When is it "okay" to repaint a PreWar or PostWar tinplate car?

The real problem I guess is determining whether or not the car you are holding is an important collectible, whether by rarity or condition,  in which case you should preserve it for future generations.  For these types of cars, you never really own them, you are a "caretaker", keeping them preserved for the future.   

Having read all of the advice on this thread, I think that perhaps the best general rule is that if a car is a very common car, thousands made, and it is only in condition "good" (which, in the collecting world means pretty darned bad, a grade of "D" in high school), then it is proper to repaint it.  It may even be that by doing this, you are increasing its value and preserving it.

Just my thoughts.

Mannyrock

It's yours, have fun.

Three sets from junkers, put a 259 with each and gave one to each of our children.

@Mannyrock posted:

The real problem I guess is determining whether or not the car you are holding is an important collectible, whether by rarity or condition,  in which case you should preserve it for future generations.  For these types of cars, you never really own them, you are a "caretaker", keeping them preserved for the future. 

Just my thoughts.

Mannyrock

But this brings up the question of who decides we have to do this?

@EscapeRocks posted:

But this brings up the question of who decides we have to do this?

I get the impression you shouldn’t be trusted with items of historical significance.

The perfect example is artwork. Collectors who own artwork are really just caretakers of it until they decide to sell it. If a collector owns an important painting but is unable to take care of it, the condition will degrade and it will eventually be lost to time. For the sake of preservation, that collector should either sell or donate the work to a person or museum that can care for it.

In the case of model trains that are of significant rarity or historical importance, if we as a collective community of model train enthusiasts want these items to live beyond our individual existence for future generations to enjoy, then special care is needed which includes not destroying the original history.

Items where 100s or 1000s exist, I’m not concerned about being restored if the owner chooses to do so (especially if they are in poor condition). It’s the items where only a few dozen or less are known to exist that we need to be cognizant of how we care for these items.

@John H. Shetler posted:

It's yours, have fun.

Three sets from junkers, put a 259 with each and gave one to each of our children.

Very nice John!  And I love that gave one set to each of the grandkids!

Reminds me of an interesting discussion in college 50 years ago.

Under English law, if you own something, then you have the absolute right to destroy it, no matter what it is.

So, a rich person could buy the Mona Lisa, or one of the original copies of the Magna Carta, walk outside in his yard, and burn it.

Should this be the case?

Just some food for thought.

Mannyrock

ABOLUTELY!!

Reminds me that back in the `70's i used to dabble in pre-1955 MG parts. A person came to me looking for an original and very unique fog lamp for her 1938 MG sedan. I found what was possibly the only new one in the country and bought it for about $5 from the manufacturer's distributor.  It's fair market value was probably $12 - $15; with less than reputable sellers in the UK asking about $100. At an enthusiast's gathering i told the person she could have it for $10. She complained loudly in front what had become a small group of 15 - 20 people that i gouged club members, called me a thief, and other names, and her contact in Philadelphia only wanted $7 for it (BUT couldn't get one!). After several minutes of her verbal abuse i let the lamp fall to the ground and shatter. She exclaimed accusingly that i broke her lamp to which i replied that i broke my lap as she was too cheap to pay me $10. Did i have some sort of responsibility to help preserve (restore to original in this case) a very rare and unusual classic car? I think not.

Why not post some pics of these cars that are shrouded in mystery? Members here can let you know if there is any historical significance to them or not.

@modeltrainsparts posted:

ABOLUTELY!!

Reminds me that back in the `70's i used to dabble in pre-1955 MG parts. A person came to me looking for an original and very unique fog lamp for her 1938 MG sedan. I found what was possibly the only new one in the country and bought it for about $5 from the manufacturer's distributor.  It's fair market value was probably $12 - $15; with less than reputable sellers in the UK asking about $100. At an enthusiast's gathering i told the person she could have it for $10. She complained loudly in front what had become a small group of 15 - 20 people that i gouged club members, called me a thief, and other names, and her contact in Philadelphia only wanted $7 for it (BUT couldn't get one!). After several minutes of her verbal abuse i let the lamp fall to the ground and shatter. She exclaimed accusingly that i broke her lamp to which i replied that i broke my lap as she was too cheap to pay me $10. Did i have some sort of responsibility to help preserve (restore to original in this case) a very rare and unusual classic car? I think not.

Hmmm, throwing money away to prove a point? Interesting, throw some my way

Love that MG fog lamp story! She deserved that after her abusive tirade! Poetic justice, and well worth the $5!

I guess I'm not convinced that the analogy between 'fine art' and old trains is a very good one - except in the case where you might have something close to a one-off.  Which, of course, raises the point of how does one know whether that is the case.  Its certainly clear that almost all of the trains most of us own - while having sentimental value - aren't worth very much as collectables.  As someone else suggested, it might be worthwhile to post pictures and see if you have that one-in-a-million rusty toy train that you'd 'damage' by trying to fix it up.

I think a better analogy is old cars (say a '67 Mustang  or '57 Chevy Impala two door coupe - or better, a '53 Corvette).  So you find one of those in someone's old barn - do you restore it or keep it around as a rusty, non-functioning hulk for the sake of posterity... (self-answering question, it seems to me).  I'm reminded of watching Antiques Roadshow when the old furniture would come on and the first concern of the appraiser was whether the furniture had been 'restored' (oh, the angst and pearl clutching - and condescension in the tone of the appraiser when it appeared that was the case).  As a woodworker, much of the beauty of a piece is the wood itself - along with, of course, the style and craftsmanship.  If that wood beauty is buried beneath a dark, oxidized finish (that the original woodworker would have long ago stripped and restored), then - for me - its a pretty easy call.  Of course, that doesn't mean firing up the belt sander with a 60 grit belt as the first step...!

@Ryan Selvius posted:

I get the impression you shouldn’t be trusted with items of historical significance.

Wrong impression, as far as comparing to art.     The very old trains I own were purchased as toys, not as artwork.   They are still used as 'toys' in that they see regular use on my layout alongside new trains. The only historical significance they have is to me.

The classic and old significant artwork I and my family own thru a couple generations was created as art, not as playthings.  Of course those get protected and cared for.  I'm not going to mess with paintings by Picasso or Chagall, or an original Fredric Remington bronze;  add some original pottery by Maria of San Il Defonso or maybe the one-off Rooster that DeGrazia erred when sculpting, etc..etc.. etc...

The only reason I bring up the above art collections is to show that I am well aware of what being a caretaker of items of historical significance means. 

If I were to decide to become a model/toy train collector, I would purchase items as such, and protect those as well.

@modeltrainsparts, that sounds like an extremely satisfying way to spend a few dollars!

@EscapeRocks posted:

Wrong impression, as far as comparing to art.     The very old trains I own were purchased as toys, not as artwork.   They are still used as 'toys' in that they see regular use on my layout alongside new trains. The only historical significance they have is to me.

The classic and old significant artwork I and my family own thru a couple generations was created as art, not as playthings.  Of course those get protected and cared for.  I'm not going to mess with paintings by Picasso or Chagall, or an original Fredric Remington bronze;  add some original pottery by Maria of San Il Defonso or maybe the one-off Rooster that DeGrazia erred when sculpting, etc..etc.. etc...

The only reason I bring up the above art collections is to show that I am well aware of what being a caretaker of items of historical significance means.

If I were to decide to become a model/toy train collector, I would purchase items as such, and protect those as well.

Fair point about using artwork as a comparison since most art is one of a kind. But it doesn’t need to be one of a kind to treat it with the respect to preserve it.

Yes model trains were made as play things but over time, they have become much more than that. Toys produced in the 1920s, 30s, and 40s are practically pieces of industrial art. The beautiful lithography, painting, and metal work make them items that are admired for more than the purpose they were created for. Many colloctors get imense enjoyment from just looking at these trains on display. Is that not the same enjoyment that a collector of art experiences?

When I speak of preserving noteworthy model trains for those who come after us, I speak of items of significance, not your grandfathers 1666 with lithographed freight cars. I’m talking about obscure paint colors, prototypes, factory production anomolies, high end models that were produced in low numbers, models that have not always held up well over time and few stable examples remain, or original items that happen to be in remarkably rare condition. I think many collectors and hobby enthusiasts would appreciate these items to survive and continue on to another collection at some point. Destroying the item by not taking care of it or doing with it as you please because you own it is a very selfish idea.

There is a noteworthy collector in the Los Angeles area who was a staple at the TTOS Cal Stewart meets. He has collected the nicest standard gauge trains of any collector. I shall keep his identity private but those who attended Cal Stewart regularly will know him. Multiple times he has brought sets out of his collection to display and even operate at the annual show. He has some of the most elaborate sets that Lionel ever offered in like new condition with all of the original boxes. Sets that many collectors probably debated if any still exist and are considered one of a kind today because no others have been found. This gentleman has gone to great lengths to protect his collection from deterioration and he has been nice enough to share some of it with the outside world. His collection isn’t much different than an art collection and I imagine he has a plan for what will happen to these items when he decides he will no longer be their caretaker.

I'm not sure I understand the question.

When late night show host Tom Snyder died in ~2007, his wide-gauge (standard gauge?) layout - on custom cabinetry - was on display at the Golden Gate Model RR building in the SF Bay area (Richmond).  It was certainly a beautiful collection of cars and engines - and a lot of fun to watch.  I have no idea whether any of it was considered rare or "collectable" - since that gauge isn't my 'thing'.  For all I know, it could have had restored items in it - if so, the restorations were well done.  All in all, a very pretty collection that ran like a top.  I believe the collection now rests with the NJ HiRailers, who apparently had the room and interest in taking it on.  A long way of saying that these types of collections - when shared/displayed for others to see - are great.

EscapeRocks -- Maria pottery, eh!  Nice going - just extraordinary artistry (something I'm not sure her kids were able to duplicate in terms of the finish/patina).  Waaaay back when, my wife and I had a 'chance' at buy some of her work - we spent a summer at Los Alamos on my way to grad school and San Il Defonso was just down the street.  What we wanted to buy cost the equivalent of a month's rent, or more, and as poor starving students, we couldn't figure out how to make that work.  Now, of course, we look back on it and kick ourselves for not trying harder...

@modeltrainsparts posted:

ABOLUTELY!!

Reminds me that back in the `70's i used to dabble in pre-1955 MG parts. A person came to me looking for an original and very unique fog lamp for her 1938 MG sedan. I found what was possibly the only new one in the country and bought it for about $5 from the manufacturer's distributor.  It's fair market value was probably $12 - $15; with less than reputable sellers in the UK asking about $100. At an enthusiast's gathering i told the person she could have it for $10. She complained loudly in front what had become a small group of 15 - 20 people that i gouged club members, called me a thief, and other names, and her contact in Philadelphia only wanted $7 for it (BUT couldn't get one!). After several minutes of her verbal abuse i let the lamp fall to the ground and shatter. She exclaimed accusingly that i broke her lamp to which i replied that i broke my lap as she was too cheap to pay me $10. Did i have some sort of responsibility to help preserve (restore to original in this case) a very rare and unusual classic car? I think not.

Jack, we are now friends exchanging emails, but I think I need to respond to this here. Leaving aside your smashing of the lamp, surely you don't mean to say that buying the Mona Lisa to destroy it is ok? It might be legal in England, but there are other considerations like ethics and the public good.  If we want to be considered a civilized society, then each individual must act with consideration to the whole. The Mona Lisa is not important because it is valuable, it is priceless because it is so important. Thankfully it resides in a museum.

@Ryan Selvius posted:

I get the impression you shouldn’t be trusted with items of historical significance.

