Restoration

[Michael H.]

The detail, the colors, the accuracy of most chassis restorations today is amazing. Folks have come a long way since the "spray can restorations with the body on the frame" style of restoration of decades past.
Correct bolt head markings and plating, coil and leaf spring finish and even some correct "final blackout". Correct dates on components, even some that no one would ever see.
I'm impressed.

However, from what I've seen in the last few decades, the paint and body restoration accuracy has not advanced much. In fact, in many cases, it's now actually further from what would be original than it was a few decades ago.
I don't think it's entirely due to a lack of effort though. Maybe a lack of knowledge. After all, how many of us really know what a new 63-67 Corvette really looked like?
A typical body shop owner that is restoring a Corvette usually has no idea what these cars were when new and has no idea what they should look like when correctly restored. His goal is to make the customer happy and that will almost always mean that he will make the body/paint much better than it would have been when the car rolled off the end of the line at the St Louis assembly plant.

I'm sure that some of the "old timers" here remember what these cars looked like when new. Can anyone describe some of the differences between original and restored. The list is long.

[Mark D.]

Re: Restoration

I could describe dozens of typical differences but here are a couple obvious ones. The break line between body paint and blackout on the under side of the hood. On restored cars, the break line is very crisp and on original cars, the break line is very ragged.
Another difference is the weatherstrip glue. Original glue was brushed on and very sloppy...typically. It was originally clear and yellowed with time. Restored cars use glue from a tube that is yellow when it comes out. It is much thicker also.
Restored cars today typically are not even close.

[Dick W.]

Re: Restoration

Fit and finish was somewhere between bad and horrible. Going back a little further my '61 looked like both sides had been torn off of it. ROUGH.

[Loren L.]

Re: Restoration

To quote from an article by a Road & Track staffer in Feb '67 on the 36K of his '64 convertible and how it was DELIVERED:
"Problems: a broken spark plug; the side windows wouldn't roll up with the doors shut; splotchy paint on top cover panel; the top didn't fit properly; the passenger's seat rattled furiously; leaks around the windshield; and the steering had a massive squeak in it.".
Other items, from personal observation: a lack of the required paint between the turn signals; leaks in the wiper area that required POUNDS of caulking to seal, etc.
But the R&T author was Happy with the car.....probably because he bought the car for $4100, with sales tax and 1/2 year licensing included. He also kidded himself that it was still worth 3K in '67. (I bought my 1st '63 coupe in '64 for $2700......and sold it in '67 with the clutch on the way out for $2200).
But they were then .....and now.....some of the best looking "I Want One" cars ever built......

[Michael G.]

Re: Restoration

I could describe dozens of typical differences but here are a couple obvious ones. The break line between body paint and blackout on the under side of the hood. On restored cars, the break line is very crisp and on original cars, the break line is very ragged.
Another difference is the weatherstrip glue. Original glue was brushed on and very sloppy...typically. It was originally clear and yellowed with time. Restored cars use glue from a tube that is yellow when it comes out. It is much thicker also.
Restored cars today typically are not even close.

A great deal of what you say is true Mark. In the area of w/s adhesion tried/did something different with my latest project. Installed the w/s using a brush on glue (contact cement). Process mirrored more the assembly line process. One can get as sloppy as they want. I've seen others now using this same process.....getting away from the yellow adhesive in a tube "gorilla snot".

[Terry M.]

Re: Restoration

Now days "restorers" just can't resist the shine on the paint. They want a "museum piece" and no deduction on the show field. They will go to great lengths and expense for a flawless paint job the likes of which never left St Louis. Who is kidding who? (or is it whom?)

[Michael H.]

Re: Restoration

How about the finish of the paint in the louvers of the front fender of any 63-67? Was the fiberglass sanded smooth before the primer/paint was applied? Was the primer sanded before the color was applied? Or did it appear as though nothing was sanded?And what about the front section of the front wheel well lip? Was it sanded smooth? Or were there there deep grinder scars running across the lip surface?One of my favorite sections is the narrow 3/8" area of fiberglass immediately above the rocker mldg's. Was the glass ever sanded smooth? Or did the natural unsanded texture of fiberglass clearly show through the primer/paint? Did you ever notice that the convex section of the upper door fiberglass is reasonably ripple free but the concave section just above it is rippled? If you think about it for a second, you will understand why. In fact, the only panels that are reasonably straight/smooth on the entire body are the convex sections. Any area that is convex will show ripples and waves. How about any panels below the horizontal body line? Were these areas sanded smooth/flat before paint?For me, making the body perfect takes the Corvette right out of the Corvette. They look almost nothing like they did when new.

[Tom A.]

Re: Restoration

You may often see a ragged edges on the paint to blackout break on the underside of the hood but it was not necessarily always true. I have been observing this on original cars for many years and have pictures of original cars with sharp masked edges and variations anywhere between the two. I would propose the sharpness of the edge depended on how many times the mask had been used and/or how careful the person was applying the mask. It does seem that the majority of restored cars exhibit a sharp edge.

[Bob J.]

