On Sat, 8 Jun 1996, PHILIP SMITH wrote:
> In my quest to purchase the correct TR6, 6 months, about $500.00, in
> expenses, I have this question, I would like to pose to the group. I
> recently checked out a 69 Tr6 that was a frame off restoration, by a guy
> who worked for a Business that restored cars. He did this car on the side.
> It is a very nice car, but in my opinion, the car felt loose, light; unlike
> some TR's I have driven, with many more flaws, that felt substanially
> tighter....
> I'm wondering,how others feel about this? Is it preferable to buy an original
> vs. a frame off? In most cases will the Original be tighter?
There is, in my opinion, no way to generalize about this. One has to look
at each car involved. An original might be shiny on the outside and newly
steam-cleaned on the outside, but be suffering from a host of 25-year-old
worn parts, perished bushings, etc. A thorough, proper, off-frame restoration
should easily be the equal or an improvment over a car that left
Coventry's Triumph factory 25+ years ago.
Of course, the opposite could be true: an "original" could have been very
well maintained v. a quickie, mostly cosmetic "off-frame" job by someone
not well-versed about the cars or just too sloppy and profit-motivated to
care.
There is little or no reason that reproduction parts should affect the
outcome here. Many reproductions are the equal of or better than the
originals, in terms of design, materials used, or care in manufacture.
(Of course, some repro stuff is junk, but....)
The closest to a generalization I'm willing to make is that a true, 100%
original could be really nice to look at and to study for its
originality, but a proper restoration is likely to feel tighter and
better because bushings, shocks, etc., etc. would be fresh and doing well
the job they were intended to do.
My $.02....
--Andy
Andrew Mace
10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant
Vintage Triumph Register
amace@unix2.nysed.gov
|