The perfect example is artwork. Collectors who own artwork are really just caretakers of it until they decide to sell it. If a collector owns an important painting but is unable to take care of it, the condition will degrade and it will eventually be lost to time. For the sake of preservation, that collector should either sell or donate the work to a person or museum that can care for it.

In the case of model trains that are of significant rarity or historical importance, if we as a collective community of model train enthusiasts want these items to live beyond our individual existence for future generations to enjoy, then special care is needed which includes not destroying the original history.

Items where 100s or 1000s exist, I’m not concerned about being restored if the owner chooses to do so (especially if they are in poor condition). It’s the items where only a few dozen or less are known to exist that we need to be cognizant of how we care for these items.

Well said. Thankfully, those who can afford or recognize truly rare items are not going to buy them to repaint, restore or otherwise modify. Occasionally, a rare item may come into the possession of someone who doesn't know what he has, either through inheritance or happenstance. That person would do well to do a little research or use the services of an appraiser. After all, if it has no historical significance to him, he might as well sell it to someone who appreciates it and use the money to buy several cars which would equally please him.

But if you find an o gauge tinplate car for less than $100 or a set or engine for less than a few hundred on Ebay or at a train show,  you can be pretty sure it's common and restoring it to it's further glory is fine,

@Will posted:

But if you find an o gauge tinplate car for less than $100 or a set or engine for less than a few hundred on Ebay or at a train show,  you can be pretty sure it's common and restoring it to it's further glory is fine,

Heh Heh ... not always !

Case in point I had a Danish seller advertise a "BillerBahn" train set on ebay a year or two ago ... now when I saw it I knew immediately it was not BillerBahn at all ... but I watched it anyway because it piqued my curiousity .. and the auction came and went without a bid .. it was originally listed @ 89 Euro start bid .. but when he relisted @ 39 I thought thats cheep enough not to worry if it is some weird repro of something ( which it kind of looked like)  ... It was mine for no further bids ... on arrival here I saw it did indeed have a BB trademark on it ... but research and help here turned it out to be a Bing British set made in 1934 by Stephen Bing IN THE UK when he fled from Nazi persecution of Jewish businessmen and he and Henry Katz took up residence with Bassett-Lowke, he saw the writing on the wall early .. with the only known example before this to be the set photographed for Michael Fosters reference book !

So this is set #2 ... until someone makes me aware of another one ( there is another fellow with some LNER green carriages out there but no loco ) ...

So not always a cheep ebay is a cheap ebay LOL

Now imagine if this was a bit rusty and ragged ... and on a whim I decided to "restore " it with a new coat of glassy paint ... That litho'd BB trademark would be lost to the world forever!

Sometimes the rarest things are not always the most impressive or complicated

But for 99.99% of what you find on ebay your statement stands firm Will !

FM: Well stated, as usual, and with a proper example! We can always count on our man from "down under" to come through with some wisdom! :-)

Fatman, that is a fantastic story and a wonderful find! I have a similar one of my own. About 1-1/2 years ago at a local club meet, I was perusing a seller’s table when I spotted a Lionel 347 cannon range and it was marked with a $5 price tag. It had the usual wear but nothing broken and had 3 original shells. I just about fell over because I always wanted one but have never been willing to pay the price they go for. I asked the seller about it and if the price was correct. He had no idea what it was and had aquired it in a box of trains at a swap meet. I proceeded to tell him it was a very scarce Lionel military accessory. I told him a rough value of the item and offered him a price considerably over his $5 asking price but also quite a lot below book value, basically the most I was willing to pay for one. He was totally happy with the deal and so was I. It is now a premier piece in my space and military collection.
Moral of the story is this item could have gone to anyone at that $5 asking price and quite possibly could have ended up destroyed. While 347’s are not an obscenely rare item, they are very seldom scene on the resale market. I’ll enjoy it for a long while and some day it will go to another collector.

Weird things show up in unsuspecting places and many times people have no idea what they are holding. The New and Unusual Items Seen at York section in the TCQ is always interesting. It is remarkable how many unknown variations and manufacturers continue to appear every year.

