ClassicCar

Hi Brownie!

I'm glad I'm not the only one out there with some of these thoughts. Interesting question. Since your question is highly subjective and prone to diverse answers due to varying opinions on the matter, I reckon I'll just share some of my thoughts and circumvent direct responses.

. . . hey, that kinda sounds like a politician, doesn't it? To me, every project car deserves a certain kind of restoration. The first thing to do is determine exactly what that would entail. The second thing to figure out is to ask yourself if you are willing to do exactly what the first answer derived.

Let's use Hudson as an example (imagine that!). I have an incredible bad case of the "Wants" for a '42C8Cv. Answer to my first question would be that a car like this, with it's rarity (there are only 4 known), that this type of car would deserve to be put back to as close to original as possible. Second answer is, yes, I'm capable, patient, and diligent enough for that type of project.

Another example: A long time ago, I had the opportunity to own a '66 Shelby GT350. Not only that, but I could get the "project" GT350, along with a '66 Mustang fastback that was intended to be used as a parts car (although it was good enough to restore in it's own right). Not to go into the details here, the opportunity slipped by me. Unfortunately, one of these days, I still want one. Who woulda thunk that now these cars routinely sell for nearly 200K in #1 condition? My current thinking, that at one time would not even be a consideration, I have now relegated to the fact that the modern-day solution is to clone a Mustang, or "Shelbyize" a Mustang, if you will. Driving a real Shelby on the road these days, taking it's value into account is fairly fool-hardy for someone who is not wealthy, like myself. In other words, even if I had one, I would be hesitant to really drive it how I would want to drive it, due to it's potential "value". Would I be happy with a mocked-up Shelby? . . . Yeah, I think I would. Older and wiser now and not so hung up on the whims of a younger man, I suppose.

Seems to me that the previous two examples fit into my theory about people who own cars that are intended for the street. Basically, they fit into two categories:

1. People that drive their cars
2. Caretakers

Personally, I fit into the first category, I like to drive the cars I own. Really, they are the best cars to own. You can personalize them, make them a reflection of who YOU are, etc.

In the past, I really have never cared for being a "caretaker", who collect automobiles and treat them like stamps in a book. Stamps in a book get taken off of the shelf occasionally, looked over and admired and then promptly put back on the shelf. And, there are some cars that really deserve to be just that, and I can appreciate those cars, too (not necessarily as an owner). There is a Tucker in a museum not too far from my house that has .4 of a mile on the odometer. WHOMEVER owns that car is pretty much relegated to being a caretaker, assuming they have a sense or morality about them. As much as I would like to own a Tucker, that one certainly wouldn't be it. Then again, the 42C8Cv mentioned previously, somewhat fits into that category as well, although I WOULD drive it periodically.


Where does all the $$ fit into this? Personally, if it's a HOBBY, don't sweat the small stuff too much. Yes, the nicer "collector" type of cars need to be "valued" for insurance purposes, potential future sales, etc. BUT, if it's a HOBBY, too much of that financial details takes the fun out of it. Makes it more like real life, than escapism, which is what the old car hobby is to me. Also, I'm probably not the right guy to talk about money and cars. If there is something I want, I'll work harder, wait longer (till I have enough $$) to get exactly the part I want, or the car I want and DAMN the cost. Down the road, it really won't matter how much that NOS steering wheel cost today. I PROMISE! But as of this writing, it's a hobby for me. As long as it stays that way, the financials are really kinda irrelevant, aren't they? Well . . . at least they should be.

Sorry so long, but you asked, and I suppose I was due for a diatribe.

I have to agree with most of the above comments. The simple answer is"No more than you can afford"..Placing your families finances in jeopardy over a restoration would be foolish. It's a rare instance that restoring a car ends up being an investment.

For me, it's what I can justify by comparing $ and satisfaction limited by my resources. If I had a very rare auto that should be preserved, I would do my best to live up to the responsibility of seeing it preserved.. Either by me or someone else, Like SELL it. If it was ,like mine is, a car to have family fun in and is of no great historical significance..I will and do, spend as much as it takes as long as I don't get us in financial difficulty.MY idea of fun is not only owning it, but working on it and useing it. I am one of those that gets more bang for my bucks by doing almost all my own labor.Which in some degree is part of the fun. If I was not inclined to do that stuff I wouldn't have an old car period. Someone wiser than me once said that having a car in the garage that you only look at might as well be a picture on the wall.. it would be a lot cheaper!

I sure wish chrome didn't cost so much!

Here's what I can tell you based on my experience and believe
it or not some additional things I've learned by watching shows like
Wrecks to Riches" and "Overhaulin" - a basic car restoration with
minimal fabrication and bolt on parts is easily between 400-500 man
hours minimum (labor only).

With a typical work year of 2000 hours if someone had all the parts
and worked on it full time 8 hours a day with no distractions or other
jobs and didn't run into additional problems @400-500 man hours
that's about 3-4 months of solid butt busting work.

