1970's Auto Restoration Question

[togor]

So a friend has a mid 1970's Cadillac, which for some reason he is thinking of restoring, and he asked an interesting question:

This car, at the the time supposedly at the pinnacle of American automotive manufacturing, came from the factory with poorly fitting panels and runs in the paint. If restored to original condition, should that include paint runs and gaps between panels the size of a child's thumb?

First thought is "no" but then again if that is original condition, then for an accurate restoration the answer might be "yes".

Anyways a good tongue-in-cheek question!

[JimF]

Once I belonged to a Mustang car club.
At a show, one of our members had a ?66 coupe that he had bought brand new.
At the show, he was giged for having a kick panel on the passenger side that had one of the securing screws missing.
Try as he might, he couldn?t convince the judge that it came from the factory with that screw missing.
That car was ORIGINAL, but . . . .being a Ford, it had it?s flaws!

(Gotta love that damn query mark, rather than the apostrophe.)

[one shot]

fix it right

[lyman]

which 70's vintage,
1970? or 1979?

makes a difference

[Allen]

Factory/original is not always best. These production line autos were rushed and the workers probably had a quota of some type. No one is going to want or pay good money for a restored car with gaps and runs.

I hate to see classic cars modified unless the original parts stay with the car and the car can be returned back to original state if need ever come. (less the imperfections).

If this cady is mid to late 70's and anything but a convertible or Eldorado it is probably a waste of time and effort but that's his money, not ours. I think 1976 was the last year for the Eldorado convt. If it is a 4dr it may be worth more as a donor or parts car to someone else.

Saw a '59 Eldorado convertible sell last night on Mecom auctions for $300K. Probably the nicest one in existence though.

[togor]

which 70's vintage,
1970? or 1979?

makes a difference

1977 I believe.

The bad years when they came off the line already rusting.

Bad style era too.

God Only Knows why he thinks it's a good restoration choice.

Forget which model.

[Art]

Late 1970s GM cars were not great vehicles, if it were mine and I were going to restore it I'd put a great paint job on it.

I know, lipstick on a pig.

Now this is a '64; probably a better choice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpDVvAlHC70

[lyman]

77,,

I would fix as best I could (mechanicals were not good in that era) and maybe go a step or 2 above a MAACO paint job,

[jaie5070]

There is a difference between factory original and perfect/flawless restoration.

[Major Tom]

The cost to restore by a GOOD shop would be astronomical! Not worth it unless you had money to waste!

[jon_norstog]

It could be worse. Every now and then I see a lovely, two-masted, wooden sailboat for sale .... fix it up and sail to Tahiti! Right! Could be a LOT worse than an old Caddy.

jn

[dogtag]

Once it's been restored it's obviously no longer in original condition.
Restoring anything to it's original bad condition sounds like a really dumb idea.

[Johnny P]

One of the locals still had his 1970 Chevelle that he bought new. Recently he had a total restoration, and the car looks factory new again. I didn't see any ill fitting body panels or runs in the paint, but the finish looks like it just came from the factory and not a custom show car. Just what he ordered.

[Mark in Ottawa]

These comments pretty much explain why the Japanese were able to overwhelm the big 3. I had a 1979 Mustang (my mid-life crisis toy). At about 60,000 km, the paint job failed and became dull; at 80,000 km, the engine started to burn about a quart of oil per week (ring job?) and I was scared that I would be stopped by the police for polluting the city with the blue smoke. At about 80,000 km the front axle stated to act up and the car shook until I had it repaired. At 103,000 (about 64,000 miles) the timing belt failed when I was on the highway. At 103,001 KM, I said "Screw this" and had the car towed to the scrap yard. I went out and bought a Toyota.

[Allen]

These comments pretty much explain why the Japanese were able to overwhelm the big 3. I had a 1979 Mustang (my mid-life crisis toy). At about 60,000 km, the paint job failed and became dull; at 80,000 km, the engine started to burn about a quart of oil per week (ring job?) and I was scared that I would be stopped by the police for polluting the city with the blue smoke. At about 80,000 km the front axle stated to act up and the car shook until I had it repaired. At 103,000 (about 64,000 miles) the timing belt failed when I was on the highway. At 103,001 KM, I said "Screw this" and had the car towed to the scrap yard. I went out and bought a Toyota.

1979 Mustang. Timing belt.

This model was bascially a Pinto. It even had the 2.3 Pinto engine obviously which was made in Brazil.

In your case you traded up but Jap cars weren't always better. The Japs make a good 4cyl engine, if that is what you want. A couple of co-workers in the mid 80's each bought a Toyota Corolla. Each gave up their mid size to full size cars in lui of what they were told got great MPG. Both ended up getting 18MPG with a 5 speed. Both regretted their trades.

There's always good and bad experience's. In my case the worse car I've ever owned (by far) was a Mercedes.