Italia 227 Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) http://britishsportscars.com/blog/2016/01/restoration-project-yet-another-triumph-italia/ Sorry, #312 - don't seem to be able to edit my erroneous header. Edited January 9, 2016 by Italia 227 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Alec Pringle Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Restoration . . . . . . ? Re-creation might be nearer the mark, judging by the state of what's left . . . . . . the end result is likely to be more Replica than Italia. I hate to think of the size of cheque book required to re-create these mortal remains. Barmy, it's still no more than a TR3A in a party frock. Cheers Alec Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Paul Harvey Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 It is Italia #312. Apart from some rust the car is absolutely complete, and appears very largely undamaged. All the bodywork was made from flat sheets of steel in the Vignale factory, and can therefore be repaired and restored with complete authenticity by a suitably skilled coachbuilder. Enough skill and enough time is all that is required. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tom Fremont Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Enough skill and enough time is all that is required. What do you reckon, Paul - would 1000 hours do it? I think more like 1500+ Way to rain on a parade, Alec ! Cheers, Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Paul Harvey Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Tom, I am not sufficiently experienced in coachworks to hazard a guess at the time required although I do know what has been quoted for the whole restoration. Let's just agree that it will be well worth negotiating the hourly rate. I think it is very significant that the bodyshell is undamaged and can act as a template for repairs. Front end damage in particular on these cars is a nightmare to fix because of the complex shapes and lack of reference after damage has been sustained. One UK restorer borrowed my Italia for 3 months just to measure it and make templates. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
2long Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 What is a typical hourly rate for specialty restoration work like what might be necessary for this Italia? Out here in the middle of the pacific, the range seems to be from $60 - $120 per hour. I recognize that is high, and wonder what a typical compromise might be if a full 1000 hour restoration were undertaken. Just curious. Sorry to divert the thread. Dan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Paul Harvey Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) Dan, The rate will entirely depend on the 'shop' doing the work but the range of rates you quote is not unreasonable (£40- £80 per hour.) it is apparent that steel workers at Vignale and other Italian Carrozzeria were not only skilled, but extremely fast workers, often producing complete prototype cars fully finished in days not weeks. Very, very few people remain with those skills and speed intact. Having said which, Vignale did use a lot of lead, and also used a thick primer/filler all over the body prior to paint. This allowed some small 'build errors' to be rectified It is immediately apparent why an Italia is a completely different restoration proposition compared to any TR, and why choice of restorer must be done with complete trust between the parties. I know of one Italia which will have zero lead and zero filler in the bodyshell, but only the restorer and owner will know that to be the case. I also know of several Italias that would be shocking to see if they were stripped of paint, and yet present perfectly well as they stand. All of which is why this car has sat for so many years, waiting for the gap between 'cost' and 'value' to close. Party frock or not, the market has finally realised the difference between Next and Savile Row. Edited January 7, 2016 by Paul Harvey Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Alec Pringle Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Not quite raining on the parade . . . . . as the restorers themselves observe " we’re confident we can make this Phoenix rise from the ashes and turn some heads. " Many years ago an expert Jaguar restorer, and a blunt Yorkshireman at that, summed up the difference between a restoration and a re-creation, as he saw it from a professional perspective . . . . " if you can drive it back to base, then it's a restoration . . . . . . if you can get in it and steer it whilst it's towed back to base, then it's a restoration . . . . if you have to carefully winch it onto a trailer and haul it back carefully, and roll it off carefully, then it's a re-creation not a restoration. That was more than 30 years ago, it made sense to me then, and it still does today. There's nothing wrong with a re-creation, making a Phoenix rise from the ashes, but I suggest that the end result justifies being differentiated from a restoration. Because there is a difference. History matters. Cheers Alec Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Italia 227 Posted January 8, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) Throughout the body work phase on my car, my restorer removed, melted and lumped all the lead removed to facilitate fabrication / repairs. This was most, but not all of the lead. At finish, they had a loose 8+ lb brick, about 9x4x3". Doesn't make my car better, but it is now ever-so-slightly faster. Edited January 8, 2016 by Italia 227 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stuart Posted January 8, 2016 Report Share Posted January 8, 2016 Better than another one I know of. Stuart. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TR 2100 Posted January 8, 2016 Report Share Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) Not quite raining on the parade . . . . . as the restorers themselves observe " we’re confident we can make this Phoenix rise from the ashes and turn some heads. " Many years ago an expert Jaguar restorer, and a blunt Yorkshireman at that, summed up the difference between a restoration and a re-creation, as he saw it from a professional perspective . . . . " if you can drive it back to base, then it's a restoration . . . . . . if you can get in it and steer it whilst it's towed back to base, then it's a restoration . . . . if you have to carefully winch it onto a trailer and haul it back carefully, and roll it off carefully, then it's a re-creation not a restoration. That was more than 30 years ago, it made sense to me then, and it still does today. There's nothing wrong with a re-creation, making a Phoenix rise from the ashes, but I suggest that the end result justifies being differentiated from a restoration. Because there is a difference. History matters. Cheers Alec Alec, I find your comments overly negative. Your Yorkshireman quote is an over-generalisation. I am not familiar with this particular car, though I suspect that some of those commenting