Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

to restore or not restore

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • to restore or not restore

    I just came into a "48 Indian Chief that, as far as I can tell, is all original. It was my dad's, has about 900 miles on it and is all there. My question is "Do I restore it?". I'm not thinking of whether the value will increase or whether it will sell easier, because its staying with me. Is there a reason other than personal taste to restore the bike? Restoration on this would be pretty much just paint and chrome (and maybe a little engine work, it hasn't been started for about 5 years). The paint is rough, but can still get a good surface on it. I do plan on getting it on the road and, hopefully, to Wauseon next year. All thoughts are welcome.

  • #2
    We live in a consumer driven disposable society. Get off the train -and enjoy the Chief for what it is. Have fun. Educate the masses. You can never go back once it's restored.

    Original paint is valued higher than restored.

    Comment


    • #3
      leave as is , luv those barn find originals, rusty , crusty an all

      Comment


      • #4
        Keep it the way it is!!!...think of all the time and wax you'll save! It's only original once, keep it that way if you can.....or sell it to me! Or restore it like some of those 100% remanufactured 100 point bikes....whoops slipped off the subject there for a minute. Just my two cents worth.

        Louie (keeper of old ORIGINAL, RUSTY, REAL motorcycles)

        Comment


        • #5
          Haven't you watched the "Antiques Roadshow" on PBS?

          A 'restored' antique is molested.
          If you restore a well preserved example, you will be spending megabucks only to depreciate your find to a fraction of its intrinsic (and market) worth, and probably rob it of much of the fun of riding it as well.

          It's only original once. If you restore it, it's just another Chief.

          If you don't believe me, park it next to a line of restored Chiefs and see which one gets all of the attention!

          PS: maintenance is always proper.

          Comment


          • #6
            pic?

            how bout a pic of your chief

            Comment


            • #7
              pic?

              I will try to get a picture up. So far, the consensus is no restoration. That is how I am leaning, anyway. The bike as it is is how I remember looking at it for as long as I can remember.

              Comment


              • #8
                If it's all original just get it running and ride it like it is first You can always restore it later on if you think that you would enjoy it more that way.

                Comment


                • #9
                  900 miles? Actual? I wholeheartedly concur with the rest of the opinion offered. To restore this motorcycle would be a serious mistake. There are plenty of restored late chiefs out there, but very few original examples. Please preserve that originality in every aspect for as long as possible. I have a 48 Chief, 23,000 miles that has sufferd from hard use as a pasture bike, and following an engine failure, total neglect. The original Seafoam Blue is there, but half the rear fender is gone from being removed and left laying in the dirt. Rugged as it is, if not for that I would do my mechanicals and give the chassis a "WD40 Resto". Anybody got a rough but solid Seafoam Blue 48 rear fender?
                  Jfred, we would love to see some pictures.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Keep it real!! Ride it enjoy it dont restore it,Thats my opinion! But do with it as you see fit,after all it is yours!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Sounds like a nice piece with a lot of sentiment. Things that will be gone forever will be the little bits of sweat and maybe a little blood from a busted knuckle and all the spots your dad touched and loved or maybe hated. I work daily with things that are world class, and the less you do the better off you are. I am also guilty of taking all of the character out of treasures by restoring them. It is all in what the person that is signing my check wants. As said before, you can always restore, but it is far more difficult and far more expensive to unrestore.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        no restore

                        Hello jfred,
                        I have to throw in my vote because I feel strongly about it.
                        NO, don't restore.
                        These guys are right. Besides, it will mean more as your "Dad's bike."
                        Bob

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: to restore or not restore

                          Originally posted by jfred
                          I just came into a "48 Indian Chief that, as far as I can tell, is all original. It was my dad's, has about 900 miles on it and is all there. My question is "Do I restore it?". I'm not thinking of whether the value will increase or whether it will sell easier, because its staying with me. Is there a reason other than personal taste to restore the bike? Restoration on this would be pretty much just paint and chrome (and maybe a little engine work, it hasn't been started for about 5 years). The paint is rough, but can still get a good surface on it. I do plan on getting it on the road and, hopefully, to Wauseon next year. All thoughts are welcome.
                          I would agree with those who say if it has original and "good enough" paint plus it was your dad's bike with his fingerprints all over it to leave it ORIGINAL!

                          ===================
                          Original Harley-Davidson!
                          At the Creation

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X