Authenticity

Carmine, if you read my barnfind post, you can see that I am struggling with this issue. In my opinion, the perfect restoration is Ivan's restoration/preservation of the prototype Vignale Spyder. He did an amazing job of restoring/preserving a piece of Maserati history. Another great example is Frank's "Mitchell" 3500 GT. It is nice to have a car that is as close to 100% original as possible for other people to refer to when restoring or preserving their car.

 

The only thing I will mention about originality is that it's not always the case that original is a good idea. Let's face it, some of these cars were delivered and did not work well or failed very soon after delivery. When people make wholesale changes then it can become a problem. I chose not to refinish my Bora with the original crappy methods (such as undercoating on raw steel) or rubber pieces in the engine compartment that fail almost as soon as it's used so I should not be penalized for that.

I recognize that it's a difficult issue but if one intends to operate the car in any sort of meaningful manner then you have to make some changes.

Zeus & Neptune be damned but the Italians weren't gods.

 

There are so many considerations determining what to do with any particular car:

How rare is it?
What state is it in before the resto?
Are you restoring for resale or for yourself?
Are you restoring for show or use?
Is the car in its' original specification a viably usable entity?

Generally I feel that anything that can be bolted back to original specification is okay, but if I were to find, let's say, a derelict Boxer I would be tempted to build a NART LM racecar out of it. Or, if I find a 450S complete body (impossible of course) I'd build a chassis for it and fit a Ghibli-Khamsin engine. It's hard to draw a sharp line, sometimes components are not available and there are no alternatives if you want to save a shell.

A collectible car with all matching components present should, imo, be restored to original.
That, however, becomes less important to me if it had been built in sufficient numbers, let's say, for example, an E-Type. If you restore one for yourself, make it the way you like to see it.

When a car is a survivor, like my Khamsin, I'd never dream of change in colours.

Too many considerations to take into account to define a general set of boundaries.

Nice topic!

Jack.

 

Some of the Vignale Spyder were changed in color shortly after delivery to the owners. If a car came new -for example!- in red color and the owner changed that to blue shortly after delivery I would call it also "original". So a resto to this (2nd) color is OK for me.

A change in period is -IMO- aceptable!

 

My Vote goes to option 3.

It very much depends on the car. If you take the very rare cars the authanticty can go to the extreem. and I have personally seen this happen.


Good example is the recient story of Ferrari restoring Steve McQueen's 275 GTB/4 to factory condition.
This was converted to a roadster at one point.

I am infavour of usability mods that can be put back to absolute orginal by nut and bolt if you get may drift.

Personally, garage/museum queens are a waste and tend to be to the detriment of the car, I should know mines abit like that now to nice to use too nice not to!

Graeme

 

OK A quick comment. There are original survivors that are untouched and are needed to be preserved so we know exactly how things were. Put them on a trailer.
For the normal preserved car there were lots of things "wrong" with most cars. Free flow rad cores, better exhausts etc are all sensible mods. I would also improve the suspension with better shocks where available. These would qualify as "bolt on" or easily changed improvements. I had an old XJ6 that had an underdesigned alternator that lasted about 2 months so owners have developed a sensible upgrade to the system.
Not for me but I enjoyed talking to Pantera owners at Concorso Italiano. The big prize winning car had changed wheels, different intake and many other changes. They seem to allow all kinds of mods almost like the American Hot Rods. Just can't see that on a Maserati.
Changing motors etc etc just does not make sense.
US owners seem freer to change the colour and interior scheme where I think in Europe there is more of a push to keep with the factory colour scheme.
Anyway - a few random thoughts which sum up to keep the really good ones perfect for reference and for the rest suitable improvements that can be undone BUT make the changes to keep the car running safer.

 

The first thing you have to remember is that any decent restoration performed on these cars is probably better than it left the factory.

Think of where these cars were built and when. The where: Modena/Bologna area of Italy. This area is the heart Communist party of Italy. Built by union workers closely tied to the Communist party for the bourgeoisie, the capitalist pigs who exploit the workers.

The when: the 1960s through the 70's. Anyone remember the strikes every other week? How about the oil embargos? The rash of kidnappings of industrialists? Red Brigade Terrorists? The high inflation, the bankruptcies of Iso, Bizzarrini, Lamborghini, Maserati the list goes on.

Now ask yourself if the people building these cars really gave a $@&? about the quality of a car they could never afford being built for someone they felt oppressed them and whose warranty was 6 months? Oh yea did I mention the cheap Russian steel?

The stuff coming out of the UK and Germany at the time wasn't much better.

 

Haha, thanks for the time-frame

Add to the list Rolls and Aston Martin.

What has changed? How many workers at Maserati or Ferrari can afford the cars they build today?

Sure, looking back the quality of many cars was really bad, compared to what you see today, but then, cars were built in a very different way.

The crappy quality was the world over, with maybe the exception of Sweden and Japan. In the US whole cities were turned into ghost-towns because the automakers moved production-facilities to other places to escapethe unions.

Yes, there were Daytonas with bubbles on the rear fenders after 3 months, and Alfasuds that were already rusting in the sales brochures.

Nothing was built to last; we are the idiots who think we can preserve these cars and enjoy them indefinitely. And we can, by repeatedly restoring them at great cost.

