Printable View
It's interesting to me to think about this question relative to the Corvette crowd and Bloomington Gold. If you're trying to attain that level of perfection, no upgrades are acceptable (correct?). I'm in Milt's camp. Change as you wish but keep all of the original parts and don't cut the tub so that a future owner may put it back to "original" (per the Kardex?) as desired. Otherwise, go out and enjoy the darned thing! :)
This is known as the "It's a nice car, but.." syndrome....:DQuote:
Originally Posted by bob tilton
Quote:
Originally Posted by CurtEgerer
I just read this and had to comment. This is a scheister's ploy! His statement loses credibility for every outside influence that is exerted on the buying population (in the case of a B.J. auction). People make dumb decisions when you put a camera in front of them or thousands of cheering people in the same room as them.
Mr. Jackson's statement only has validity in a setting where the bidders are totally isolated, completely informed and there are no plants.
Erik
What is this, Jim? You sent me to college trying to make your car as OH-ri-gi-nal as possible and now you're askin' a question like this? You've got to be kiddin' me, Toast. ;)
In answer to your question I think there are three major schools of thought - Period Correct, Hot Rod and User Friendly.
The first is the "Period Correct" way of thinking. This method basically adheres to the idea that you can use any upgrade from the general period of your car to improve performance/usablity. This generally includes RS flares, engine upgrades (bore/stroke/tensioners/oil pump/etc.), 901 -> 915 tranny updates, oil cooler, etc. I followed this theory (mostly) with my 914.
The Hot Rod way of doing things is pretty much self explainatory. You take the best/coolest stuff from any era and go Hog Wild! This is the R Gruppe way of thinking and, personally, my favorite. I tend to favor this method because it takes advantage of Porsche's "evolution" style of engineering. If the parts from the later years are better, and they can either bolt on or be made to fit with minimal fabrication, then why not take advantage of the engineering accomplishments? This allows Porsche owners the best of both worlds - late-model performance, safety, reliability, etc. with early-model styling, driving experience, etc.
I think the User Friendly method is the least gung-ho method of upgrading. In essence, this method basically uses only the improvements that are necessary to keep the cars running properly and safely. This would include (but is not limited to) tensioners, brakes, seat belts, etc. Little stuff that is necessary to make these cars livable in the today's automotive climate.
Maybe I missed the point of this question, but I like to think that Porsche evolved their cars for a reason. It is our DUTY to take advantage of the fact that the improved parts of the later cars can easily be made to work on our early cars. I believe that, if done properly and tastefully, these changes will truly improve the driving experience and allow us to continue to enjoy these cars in real-world situations for many years to come.
And while I sit here and advocate the upgrades I think back to the all the bone-stock early cars I've driven - solid tensioners, Zenith carbs, 30-year old bushings and all - and can't deny the purity of engineering that these cars were ... are ... will continue to be. I just wish I could afford more than one :cool:
Now the cars are even worth more today. Again I ask what is acceptable in term of upgrades?
You ask what is acceptable, but on who's terms or judgement? Upgrades in what area . .. performance, comfort, resale value?
I think these are acceptable upgrades-
1. Non-destructive upgrades (the work could easily be returned to original).
2. Work that Porsche would have done then, and still does now. I.e. pressure fed chain tensioners, gear sets, sway bars, suspension upgrades, shocks, wheels, tires. The Customer Centers today do "upgrades" according to the customer's wishes, and acceptable to Porsche's performance standards and TUV.
3. Ones that bear the test of time and have broadest adoption, are also acceptable with Porsche Club's different classes of judging. They can be very specific, strict and adhering to exactly as it left the factory door. Unaltered.
For me? I work hard at staying very close to how the car was produced, and then adding or enhancing certain components- sway bars, shocks, wheels.
Shocks: my car was built with Koni shocks. I replaced them with Bilstein struts and shocks. Why? better performance, personal preference. Would have the factory put these shocks on in production? Yes.
Wheels: I have wider rears. Why? better performance, personal preference. Would have the factory put these on in production? No, but the car would have been taken to special wishes department to have them installed. This department did and does changes to customer's cars.
Engine: A lot of engines have been "changed" over the years. Is a car with an larger than the standard engine a detriment? That would depend on the change. If the original motor case is retained (matching numbers) with the engine that has performance upgrades, that is best. I.e. increasing engine liters, say from a 2.0 to 2.2 I feel it is very acceptable upgrade and will not hurt the value of that car. Unless there is a consideration for originality.
Unaltered, original cars are the ones most often that are worth the most.
Whether it is a barn find or in a collection, an exactly original car is fascinating. They are time capsules of how these cars were 45-50 years ago.
It is very rare to find one of these cars that hasn't been "worked on". Over that period of time a lot of people working on one car has its impact. No matter how well intentioned, more times than not these cars witness work having been done on them.
If repairs and service have been performed according to factory standards and practices then no concerns. If a vehicle was maintained by other repair centers, that could have an potential impact to the value of the car.
The NCRS/Bloomington Gold comment was appropriate. Neither organization encourages perfection. Both encourage originality. I've seen cars get massive deduction for paint that was too good.
The NCRS also operates with a huge data base. They know what was original. They've done their homework.
Porsche Club of America has a much looser set of guidelines. "It it's close it's ok." The car that was judged to be the best 911 survivor a few years back had a new front pan and had also been repainted. That would not happen at a Corvette or Ferrari judging session. Each marque seems to have developed their own criteria as to what is original. That's fine. It's probably the way it should be.
Most of cars here are pretty basic. The Germans made a lot of them. Some though enter the category of "significant". What I do to my 1973 911 really doesn't matter. What someone does to a LeMans winner does matter. There are no easy answers.
As I've worked with museums over the years I've come up with some definitions that seem to help.
Preservation: The essence of preservation is stabilization. Preservation is an effort to decrease the rate of deterioration. It involves maintaining the condition of the car.
Conservation: Conservation is an intervention to protect what’s there. Conservation is an attempt to manage, or at least reduce, the effects of decay that takes place on a daily basis. This is very similar to preservation except that conservation involves some type of active intervention.
Restoration: A restoration is an intervention that permanently changes the car. It’s an attempt to return the car to some previous state. In some cases this may be a state that never actually existed. When you replace significant parts, whether original to the period or not, you’re altering the historical integrity of the artifact, or car. The original manufacturer’s work is no longer intact and the research value of the artifact, or car, has been reduced.
If you decide to permanently change the car there is no going back. That's why you need to give a lot of thought to whether a restoration is appropriate. A restoration is not a bad thing. It's just a big deal thing.
On the other hand it probably doesn't matter what most of us do to our cars. There are any number of perfect 1973 911s out there so no matter what I do to my car there will always be some historically correct cars in existence.
I actually like the FIA approach to race cars. They've given up on trying to determine what's original. They look at cars to see if they're period correct. And, they have the necessary data base to do this.
Richard Newton
Maybe, but this would be more valid without an open bar for the bidders.Quote:
Originally Posted by CurtEgerer
H1's always demonstrate good taste.Quote:
Originally Posted by gulforange
Cheers,
John
Was just reading thru the responses to this thread
and I noticed an opinion I had contributed back in
2005 to this very same thread! It's amazing to me
how long I have been doing
the same thing though my opinions have changed.
Don
-/-/-/
1970 triple-black 911T
2006 Cayman S