Let’s make one thing clear right from the start: A car is only “as-born” once. It can never be returned to that state. Any attempts to do so result in a fictional re-creation, done to please the owner and whatever standards he is aspiring toward. And that’s okay. We can’t go back in time. We can only make a best guess about the way the car might have been when new based on the resources available. There is no definitive way to tell if a restoration is correct. Unlike Moses and his Tablets of the Law, the Ten Commandments of a […]
Let’s make one thing clear right from the start: A car is only “as-born” once. It can never be returned to that state. Any attempts to do so result in a fictional re-creation, done to please the owner and whatever standards he is aspiring toward. And that’s okay.
We can’t go back in time. We can only make a best guess about the way the car might have been when new based on the resources available. There is no definitive way to tell if a restoration is correct. Unlike Moses and his Tablets of the Law, the Ten Commandments of a correct restoration are not cuneiform carved into stone.
All car restoration standards are relative; most are related to the clubs and events that created and use them. Car clubs are tribal, which makes their judging standards tribal as well. These evaluative processes are notional constructs defined by the very people who will be using them. (The cars themselves certainly don’t care.)
It stands to reason then that we should re-examine how we use vague, totally subjective terms like “correct” or “authentic” restoration, or that old canard “just as it rolled off the line.”
Perhaps our new term for a car that has seen the inside of a restoration shop should simply be “build.” Whether an “authentic build” or a “period-correct build” or even an “outlaw build,” the word “build” connotes a unique modification to an artifact.
Criteria and critics
Whenever we touch a car, we are modifying it in ways that suit our particular prejudices.
There are several key factors that go into picking the path. First, there are the standards of the organization you want to have evaluate your build. Pebble Beach uses one set of judging standards. The Amelia has another. The Jaguar Clubs of North America has a third, and Cavallino a fourth. The list of events and clubs that have their own unique judging criteria is long. Some criteria, like those of the International Chief Judge Advisory Group (ICJAG), are used by more than one event. But many are unique.
Some events judge cars against each other, so at the end of the day, one car is chosen as the winner. Other events judge cars against a standard, which allows for many cars to achieve the top award.
I’m not arguing for or against any specific event or its judging rules. No one set is more correct than another.
If restoration to a certain event or club standard is your goal, then enlist the advice of a tribal elder from the beginning. It’s no secret that recognized authorities on specific marques (including Corvette, Porsche, Ferrari and Maserati) are often hired by owners to guide the build process, so that the finished car is in compliance with the (arbitrary) standards developed by the club or event in question.
This is true for the market as well. For instance, shrewd sellers know what kind of Porsche 911 build will bring the most money. They are often not the most authentic ones. Is a “build for big bucks” the wrong approach? No — it’s just one methodology, however much it may not be to my (or your) liking.
This brings up an important point: Succeeding at meeting one tribe’s standards does not guarantee success with another’s.
For instance, you can get a Red Book from Ferrari Classiche even if your 250 GT SWB no longer has its original block. The factory will make and bless a replacement block for you; Ferrari calls it “correct” and thus it is.
However, the tribe we call “the market” will assign a significantly higher value to an SWB with its as-born engine. While your new-block Ferrari might be a player at Cavallino, it will always be second-tier in valuation. Just as Cavallino sets its own standards, so does the market.
Have it your way
In addition to the standards you are building for, the end use of the artifact also comes into play. If you are building your Austin-Healey for tours, then putting in a 5-speed is an excellent choice. You may be trading a shot at a top award at a marque concours for comfortably cruising at 70 mph, but that’s your decision to make.
A “correct” build is one that satisfies your interpretation of correct. I would suggest that having a respect for the artifact, the life it has lived and its place in automotive history could be appropriate things to take into account as well, but that’s up to the owner.
If you aspire to a shelf full of trophies for re-imagined authenticity, that means adhering to one set of standards. If you build your BMW 2002tii for the maximum “wow” factor at a Cars & Coffee, you’ll need a different shelf for a different set of awards.
Each owner has a particular fantasy they are setting out to achieve. It can be the fantasy of “as-built” or “period-correctness” or “homage” or “outlaw.” The more clarity you have about this when you begin to touch your car, the greater chance you have of being satisfied when the process is complete.
I wish you well with your build, in whatever direction you choose to take it. ♦