Re: Restoration

Can anyone describe some of the differences between original and restored. The list is long.

Bonding strip seams and lack of paint on lower surfaces comes to mind.
It just takes one paint job through the years to ruin the look of unsanded fiberglass forever. Bob

[Edward J.]

Re: Restoration

The detail, the colors, the accuracy of most chassis restorations today is amazing. Folks have come a long way since the "spray can restorations with the body on the frame" style of restoration of decades past.
Correct bolt head markings and plating, coil and leaf spring finish and even some correct "final blackout". Correct dates on components, even some that no one would ever see.
I'm impressed.

However, from what I've seen in the last few decades, the paint and body restoration accuracy has not advanced much. In fact, in many cases, it's now actually further from what would be original than it was a few decades ago.
I don't think it's entirely due to a lack of effort though. Maybe a lack of knowledge. After all, how many of us really know what a new 63-67 Corvette really looked like?
A typical body shop owner that is restoring a Corvette usually has no idea what these cars were when new and has no idea what they should look like when correctly restored. His goal is to make the customer happy and that will almost always mean that he will make the body/paint much better than it would have been when the car rolled off the end of the line at the St Louis assembly plant.

I'm sure that some of the "old timers" here remember what these cars looked like when new. Can anyone describe some of the differences between original and restored. The list is long.

Mike, I think that today the mid year owners are spending much more for there cars and a way to much to restore them as close a NCRS as they can. With the exception of the paint. a beautiful paint job will just seem to make the car more desiriable than a car with a so-so paint job.I think there are a few exceptions for the die hards. I just finished my 63 and want to keep it close to original but the paint is something I feel I would I would not want a factory style finish, I have been around cars long enough to know what the factory finishes looked like as I had many years at the GM dealerships.In those days(70/80s) a subpar paint job was Okay no one got on the hands and knees to really looked that close at the lower panels,or look at the door jams that close.A lot of the time these cars sat out doors for months before they sold and they rusted and acid rain would spot the paint and require a buff job or even a repaint sometimes.

[Mark D.]

Re: Restoration

On 68/69, the front lower valance on restored cars is almost always over restored. They were very rough at the left and right bonding seams but restored cars are smooth as, well, glass:-)

[Tony S.]

Re: Restoration

Good post Mike.

You know as well as anyone that our cars (especially C1 and C2 cars) were production line cars. When we restore them now, they are hand built cars. I suppose the goal when I restore a C2, I try to make it look like the car was built on a really good day on the production line. After all, these were St. Louis guys, and I wouldn't want to buy a car built the day after the Cardinals lost or the guys on the line spent too much time sampling a case of Budweiser.

I think the quality of chassis restorations have improved because we've been good as a Society at educating our members. No doubt, that has had an impact on our chassis restorations. The same will hold true with body and paint. Members/judges such as Tom Ames and others have been active in trying to teach/explain these finish issues about paint. I think the level of orginal-appearing paint will continue to improve, but one big difference is the unavailability of original paint. Our C2's were painted at the factory in a different way and with different production materials than what we have available today. The quality of modern day lacquer just isn't the same as it was back in the day. If you can find some original paint, it costs a fortune.

I think we're headed in the right direction regarding body and paint. We just need to continue to educate our members to try and get things looking as close as possible despite the rarity of original paint. The more people like you get the word out on these original finish issues, the more likely restorers will achieve a factory look just as we have with our chasses.

[Joe R.]

Re: Restoration

It must be nice to call yourself "a restorer" and have the money to direct a project such as a 67 Corvette. Your not a restorer, but you are a Corvette owner and driver.
As an owner of many Corvettes and was the laborer on all of them, I can clearly see why Corvettes are "over" restored!
Here are some of the facts:

Try to obtain the materials used to prepare and paint a chassis or a Corvette body. It just ain't gonna happen sports fans!
You just can't use the equipment and materials available today and do such sorry work!!!! Let's look at the equipment. Those St. Louis workers didn't have pneumatic inline sanders and what about a DA. Why, I can take a DA and sand an entire panel while a worker from St. Louis is signing his union card. These new paint guns are so nice that a blind man could paint a Corvette if pointed in the right direction!
Have any of you painted a Corvette with Nitro Cellulose Lacquer? I doubt it! Most of you have never even seen or smelled a gallon of Nitro!

No real restorer worth his salt is gonna turn out a POS when modern equipment and materials are available. No "Owner" is gonna pay for a crappy job either! They want it to shine better than the Corvette beside them. That's what they pay for anyway!

You won't find me driving a Corvette with no paint under the doors or primed valence panel. I have my blue ribbons and Duntov's and now I have my 67 BB and 63 Split Window painted to the 10's and they are gonna stay that way. Including the frame's!

JR

[Jim D.]

Re: Restoration

I agree 100% with JR. I do all my own work including body and paint. There is no way I would ever do a crappy paint job like the factory did and will never understand why someone would want to replicate it.

[Tony S.]

Re: Restoration

I don't remember seeing you in the shop while I restored my cars Joe. Did I miss your visit?