The problem there in is this is just not a realistic timeline as you also
have to factor in delays from vendors for things like rear ends, brake
systems time spent on the phone sourcing bolts, clips, etc... This may
not necessarily factor into the price - but does extend the overall time
to completion.

Then from there you can start adding many, many more hours
depending on the level of quality desired, the state of the car - and
any design or parts changes made along the way. Trust me...the cars
on "Wrecks to Riches" and "Overhaulin" are FAR from high quality
because of the short timelines in which they complete the cars - even
though they look good on TV)

Also - these general time lines for a 400-500 man-hour car are where
aftermarket replacement parts, molding clips, trim, interior etc...are
readily available for order and delivery and "bolt in replacement" -
Hudson stuff as you know is not mail-order anything except for a few
things like parts form KGap.

If you go for a high level build like the "Riddler Award" those cars are
upwards of 7000+ man-hours (labor only). :eek:

I would say a "typical" Hudson restoration is going to be 800-1500
hours minimum. And even @ low-ball 50.00 hour that's between
40-75k just to get started.

Browniepetersen wrote:

Let's speculate for a minute that a "phantom" Jet Convertible ends up in my yard in the condition that the "real" one was in. It would be way over my experience base to restore that car. Do I pass on it because it is a "one-of-a-kind" car or do I do the best job I can do and enjoy my project before, during and after it is complete? Is it more important in our hobby to have fun and experience the build or are there certain cars that should go to someone with the funds to have it professionally restored?

I say if you are fortunate enough to be able to locate and buy a rare car, you are entitled to do with it as you want. If someone else wants it bad enough, they will offer enough $$$$ to get you to part with it.

I brought this idea up because I got an email and follow-up telephone call from a high end restoration shop that wanted to buy my English Hudson so they could build and sell it to one of their high end customers. The customer had seen the car on the Forum and had sent a photo to the restoration shop asking them to contact me and see if they could negotiate a deal. Their basic question was: How much are you into the car at this point? They wanted to give me 20K above that price. During the conversation they mentioned that the money that they made from their high end customer was not important. What was important was that this was a car of historical value that should be built by a professional shop so that it would be built right, and so it would be properly preserved. Their intent was to strip it down to bare frame and start all over again--as the individual said: "We need to start from scratch so we will know that it is done right."

Dan's right. Don't take it as a slight (although I still contend that many "amateur" jobs can be and very often far better quality than a "professional" job).

This is a very easy decision, though, Brownie. Only one question you have to ask yourself: Which means more to you, the money or the car?
Answer to that will tell you which way to go.

Three years ago, I ended up selling my '32 Ford Hot Rod for more than I had in it (not counting time), simply because there was a buyer who was willing to pay enough to make me say, "yes". And, at the time, the money was more important than the car. Of course, in hindsight, I still miss that car! Be careful what you wish for . . .

I know what you mean. I have owned probably 50 different tractors over the years (some for collecting, many to re-sell). When anyone asks about a particular one (an Oliver 550 diesel, for any tractor afficianados out there), I just say "No, can't let that one go- it's gonna be in my estate auction."

"Very rare cars I think should be correctly restored I think. But if it's a source of constant anxiety for you if you drive it a few rain drops in the sky make you panic. What good is owning it? If it's a source of worry for you I'd argue you're not having any fun."

My point exactly, stated earlier in this thread. That's not someone who gets the full enjoyment out of their car, that's basically a caretaker. Being a caretaker has it's merit and it's place, but IMO they are missing out on a huge part of classic car ownership.

Additionally, for the average old-car hobbyist, old-car ownership is not an investment. In actuality, with the cost of restoration, "the love of the accomplishment" had far better outweigh the amount of money or time involved. If it doesn't, you've got one more potential future Project-Seller in the making, guaranteed. Happens every . . . single . . .day.

Sarah Young wrote:

How much should you spend on education? My restoration has been a learning experience. That's my story and I'm sticking to it, lol.

Ooooh you haven't really learned until you've been ripped off at least once in this hobby. LOL I've lost a car or two in the learning process. Luckily that didn't cost a whole lot. hehe

RL Chilton wrote:

Hi Brownie!

I'm glad I'm not the only one out there with some of these thoughts. Interesting question. Since your question is highly subjective and prone to diverse answers due to varying opinions on the matter, I reckon I'll just share some of my thoughts and circumvent direct responses.

. . . hey, that kinda sounds like a politician, doesn't it? To me, every project car deserves a certain kind of restoration. The first thing to do is determine exactly what that would entail. The second thing to figure out is to ask yourself if you are willing to do exactly what the first answer derived.

Let's use Hudson as an example (imagine that!). I have an incredible bad case of the "Wants" for a '42C8Cv. Answer to my first question would be that a car like this, with it's rarity (there are only 4 known), that this type of car would deserve to be put back to as close to original as possible. Second answer is, yes, I'm capable, patient, and diligent enough for that type of project.