Looking at my Maser, I really can't say that there is much evidence of poor workmanship, contrary. A lot of the car is hand-made, which brings with it that fit isn't what you see in a modern car, but someone, communist or not, took pride in making the item, otherwise it wouldn't have come out looking so good.

There were many things causing cars then to be of inferior quality, but to us, mostly, that was the normal then. And we still love them today.

 

Sorry to say - but in my little blue Merak from 1981 I could not find anything communist! The build quality is better than Lenin`s dead body in this "black Box"!

Also nothing was left by helpfull hands in the various Gulags...:

MASERATI LOVERS -UNITE!

 

I've recounted this story a few times already but I supposed it bears repeating here. Back in the early 1990s right after I had finished my Bora and it was at it's zenith. We had a visit from Giulio Alfieri at Concourso. I discussed with him this topic as it related to some of the abysmal things I found on a car with very low mileage that had led a pampered life.

I asked him why they just sprayed undercoating over raw steel and other such "atrocities" (yes we're all nuts). His first reaction to looking at my car was was an exclamation of "Nuevo!" followed by some Italian that translated as "Better than new!".

He was truly flabbergasted to find all these old Maseratis in such terrific condition.

So why was that?

Because in answering my question about not painting raw steel and just undercoating it he explained that they never intended these cars to last very long.

Yeah, no kidding. That part they got right ...

They expected the cars to last 3,4 or 5 years and then they wanted you to buy a new one.

It all makes sense now ...

 

True - I am amazed by the build quality in certain areas. Obviously done by people who had passion. The compromises seem to have been in design elements where the result was a bit flawed. Take the QP III. I would say the key areas of design flaw are front end strength - hence the new Ohlins system we are perfecting for the front coil over system. The dual cooling fans and electrics associated with it tend to put the car at risk of overheating - a must is a free flow rad core, better hoses and renewed fan motors with a switch to turn them on in case the auto cut in fails. These are not build quality issues but areas where use has shown up the design. Where there are issues is in the door fit which was horrible and any car properly painted, say by ALSA, will have a lot of fettling work done to adjust the fit.

So not the robots of the capitalist West but each car is still a good compromise. See the happy workers......

 

This is also why a well-done resto today could produce a car that will last longer: We allow ourselves the time or pay for it, and we have access to much improved materials and processes.

I don't subscribe to the Corvette councours guys, who get judged by the look of overspray and if this overspray appears authentic. Nor would I restore a Maserati with undercoating on untreated sheet-metal. The ways we can protect sheetmetal these days is eons ahead of the seventies.
The same goes for mechanical parts: we can finish better, with better tolerances and more durable and lighter materials.

In that regard I think originality should give way to quality.

I have to agree with Walter: I have nothing to say about the build-quality of my '82 Khamsin. It's well stuck together, with clean shutlines and great fit of components. Someone definitely DID care.

One thing in which Italians really lagged was the introduction of rust-prevention. I'm lucky enough to have a car that was never near any ocean, and is, save 1 little spot in the rear wheel-well, rust free. Porsche and Volvo used a lot of plated sheetmetal and electro-charging to better their durability from the early to mid seventies on, many others followed. I have no idea when Maserati started, but Ferrari only started serious rust-proofing in 1984 (some of it a few years earlier), which in itself speaks volumes, and re-iterates what Bob's anecdote is about.

 

I wish every Cummunist a Maserati!

MASERATISTI - UNITE! or : To learn from Maserati means to be victorious.. (Mao Tse Dongh ?)

 

I have to agree with Walter: I have nothing to say about the build-quality of my '82 Khamsin. It's well stuck together, with clean shutlines and great fit of components. Someone definitely DID care.

I'm surprised by the solid feel of my QP1-65. It almost feel like an old mercedes. It is like a tank! Or maybe a truck, very solid.

Maybe this is the result of a quality restoration than original build quality?

 

Well, do you know the differnce between Capitalism and Communism?

In the capitalistic systems a woman need 9 months to give birth to a baby! In the communistic system 9 women try to fix this in 1 month!

 

Sorry Joe, but I think you are overstating the situation by a wide margin.
Yes, the region is run by a form of commune (Communist) mentality, but it is an Italian form with all its culture and nuance. They still possess a great deal of pride in workmanship as apposed to other cultures I will not name.
In the 30's 40's and 50's and 60's all of the great advancements in technical and design evolution came directly from Modena and Turin. These guys were on their game and in many ways still are, although the Germans are in my opinion the currant leaders in technical advancement.
Ciao,
FGM

 

Walter,

This thread must please you: You made a statement, and we all agreed with you! (regarding build quality, not the communist/Lenin cr*p)

 

If we are talking in terms of quality of product, it isn't even close. Japanese cars are still head and shoulders above everyone.

 

Above the Germans? Really?

 

Yes, I'd say. Daimler's merge with Chrysler didn't do it much justice in the quality-field, and BMW lost the plot when they started to put more electronics than just the basics in their cars in the early 90-ies.
After a few years of use, it's all the boxes you ticked for many $$$ that refuse service.

Globalisation also didn't do much favors: Certain models are built in several places, and the quality isn't always the same.