The term "all original"

This forum is for discussion of those terms we see in car ads and articles that can be misleading, misunderstood, or misused. The goal is to arrive at definitions we all can agree upon.
Post Reply
User avatar
mechatech
Addicted to Lincolns
Posts: 1424
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:01 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

The term "all original"

Post by mechatech »

I read a post here that stated that if a NOS part is put into a car now that it is not "all original" anymore.

A 64 Lincoln put in storage new, never used until today would fall into this category.

Where does one draw the line with all original? For example:

-the same car well maintained with the usual replacements - brake pads, exhaust, light bulbs, shocks.

-the same car with a water pump, carb or other major part replaced with factory NOS. The time at which this was done; installed in 1968 or in 1998. Is there a difference? Is the place of repair a factor? Warranty replacement of a power seat motor at the dealer in 1965 vs NOS at Joe's garage now.

-What about a minor part like a cigarette lighter, lock button, rear view mirror, broken tail light?

Is this an issue in car show competition?
1972 Lincoln Continental :smt004
Image
See the restoration. Now... Where does this part go? :smt017 :smt013 :smt102 :smt100

My friend's blog.
User avatar
Dan Szwarc
Site Admin
Posts: 29772
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2000 1:01 am
Contact:

Post by Dan Szwarc »

Mine has the original oil.
Lugnut

Post by Lugnut »

I read a post here that stated that if a NOS part is put into a car now that it is not "all original" anymore.
I think that statement you read was an attempt at humor. I would wager there is no such thing as a 100% original car over 30 years old, even one that might have less than a 1,000 miles on it. Deteriorization of belts, hoses, and tires prevents just about any car from being 100% original with the passage of time.

Dan, mine still has the original anti-freeze in the radiator........ :D

And, if you believe that, I've got one heck of a deal on season tickets for the submarine races.
Todzilla
Lincoln Maniac
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Post by Todzilla »

For me i think that for a car to be original it has to have all of the main components still with it, ie; engine, trans, diff, bodywork and interior. I would even extend that to the paintjob.

I would consider that a car that has been reupholstered and repainted - even if it is in the factory manner - is not all original.

Things like tyres, pumps, belts etc surely must be classed as consumerables.
SUICYDE
Dedicated Enthusiast
Posts: 990
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 1:01 am
Location: La Honda, CA
Contact:

Post by SUICYDE »

I've got one heck of a deal on season tickets for the submarine races.
I'm in!!! I'll trade you for beachfront tix to the migrating humpback whale races :D

I'll even throw in a folding chair w/cupholder!!!

I wouldn't include regular replacement wear items under classification for "original". yet i find it quite annoying when i see an "all original" 64 for sale with 65 seats, engine painted ford blue with a chrome air cleaner, and an electric fuel pump!!! :evil:
Doug

1964 Lincoln Continental Sedan
1962 Lincoln Continental Convertible
User avatar
jsanford
Lincoln-ally Insane
Posts: 3210
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Sacramento, CA
Contact:

Post by jsanford »

I think many people equate "original" with "stock." Therefore any car that has been updated, modernized or customized is not "original." Of course some modernizing is acceptable, like radial tires and a group 27F battery instead of the original bias-ply and group 29HR.

I think an Edlebrock carb in place of a Carter AFB would be an unacceptable update for "all original" purposes.

Jeremy
LCOC Western Region Webmaster & Northern CA Activities Coordinator.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest