DUANE KANAR wrote:
>I have a '65 MK I with a bit of worn carpet and seat/console uphostery. I
>really don't care how my decision affects the value of my car because I never
>intend to sell it, but I do care how I am received by the Tiger family, so I
> ask if I should replace with new carpet/upholstery or have the original
>materials in the car repaired? What do you think, folks? Original or
>replacement?
Duane:
I'm in the middle of replacing all of mine (see my silly posts "The
Inside Story"), and,
even discounting appearance and utility, it's worth it to replace everything
just to improve the
smell. Test: Tilt your driver's seat forward, shove your nose into the
underside of the seat, and
_sniff_; I guarantee you'll be ordering all new stuff. The vinyl might not
smell as bad as the
garbago under it. The same is true of the carpet but, as I've read that the
original is Wilton wool
and probably irreplaceable, that decision could be a wee bit tougher.
Side note: If you, like me, _never_ intend to sell, you can consider
that the expenditure be
enjoyed over many years, making the cost per year rather low.
Larry Wright "I can't get no-- Satis-traction"
P.S. Don't worry about "how I am received by the Tiger family". If you want
button-tufted purple
velvet and ball fringe, do it!
|