public. But those cars are more museums pieces and driving them regulary now harms their technical parts. Its almost a shame they survived such a long time and then one would just add miles/km on it. If its an ex-racer, you wouldnt even take a turn. Having a "survivor" car is IMO visually a fine line btw a real patinated car and just an old grumpy object. As for myself, few tick the box and if they do, I rather want them to be static, to not risk their unique time-capsule beauty.
Leaves us to partially restored cars, maybe a older respray and a wise (long-time) owner, who -regardless of trends and mods- wanted or left the car as it was build. These cars do offer regular use with a vintage car, kept most patina and all original parts. There was never done more than neccessary and this preserved the car beautifully. It usually also gives the car its soul (see above). 10 years ago I stumbled on such a car and Ill still have it.
Last edited by 911T1971; 05-24-2015 at 11:24 AM.
Registry member No.773
Terse and accurate assessment!Originally Posted by Macroni
According to Webster's, restore means to return something to a former condition.
Now, Porsches were of very high quality fit and finish upon leaving the factory so to me, it is tough (but possible) to "over-restore" a Porsche (meaning to bring it to better than factory condition).
By contrast, a '60's-era detroit muscle car, with its horrible body gaps and orange-peely paint, is fairly easy to "over-restore".
JMHO
Brian
S Reg #1032
"I measured twice, cut three times, and it's still too short!"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote