Original or Restored

I restore and paint my own steamers. As I see it, They will be with me until I am gone so who cares?

Rob

quote:

Not counting reproductions, if you walked up to a table at a train show and there was an original scrachted and dinged, but working 400E for X price and a beautifully restored 400E for the same price, which would you buy?

 

If the scratched and dinged one was offered at a price I wanted to pay, I'd buy it over a restoration. I would not buy a restoration. Period.

These days, I guess its all a matter of personal perference.

I buy reproductions, originals, and restored originals.

 

It depends on the item.  Sometimes a nice repaint is a very good thing.  When I had the garden railroad, about 20 years ago, I used to purchase repaints and overhaul them mechanically.  This worked out well for running outdoors, but now I do it anyway.

 

If I had the talent to paint properly, I would probably do that, too!

 

It is, as C.W. Burfle stated, a matter of taste.

 

I also agree with oldrob:  "As I see it, They will be with me until I am gone so who cares?"

 

Very wise!

I assume you are talking about value. To have a restored piece be worth more than an original, the original would have to be restoration or junk grade, pretty much. A restored train, no matter how well done, is generally not worth any more than an original in C-6 condition. I've restored before, and the going rate for a restoration that looks like a new Cadillac is about what a C-6 car goes for.

 

It has to do with the condition and rarity of the piece you are comparing to a restored piece. As a general rule of thumb, I would take an original piece in C-6 condition, which to me is presentable, runner grade, over a restored piece. This is what I consider to be a lower C-6 or C-5 hopper car:

 

 

I would take this over a restored one in perfect condition, and I would not think about stripping this for restoration. It's too decent.

 

The second part of this equation is the rarity of the piece. If a piece is significantly rare, then condition can be compromised and the piece still have significant value. A restored piece in a rare variation is pretty much worth the same as any other restored piece. For example, just because an original two tone green City of Denver is ultra rare, and a C-5 example is worth thousands, that doesn't mean that a restored City of Denver, in two tone green is worth much more than $600 on a good day.

 

So, I guess the answer is, if it's useable, C-6, go with the original over a nice restoration, if maintaining value is your aim. At least that's my opinion, for what it's worth.

I always prefer a decent original, but will buy a restored item if it is done very well and decent originals are hard to find (there are things that I have looked for for more than 8 years to find one for sale in any condition).

 

I used to restore badly roached items when I had more time and no money, and you could still get decent automotive enamel  (I always liked Dupont Centari with a bit of flattening agent to knock the plastic look down) so I am fairly picky about restorations.

 

I will buy a reproduction if originals are extremely scarce, (Bassett Lowke A4s and Coronation Scots spring to mind with 200 or so ever made) or if I want something to run regularly (I have a Bing City of Bath, but it is clockwork and springs do have a finite life, so I bought an Ace Bulldog to run)

 

But the bottom line is that a reasonable original is always my first choice.

 

I agree with jsrfo, the Lionel 816 would be preferable to me over a restoration or reproduction. Also something in a rare color variation (such as an original green City of Denver) should not be restored unless 99% of the paint is gone, and once restored is worth no more than any common C of D in any color, because the original color that made it rare is gone.

 

Roland

I think there should be some value inherent to restoration - there's a lot time invested there to do it well. However, the market is such that it doesn't really work out that way. (I'm talking here only about relatively common items, not the real collector pieces which are obviously far more valuable as originals regardless of condition.) With many of these trains pushing 100 years old, there are far, far more pieces out there that been restored over the years than there are original ones, and only a limited number of buyers for them. From what I've seen, you'll pay about the same for a good restoration as you will for a lower-end original (typical eBay quality - mechanically iffy, and aesthetically not very presentable). Either way, there's not much of a market for them - serious collectors already have their rare, fine condition originals and people just looking for runners have a glut of restorations and reproductions to choose from.

 

So, is it wrong to restore the piece? I don't think so, as long as you don't do it expecting to gain any value. There are way more beat-up 10's, 385's, and 390's out there than there are loving homes for.

It is unfortunate that restorations have no real value beyond a middle condition original, but it is just a fact. Prior to the TCA grading guideline changes the TCA felt that a restored item could be graded no higher than C-7. The TCA has since adopted grading standards for restorations (I think that's a mistake, but another story all together).

 

I have restored several pieces over time, and it is quite an extensive process to do it as correctly as one can. You're lucky to break even, and if you charge yourself $5.00/hr for time, you're in the hole. The cost of the base train, the paint, replacement parts, and a lot of time and patience don't equate to dollars and cents, only a sense of pride and accomplishment.

 

As an example, I did both an 817 caboose and an 814 box car in one day. They look great, but I doubt I could get $50 apiece for them. I'll keep them instead. In other words, do it for yourself, but not for profit. There are folks that charge for restorations, but they either work every fast and efficiently, or discount the time it takes to do them.

 

I started doing restorations because I never thought I'd be able to find or afford originals, but in the end, I realized that although they look nicer than originals in a lot of respects, even though I do not generally collect C-6 items, I'd rather have a C-6 original than a restoration.

 

Here is a link to the TCA grading standards. It may provide some useful information.

 

http://www.tcamembers.org/standards/condition.htm

I must admit to all three, Mint, Restored and original played with (C-5).

The cost of the base train, the paint, replacement parts, and a lot of time and patience don't equate to dollars and cents, only a sense of pride and accomplishment.

 

I suspect there are a lot of amateur restorers out there that simply enjoy the process as a hobby. They buy up, restore, and resell those C-5 or less pieces, and this further increases the supply of restorations and thus depresses the prices. Personally, I don't see this as a problem - again, there are more C-4, even C-5, examples of common pieces than there are people that would actually run a piece in that condition instead of a restoration or reproduction. That means that people that want an original (albeit restored) piece instead of a repro can get one for approximately the same price.

 

I realized that although they look nicer than originals in a lot of respects, even though I do not generally collect C-6 items, I'd rather have a C-6 original than a restoration.

 

From what I've seen watching eBay (I don't know how train show prices differ), even a C-6 original fetches a slightly higher price than a good restoration. A C-7 probably gets almost double the restoration's price. That seems about right to me - I think C-6 is, to most eyeballs, about as low as you would go for something you would actually run on a layout unless it's a really rare and special piece.

 

Personally, I'm not much interested in collecting for it's own sake. I love the classic (some would say trite) Lionel steamers, and I want trains primarily to be played with and enjoyed. At some point, I'd like to pick up a single C-6 or C-7 original engine and set of cars, just for the sake of having one original example. I'm not sure just what it is that I want yet - I figure I'll know it when I see it. But beyond that, I think I'm happy to deal with restorations and reproductions and leave the $$$ stuff to the collectors.

I prefer my trains original or reproduction. They are only new once. Restoration seems to deny the "life" the toy had before it came to you. On top of that, too many people price restored items as if they were solid gold- if you bought it for $10, then restored it perfectly, I will give you $12, not $120

I prefer my trains original or reproduction. They are only new once. Restoration seems to deny the "life" the toy had before it came to you.

I used to share that opinion. But the nice thing about a restored train as a runner is that you can pretty well bank on parts and service being available forever. I'm confident that I'll be able to find some random replacement prewar Lionel part 15 years from now. Collectors will always want to fix up originals that are short a part or two. Will I be able to replace a flaky PS2 board or modern MTH motor at that point? Maybe, but I wouldn't count on it.

 

That's not to say that I'm against repros entirely. But for common items you can probably find a nicely restored original for about the same price as a traditional repro, with a greater degree of long-term confidence. I'd prefer to leave traditional repros for items where originals of any condition are scarce, and contemporary PS2/3 repros for items where, for whatever reason, I really think the modern features add to the experience.

"Whatever floats your boat." 

 

There is NO "right" or "wrong", just whatever YOU enjoy, and that may include BOTH!

As others commented above, I think the value of a restored piece is based upon rarity and quality of restoration. And in most all antique catagories original paint (even in bad condition) trumps restoration.

That said, I have several comments...

I've noticed in the European train collecting market it is more common for pieces to be restored and hold value. Some very famous collections have a lot of pieces that have been "worked on".

The original post didn't mention operating condition in restoration. That is an issue to me. A restored train that looks new should be in perfect as new operating condition also.

I have also heard comments like Lionelbob's and must politely disagree.
"Once you restore it, it is no longer a historical item, but just another repainted  toy."
I don't agree with that. A proper restoration should show the piece as new, like it just came out of the box. It is still the same mechanical object it was before restoration. What about all the aircraft and spacecraft on display at the Smithsonian? They have been through extensive restorations to bring them back to near original operating condition...Did the Spirit of St. Louis lose its historical presence because it was repainted? Did the original Wright Flyer lose its place in history because it has new fabric on it?

The standards for vehicle restoration, including cars, air planes, and boats is very different than the standards for other objects.

Funny thing...a restored 400E Blue Comet may have really been a BLACK 400E, but an ORIGINAL Blue Comet 400E IS a Blue Comet 400 E...think about this!!! A restored BLACK 318 may really have been a PEA GREEN 318...and so on!!!  So much for RESTORATIONS...eh???  The Spirit of St. Louis???  I doubt if anyone is going to buy one at the next York Meet!!!

Ron,

 

you are absolutely right. Things like airplanes, cars etc have serial numbers and therefore retain their inherent historical value when restored. But a restored toy is worth whatever the most common version would be worth restored. for instance a Ives set restored as a "White Ives" set should not be worth more than one restored in the common orange colors even if it was a white set to begin with (although some people will pay a little more for a rare color scheme as the are unable to find an original). To this end I have seen partial restorations where the external surfaces are restored but the interiors are left original in the hope of increasing the value of the restored item. It does not usually make a big difference.

 

Roland

In this regard, I'd say that rarity has very little to do with the restoration of Lionel preawar, beyond conserving the piece. Again, a restored piece, no matter how rare, is a restored piece, and a portion of rarity is gone. It's a difficult concept to wrap your head around.

 

The type of restoration has a lot to do with things. Most of the Lionel restorations mirror the restoration of antique cars. We take them completely apart, down to piece parts and then restore or over restore them.This completely erases the piece's past life, and provides a new beginning for it.

 

Restoration specialty houses like Tn Toy Works specialize in restorations and repairs that conserve the look of items. They can repaint an item, and craze the paint to look like a 100 year old Marklin building, etc.

 

The issue of historical value or significance lies more in the item itself, rather than it's condition. If it is an ultra rare piece, it will always have significant value, even restored. But with most train items, rarity often comes from a variety of reasons, such as trim and paint color. During restoration, these can easily be duplicated or faked, so there's no real collector or historical significance there. It's also why documentation is equally important for these pieces. My favorite example is the two tone green City of Denver, the original green paint makes it rare, not the train itself. The cars were used in Flying Yankee's, Silver Streaks, Blue Streaks, etc. Repaint, and it's a common restoration.

 

When speaking of items like the Spirit of St. Louis, you are really speaking of a one of a kind item, which is why restoration doesn't affect value. There is only one Spirit of St. Louis airplane.

 

This is a difficult topic of discussion, and there are no right answers.

Exactly the point I was trying to make. Well said.

 

Roland

Me, I actually do understand the concept that a restored piece is a restored piece.

Again..."I think the value of a restored piece is based upon rarity and quality of restoration." That is a comment about financial value not historical significance nor the modified level of rarity if a piece is restored.

Maybe the Spirit of St. Louis is an extreme example but my point is that restoring/repainting an object does not destroy all of its inherit properties.

Value, either financial or historical, can be subjective. And I think a lot of times in the toy train world it gets blown way out of proportion.

Returning to the original post; "...what is wrong with taking a "fixer upper" and returning it to its former glory?" I would say nothing, as long as you are aware of the consequences, mainly how it effects the value and how rare/desirable the toy would be untouched.

i only own one restored (or perhaps more correctly, repainted) piece; a Lionel 390 re-finished in green livery.  at the same time i picked this up, MTH had just released a repro, but the restored loco was actually cheaper & very nicely done (an older refinish with a slight patina).  neither choice was original but then i doubt whether i would ever see or be able to afford one close to C7 condition.  to me the restoration seemed like the better deal.

 

being a fan of tin litho, my biggest beef with restorations is when a general C5-6 condition piece has the solid color frame and roof repainted to look C8-C9.  pieces like that just look wrong, period.

 

cheers...gary

i only own one restored (or perhaps more correctly, repainted) piece; a Lionel 390 re-finished in green livery.

That train was my first thought after reading the repaint comments. It's a beautiful color scheme by itself and looks smashing with many of the 500-series cars. I'd love to have one as a runner, but I can't imagine paying $1200+ for a nice-looking original and then playing with it. Considering that the repros are even tough to find, I'd happily pay $500 for a well-done repaint, knowing full well it's a "fake" green 390.

Great thread

 

Over the holidays, my father in law gave me a pile of trains that included a 3 rail American Flyer Green Diamond in rough shape.  I was intent on getting it completely restored. I wasn't and don't plan to sell it and I admit, I do like the shiny stuff. Since I am a youngster (41) collector, I took it to York TCA meet for estimates and advice. It was a great time chatting over this set with lots of folks and is very consistent with this thread.

 

I decided to have it professionally cleaned and a couple of new parts with a hope of getting running. I don't plan to sell it and it won't get much run time but wanted to keep it as original as possible as a family heirloom. I can change my mind later and have it restored but if I were to restore it now, no going back after that. 

quote:

Jimmy was a master,  probably the best there ever was. He made things. Take the IVES Chief set for example. We know of maybe ten original sets in existence. It was made only in 1930 and used Lionel 418 series car bodies. Demand for this set was always strong. Jimmy made tooling to produce the parts unique to the set, trucks, and air tanks, as well as the snake track pull couplers. He made the decals as well. He then rounded up ratty Lionel mojave and apple 418 cars, took them apart, and made them into Chief cars. After the cars were done, they were aged. Jim's cars today are very, very hard to distinguish from an original, even with experience. He was soooo good, sometimes he couldnt even tell you if he did it. If you wanted a Chief, Jim was your man. 

 

  Today sets of Jimmy's cars bring well over a thousand. They are works of art in their own right. So with rare items unavailable to most, even if you have the money, a proper restoration has it's place. 

 

  I also bet there are alot of trains out there that Jimmy made that have been passed around as original. (They even beat a black light test!) Spooky

 

IMHO, you are not describing a restoration or a reproduction. Sounds like an outright fake.

Lots of good comments guys thanks, but I do want to make a few things clear.

 

First, I have no use for "fakes" or fakers. I put fakes down the revisionist history and they do all harm and no good.

 

Second, this thread was about your personal stuff, not really buying something to restore and then try to resell it, that's business not collecting. Any time you buy something to resell it you take the chance you are going to lose money.

 

I tend to agree with Nighthawk. I am 40, and I think a lot of "newtimers" would buy reprotuctions from MTH rather than beat up originals. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I would rather buy original beat up Lionels and restore them and call it good. To me I have the best of both worlds, I have an orignal pieace, and it looks and runs like new(even better than new).

 

I understand the mindset that says "all original or nothing" but that was the purpose of this thread, is that pendulum swinging the other way?

 

P.S. I grew up restoring World War 2 aircraft so I know a thing or two about "originals' vs "restored", but this train thing is a totally different market

quote:

I understand the mindset that says "all original or nothing" but that was the purpose of this thread, is that pendulum swinging the other way?

 

I enjoy the OGRR board, and don't mean the following comment to be disparaging, but IMHO, it is hardly representative of the Train Collecting community. None of the collectors I know participate on this or any other board.

Prices certainly have softened on most "collector" trains that are in anything less than full excellent condition or better.  Whether that means restorations have higher or lower street value than an original piece in good condition  is not clear to me.

 

As I wrote in my first post on the subject, I think it's all a matter of personal preference.

A trap we fall into is "seeing" OGR Forum as a bigger barrel of fish than it is in reality.  Another trap is trying to wrap your brain around thinking ALL TRAIN COLLECTORS belong to the TCA or LCCA.  It just isn't so!!!  There are tens of thousands of collectors/operators that GO IT ALONE for various reasons.

I'm pretty sure that Cohen identified the pieces he worked on as either his creation or his restoration. I don't think he was out to fool anyone or make a fake item. He provided a service that people wanted, and he was good at it.

 

It still doesn't mean that a Cohen repaint of a green 390E is as valuable as a real one in C-7 condition. It will probably be worth a good bit more than one of equal quality that was done by you, me, or anyone else, if only because he did them so well, and he and his work have gained iconic status.

 

The original question was whether or not originals held more value than restorations, and which would you prefer, a lower grade original, or restored piece. The answers parallel the question of whether or not you'd buy a repro versus an original. It's personal for any number of reasons.

 

Personally, originals are the way to go whether they are C-5 or C-8. To preserve value, buy C-7 or C-8 originals, and there will always be a market for them when you need or want to sell.

 

When it comes to restorations, just remember that with classic Lionel, value is in originality, as there are really no "rare" pieces. There are countless numbers of cars, tenders, and engines that can be repainted into anything anyone wants. What sets them apart is condition, completeness, and any rarity derived from being a "special", like a green 390E or Macy set. But all that can be duplicated when restored, and that doesn't make the restoration special.

 

When thinking of repro's, remember, anyone with an open wallet can buy one. 408E's, 400E's, etc, have been around forever in the reproduction market.

 

Some modern items are different, like the uniqueness of the Brute, and Lionel's SG Hiawatha and Commodore. They have already rebounded on the value scale, and I would consider them to be somewhat collectible today.

quote:

I'm pretty sure that Cohen identified the pieces he worked on as either his creation or his restoration. I don't think he was out to fool anyone or make a fake item. He provided a service that people wanted, and he was good at it.

 

I expect so. I have only heard good things about Cohen.

However, the post I quoted stated:

 

quote:

He was soooo good, sometimes he couldnt even tell you if he did it.

 

That certainly makes it sound like his items were not identified. Perhaps the comment was just a bit of hyperbole.

 

I would buy the beat up, rusty one. I've reciently put together a "rough room" for standard gauge. All originals in bad shape. My friends that know nothing about trains ooh and aah over those old "antique" trains, as if they were worth 1,000 times more than those shinny ones (originals, repros & repaints) in the main room. It's quite interesting actually. I've taken apart a few MTH items including a 400E & stripped off all the laquer off the brass & copper trim. Then soaked them in salt water with some rust. And actually buried the frame and other painted parts for a month. Then layed it all on the roof for another month to fade the paint. Put back together, spray WD40 all over it and have what looks like an old train for way less than an original. I'm getting ready to do a blue & copper 400E. I need the cars before I do the job. Does anybody have some used or damaged Blue Comet cars that I can buy for a decent price?

I don't buy restorations for my own collection.  I was tempted to buy a restored Hiawatha passenger set since the engines are very difficult to find in nice condition because they were top heavy and often fell off the track.  Then one day I did find one in E- condition and snapped it up.

As a matter of taste and pragmatism, original ( unless I can examine exactly what was restored and how, quality etc). As far as value, its all in the eye of the beholder either on a cash basis or on a aesthetic basis. I don't market analyze. I buy what appeals to me.

Restorations are a last resort for me.  I have some restored trains, generally Ives pieces that had practically no paint left, but I tend to avoid restored pieces.  Personally, I want the scratches and dings and patina that only time brings.  It proves the piece was played with and loved by some kid seventy or eighty years ago and that, to me, is half the fun of having these things.  Once a train is restored, a lot of that appeal is lost. 

 

I have only restored a couple of locos myself, and in those cases I've tried to leave as much as possible original.  If I were at a show and saw two 400E's, I would definitely pay a premium for a scratched up original over a restored and shiny original.  And say what you like, in any field of collectibles, whether it's Tiffany lamps or Coke machines or muscle cars, an unrestored original is consistently much more valuable than a piece that's been restored. 

I agree that a lot of what makes an original valuable to me are the scratches. It's funny, but as you "mature" as a collector, sometimes that C-8 piece, while very nice, leaves you cold, because you know that no one really had a chance to enjoy it, other than look at it, over the years.

 

And, you are right. An unrestored, original is consistently worth more than a restoration. Some items, like muscle cars are tough to find in an unrestored, but presentable state, so a lot of them are restored, and the majority of "barn finds" are in need of restoration. I see muscle cars in a slightly different light than trains, but yes, they are also worth more than restored ones. Same with vintage Fender and Gibson guitars, etc.