The English law bit about having a personal right to destroy anything regardless of its cultural and societal importance is on its face most boorish and uncivilized. I, for one, am glad the Cotton Vitellius A XV manuscript of the Beowulf epic poem is safely escounced in the British Museum!

For some reason i think this conversation has strayed a bit from the subject. It is like we are trying to compare diamonds (which have universal value) to pieces of granite (some of which may hold value to select geologists).

Great stories @Fatman and @Ryan Selvius. Ryan, you were very generous to offer more for that piece. You won't see that at a train show very often.

I have my father's and some of my grandfather's old trains and accessories. I have returned the Lionels of my Dad to working condition, replaced any missing parts and am slowly and selectively touching up paint. It gives me and my family great joy to run these and I am looking forward to introducing my young granddaughter to them. There are old Barclay figures and Tinkertoy cars for her to play with and if they are old and the Tinkertoy Graham is worth $75, so what?  She will be able to run the trains from a restored, safely working prewar Z transformer. The sentimental value of these common items greatly out weighs their monetary worth.

I also have my grandfather's 115 year old Bing station, platform and semaphore ( alas no trains). Those will remain in the slightly tattered condition I found them. I do consider myself the temporary caretaker of all these items, and I hope my children will be the next caretakers.

Perhaps some photos of the cars that started all this would help?

@John H. Shetler posted:

Perhaps some photos of the cars that started all this would help?

John I don't know if he has specific cars in mind or was just asking for some guidance for possible purchases? He said he "often sees cars" and assuming he is new to the world of tinplate, it seemed like a good question. But you are right, photos would go a long way in specific cases.

The OP has previously stated that he prefers not to spend much on his train purchases. He has also stated that he collects premium vintage firearms and that is his true passion. In summation, he is definitely NOT buying any collectibles, thus restoring them is a moot point.

@Ryan Selvius posted:

Fair point about using artwork as a comparison since most art is one of a kind. But it doesn’t need to be one of a kind to treat it with the respect to preserve it.

Yes model trains were made as play things but over time, they have become much more than that. Toys produced in the 1920s, 30s, and 40s are practically pieces of industrial art. The beautiful lithography, painting, and metal work make them items that are admired for more than the purpose they were created for. Many colloctors get imense enjoyment from just looking at these trains on display. Is that not the same enjoyment that a collector of art experiences?

This is a fair point as well, and I think you and I are actually closer on this subject than it initially appeared.   When I say my old stuff was purchased as toys, They were purchased by my grandfather and father, and have been in continuous use since about 1946. 

As far as train collectors, yes, it is the same....for the collector.    I am not a collector of trains in as far as buying anything to display and enjoy.   I am a model/toy train operator.  Do I trash my trains? Of course not.  Do I take care of them? Of course I do.  

There is absolutely nothing wrong, at all, with being a passionate collector of model trains.  I enjoy seeing those preserved collections.

I am just as  passionate about operating all my trains.  I run them till the wheels fall off, so to speak, repair them, and run them some more.

Thank you for the discussion.

Interesting question. Whether you're the original owner of an item or not be it a train, gun, car or whatever at what point in time do you stop fixing or repairing it to keep it in good shape and functional and just let it become a shelf queen, which is a fancy way of saying old and broken ? Is there some point in time where it becomes an "heirloom" and no longer a functional piece even tho parts, be they NOS or stripped, are still available to keep it going? And at what point does "patina" simply become rust, dirt and corrosion especially if you want to keep something in a usable, attractive appearance? I have what I have for me, not future generations, not history and if I want it to be as nice functionally and appearance-wise I'm not concerned the Frank Fritz's of the future are going to be horrified that I painted or replaced parts so they can't take advantage of a seller and then go on to gouge a customer with it. No one has a problem with an old piece of farm equipment that has been fixed and repainted many times over its life by a farmer so he can keep using it but loose their minds if you strip and repaint a train you like because it doesn't look very nice and replace missing or broken parts on it. Granted, if you're going to fix something try and do a good job, just don't grab a can of Rustoleum and a chip brush and go to town but, if its yours and you want it to look better than it does I say go for it. I'd love a State set in mint condition but if I found one that was a little worse for wear I'd either restore it my self or have it done for me depending on the amount of damage it had because I like showroom new things not someone elses banged up old crap. And Will I get your point about being a caretaker for future generations but most of the people who had it before us sure didn't have that  philosophy but I applaud your view on the subject. In the past people took care of tools and toys because they weren't cheap not for future generations so I see no harm in keeping an item in good condition be it appearance or functionality just like in the olden days, that way it's still around and usable for the future owner.

Case in point:

My grandfathers 1666E was a total basket case, burned out motor, broken pilot, missing drawbar, a driver and other parts and he shelved it because fixing it wasn't going to be cheap for him but he kept it anyways in that hope. Fast forward to the mid 80s I found several donor 1666Es at a train show and I used their parts to get it up and running, I stripped it and gave it a coat of Charles Woods Gunmetal Grey paint and it is one of my prized pieces. I'm pretty sure if my grandfather had the materials available at the time he would have done the same. The same locomotive in good condition would cost less than what I put into my restoration and most people nowadays would just get another one and be done with it but to me besides the fact that most of it was still my grandfathers it looks nice too and there was that part of me that said "I know I can get this running again".

Jerry

As Lehigh 74 stated, I don't think I understand the question, (original piece).

@EscapeRocks posted:

This is a fair point as well, and I think you and I are actually closer on this subject than it initially appeared.   When I say my old stuff was purchased as toys, They were purchased by my grandfather and father, and have been in continuous use since about 1946.

As far as train collectors, yes, it is the same....for the collector.    I am not a collector of trains in as far as buying anything to display and enjoy.   I am a model/toy train operator.  Do I trash my trains? Of course not.  Do I take care of them? Of course I do. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong, at all, with being a passionate collector of model trains.  I enjoy seeing those preserved collections.

I am just as  passionate about operating all my trains.  I run them till the wheels fall off, so to speak, repair them, and run them some more.

Thank you for the discussion.

It’s refreshing to have a discussion with someone on the web that doesn’t turn into a battle. We each have a unique perspective to a topic and discussion with others helps broaden our gaze.

@Ryan Selvius posted:

It’s refreshing to have a discussion with someone on the web that doesn’t turn into a battle. We each have a unique perspective to a topic and discussion with others helps broaden our gaze.

Only on even dated Thursdays of months NOT having a blue moon!

For those concerned about future generations, take note that sooner or later, regardless of what precautions are taken, it will ALL inevitably become heirlooms of Waste Management.

Simon's 3rd corollary  of the ridiculous: As long as I am the one paying, I will do whatever I want, whenever I want, however I want, without consulting anyone........well, maybe Yoda.

Simon

@baltimoretrainworks posted:

Interesting question. Whether you're the original owner of an item or not be it a train, gun, car or whatever at what point in time do you stop fixing or repairing it to keep it in good shape and functional and just let it become a shelf queen, which is a fancy way of saying old and broken ? Is there some point in time where it becomes an "heirloom" and no longer a functional piece even tho parts, be they NOS or stripped, are still available to keep it going? And at what point does "patina" simply become rust, dirt and corrosion especially if you want to keep something in a usable, attractive appearance? I have what I have for me, not future generations, not history and if I want it to be as nice functionally and appearance-wise I'm not concerned the Frank Fritz's of the future are going to be horrified that I painted or replaced parts so they can't take advantage of a seller and then go on to gouge a customer with it. No one has a problem with an old piece of farm equipment that has been fixed and repainted many times over its life by a farmer so he can keep using it but loose their minds if you strip and repaint a train you like because it doesn't look very nice and replace missing or broken parts on it. Granted, if you're going to fix something try and do a good job, just don't grab a can of Rustoleum and a chip brush and go to town but, if its yours and you want it to look better than it does I say go for it. I'd love a State set in mint condition but if I found one that was a little worse for wear I'd either restore it my self or have it done for me depending on the amount of damage it had because I like showroom new things not someone elses banged up old crap. And Will I get your point about being a caretaker for future generations but most of the people who had it before us sure didn't have that  philosophy but I applaud your view on the subject. In the past people took care of tools and toys because they weren't cheap not for future generations so I see no harm in keeping an item in good condition be it appearance or functionality just like in the olden days, that way it's still around and usable for the future owner.

Case in point:

My grandfathers 1666E was a total basket case, burned out motor, broken pilot, missing drawbar, a driver and other parts and he shelved it because fixing it wasn't going to be cheap for him but he kept it anyways in that hope. Fast forward to the mid 80s I found several donor 1666Es at a train show and I used their parts to get it up and running, I stripped it and gave it a coat of Charles Woods Gunmetal Grey paint and it is one of my prized pieces. I'm pretty sure if my grandfather had the materials available at the time he would have done the same. The same locomotive in good condition would cost less than what I put into my restoration and most people nowadays would just get another one and be done with it but to me besides the fact that most of it was still my grandfathers it looks nice too and there was that part of me that said "I know I can get this running again".

Jerry

This is perhaps my favorite topic of this hobby / interest and for those of us who enjoy prewar and maybe postwar trains. I suggest if we were speaking of our father’s 1948 Packard Clipper Convertible or Mom’s 1954 Hudson, wouldn’t we consider a full body off restoration or at least a high quality paint job. How about if we scored a 1969 Z that was in your neighbor’s field behind the stables. Isn’t he the guy who restored his Granpop’s Farmall and drove it at the Memorial Day parade in town? C’mon, if my Papa broke the handle on his small axe, he would have replaced the handle. Isn’t it still his axe if you did the same?

@WRW posted:

C’mon, if my Papa broke the handle on his small axe, he would have replaced the handle. Isn’t it still his axe if you did the same?

Reminds me of that old joke, I have an axe Abe Lincoln used to split rails before he became a lawyer, the handle has been replaced 3 times and the head twice!

There actually is a philosophical argument called The Ship Of Theseus.

It is supposed that the famous ship sailed by the hero Theseus in a great battle was kept in a harbor as a museum piece, and as the years went by some of the wooden parts began to rot and were replaced by new ones; then, after a century or so, every part had been replaced. The question then is whether the "restored" ship is still the same object as the original.

If it is, then suppose the removed pieces were stored in a warehouse, and after the century, technology was developed that cured their rot and enabled them to be reassembled into a ship. Is this "reconstructed" ship the original ship? If it is, then what about the restored ship in the harbor still being the original ship as well?^[

If over the course of time all the parts of a ship are replaced because of wear or damage, is it still the same ship? Are we still the same person today even tho all of our cells are replaced every few years that we were 10 years ago?

Jerry

I know of the Ship of Theseus. Nice catch! And thanks for sharing too. I’m loving my grandfather’s axes. I wish I had his son in-law’s and sons’ trains. I’m game for painting and adding springs / wheels.

@WRW posted:

I know of the Ship of Theseus. Nice catch! And thanks for sharing too. I’m loving my grandfather’s axes.

From Wikipedia:

A literal example of a Ship of Theseus is DSV Alvin, a submersible that has retained its identity despite all of its components being replaced at least once. Blackfoot, Blood, Sweat and Tears, Thin Lizzy and Ratt are examples of rock bands that have retained their names despite member reshufflings to the degree that none of the founding members of the respective bands remain as do all major metropolitan orchestras.

So why do we make ourselves nuts over repainting a toy? This kind of thing goes on all the time.

OGR FORUM, COME HERE FOR THE TRAINS, STAY FOR THE PHILOSOPHY LESSONS !

Jerry

This thread has included some interesting philosophical musings about restoration, and it has been a good discussion. The fact remains that the OP has stated that he has no desire to spend much on trains. It might reasonably be concluded that he will not be purchasing what might be termed "collectibles", so at least in his case, the question of repainting becomes moot.