may be, but from the photos, the car is so far from being a "phoenix rising" as to make your reference absurd in relation to this car. Given the quality of build in the first instance, and assuming the type of use (thrashing!) to which (I believe) you think TRs should be (and usually have been) subjected, it is fortuitous that so many survive. It is of great credit (usually previous) owners when cars are so well looked after that they need little by way of restoration, and lovely cars they are too, but your comments seem to ignore the vast majority of TRs that have been restored with a goodly quantity of original/remanufactured spares. I, for one, do NOT regard these as recreations and unless there is a lot lot more about the Italia prompting these comments that I am not aware of, it looks to me like one of the better Italias for restoration, NOT a recreation. OK, so history matters. But what of a car that has been used/thrashed over the years then rebuilt - what you are saying is that the identity, the history of the car has been lost by the rebuild/restoration and the car is no more than a recreation. To me, that is nonsense. In the great majority of instances. Of course, there are some exceptions. I like the Italias - lovely looking cars, but IMO very similar in driving experience to a TR4 surrey top. If anyone wants to pay 2-3 times the price for something that is a bit different, great - it all helps promote interest in the TR marque. Same thoughts on the Doretti. AlanR Edited January 8, 2016 by TR 2100 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tom Fremont Posted January 8, 2016 Report Share Posted January 8, 2016 . I like the Italias - lovely looking cars, but IMO very similar in driving experience to a TR4 surrey top. Same thoughts on the Doretti. If anyone wants to pay 2-3 times the price for something that is a bit different, great - it all helps promote interest in the TR marque. AlanR Very much my sentiments too, and I suppose the 2-3X factor in value is what brings many of us up short. Never having experienced an Italia but knowing the joys of the Surrey topped Michelottis I'm not tempted in the least by the former but happily applaud those who do and bring them back to snuff and beyond. I also feel the example in question is far more there than not. Cheers, Tom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Paul Harvey Posted January 8, 2016 Report Share Posted January 8, 2016 Despite appearances, the car in question was capable of being driven, as in self-propelled. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stevecross Posted January 8, 2016 Report Share Posted January 8, 2016 Italia 227 I am not familiar with these but to me that looks like a really nice project. From what I see of the pics. although the floors are rusted out the rest of the car sits well and looks about as complete as anyone could hope for. All exterior panels look completely saveable and if original and untouched are far, far better than most cars of this age. Personally I would have loved to have the opportunity to rebuild that despite the problems Driving as well eh? Compared to some of the cars I have had that's a dream! Good luck Steve Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stuart Posted January 9, 2016 Report Share Posted January 9, 2016 Like I said compared to one I know (and will be doing) thats a very easy one. Stuart. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Paul Harvey Posted January 9, 2016 Report Share Posted January 9, 2016 (edited) Actually, Italia #312 is capable of being conserved rather than restored, and could well become a benchmark for such treatment. I know the owner wants a high quality job, and unlike with a TR he has nowhere to go for repro parts. Almost every part on the car can be repaired. Looking through the high resolution photographs carefully, I can see hardly anything that is not correct and original from when the car was first built. (Actually, tell a lie, the choke pull knob is new and likely to be a reproduction.) Much of the brightwork is solid aluminium, and will polish up amazingly well. All the dashboard and gauges can be cleaned and refurbished. There are no replacement trim parts so the seats will be repaired, and even the trim panels will likely be salvaged because they are plywood and not generally prone to rot. The engine, gearbox and differential are likely to be original and can be overhauled. New floorpans will be required, but the rest of the steel will have new pieces welded in with the vast majority retained. When finished, this Italia is likely to retain more parts fitted by the factory that built it than the vast majority of Triumphs on the road, including several that are held to be paragons of originality. Edited January 9, 2016 by Paul Harvey Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malocomotion Posted January 9, 2016 Report Share Posted January 9, 2016 Paul, as usual is completely right ! a TR is just industry, an Italia is industry + art ... not a simply a driving machine ... happy motoring in 2016 ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobL Posted January 13, 2016 Report Share Posted January 13, 2016 Well said guys. A recreation is something created anew (to be similar to something existing) and this means a new item, not something that previously existed. So we are discussing a restoration of something that previously existed. Of course, if the handle and head of a hammer are renewed that is arguably a recreation. If anyone hates to think of the size of the cheque book needed to restore this car then simply don't think about it: it is the business of the cheque book owner, nobody else. Thank goodness people in the dim and distant past went ahead and restored vehicles when that may not have been financially sensible, ie the initial purchase costs together with the restoration costs exceeded the final value of the vehicle. This morning I visited my local garage where a Vitesse is being restored at a cost that will significantly exceed the value of the finished car. So what ? How many TR's have been 'lost' because of restoration costs being too high for the owner to bear ? If somebody wants to expend lots of money doing anything at all then that is their prerogative if they have the means. It certainly doesn't suggest that they necessarily have mental issues even if some people don't agree with their actions or wouldn't do it themselves. For example, does everybody who buys a racehorse that never wins or somebody who buys a football club that doesn't make money (hard to think of any that does) have mental issues ? This simplistic approach ignores the fun and satisfaction derived from doing what owners enjoy. TR's are unlikely ever to be fortune-making but by golly they can be great fun. As far as TR's and their derivatives are concerned why can't we all just be thankful that our marque is being saved and not be judgmental ? Rob PS: definition of recreation taken from my dictionary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.