Another example: A long time ago, I had the opportunity to own a '66 Shelby GT350. Not only that, but I could get the "project" GT350, along with a '66 Mustang fastback that was intended to be used as a parts car (although it was good enough to restore in it's own right). Not to go into the details here, the opportunity slipped by me. Unfortunately, one of these days, I still want one. Who woulda thunk that now these cars routinely sell for nearly 200K in #1 condition? My current thinking, that at one time would not even be a consideration, I have now relegated to the fact that the modern-day solution is to clone a Mustang, or "Shelbyize" a Mustang, if you will. Driving a real Shelby on the road these days, taking it's value into account is fairly fool-hardy for someone who is not wealthy, like myself. In other words, even if I had one, I would be hesitant to really drive it how I would want to drive it, due to it's potential "value". Would I be happy with a mocked-up Shelby? . . . Yeah, I think I would. Older and wiser now and not so hung up on the whims of a younger man, I suppose.

Seems to me that the previous two examples fit into my theory about people who own cars that are intended for the street. Basically, they fit into two categories:

1. People that drive their cars
2. Caretakers

Personally, I fit into the first category, I like to drive the cars I own. Really, they are the best cars to own. You can personalize them, make them a reflection of who YOU are, etc.

In the past, I really have never cared for being a "caretaker", who collect automobiles and treat them like stamps in a book. Stamps in a book get taken off of the shelf occasionally, looked over and admired and then promptly put back on the shelf. And, there are some cars that really deserve to be just that, and I can appreciate those cars, too (not necessarily as an owner). There is a Tucker in a museum not too far from my house that has .4 of a mile on the odometer. WHOMEVER owns that car is pretty much relegated to being a caretaker, assuming they have a sense or morality about them. As much as I would like to own a Tucker, that one certainly wouldn't be it. Then again, the 42C8Cv mentioned previously, somewhat fits into that category as well, although I WOULD drive it periodically.


Where does all the $$ fit into this? Personally, if it's a HOBBY, don't sweat the small stuff too much. Yes, the nicer "collector" type of cars need to be "valued" for insurance purposes, potential future sales, etc. BUT, if it's a HOBBY, too much of that financial details takes the fun out of it. Makes it more like real life, than escapism, which is what the old car hobby is to me. Also, I'm probably not the right guy to talk about money and cars. If there is something I want, I'll work harder, wait longer (till I have enough $$) to get exactly the part I want, or the car I want and DAMN the cost. Down the road, it really won't matter how much that NOS steering wheel cost today. I PROMISE! But as of this writing, it's a hobby for me. As long as it stays that way, the financials are really kinda irrelevant, aren't they? Well . . . at least they should be.

Sorry so long, but you asked, and I suppose I was due for a diatribe.

Russell, you visited my garage and saw my 53 Coupe. I started my restoration in 1953 and five years latter, 1998, it saw day light for the first time. It was a complete restoration by me with the exception of paint and chroming. Paint, 7,000 and chrome, 7,000. I'll never add up the cost of parts and labor. Might have a heart attack. On my third trip across this country while having lunch in a restaurant in Maryland, a fellow came to our table and asked if the Hudson outside was ours, and offered me $100,000. Margaret's answer was, I waited 5 years for that car and will not wait another 5. It was 10 years old when you saw it and is now 12 years old and still looks like I just got it out of the shop. New odometer started a 00,000 and now reads 130,000 miles and nothing has been touched but oil and filter and grease jobs every 3,000 miles, valve adjustment, 0.014 and 0.017 every year before we start our cross country trip. Auto-matic trans fluid and rear axle grease every 3 years. Like you said, if built for your own enjoyment, forget cost and enjoy. Walt.

Everyone is a caretaker of their cars, and here is why - YOU can not take it with you when you die, unless YOU die in an accident in that car.



The car goes to someone else. It lives on, perhaps for decades after you assume room temperature. Sure, we all are owners, too, but that is NEVER permanent.

Check this rate our. I ensure my 1936 for $60,000 "Total coverage" for under $200 per month with State Farm. Not a bad deal?



My experience has been that the "loving feeling" comes from sweat expended. Take a car from frame to finished product and if you are not emotionally envested I would say that you need to look for a new hobby. I am not convinced that it is any different from restored to original, modified as a resto rod or a full custom--a bunch of busted nuckles, sweat and lot of hours in the shop and with the research makes it for me.

To restore a car that you are afraid to drive is a waste of time and money. My 53 Hornet, which I will never add up the cost that I spent, was restored to be a driver. So far 11 trips across this country, San Francisco to Florida, SF to CT and MA. Plus all the National since 1998. 134,000 miles so far and having a ball. That fun makes it all worth while. Build it and drive it. Walt.

I think many who begin keeping track soon abandon it- there are some things in life you just don't wanna know. And as one guy on my tractor board said, his lawyer told him it would be admissible evidence in a divorce proceeding. He said his record book was used to start the fire in the shop stove that very evening. . .