Originality? Advice please

I think its all down to personal preferences and what made you interested in old engines to start with, John. I'm an originality lover, myself.

I find that an obviously non-original and visible part on an engine mocks me every time I see it. A large part of my interest in old things (not just engines) is brought about by the fact that they are a link with the past. I like to imagine what people used them for and in what surroundings, so it helps if they look right. If the old finish is largely surviving I favour keeping it. Others like to give the engine the best finish they can, and many produce beautiful displays. I would only refinish an engine if the original finish was gone or, most often, overpainted by old uncle Bert with that tin of paint that was in the barn for years. I don't condemn those who would refinish, they own the engine and can do with it as they please.

I also find old engineering to be visually appealing in a way that modern equipment just isn't, so a fine old engine fitted with a tractor silencer is offensive to my eye.

Other people are more focussed on the spanner-work and the job of getting engines running, so to them the tractor silencer is an efficient solution and probably quieter than the original would be. Good luck to them.

You're working on the engine primarily for your own satisfaction, so do what pleases you. We all have slightly different views and one man's view is just as valid as another's.

Regards, Arthur G

"Arthur G" wrote

We tend to do the same and as Arthur only restore when all the original finish is gone.

There are some engines though that have had heavy mods or repairs during their working lives and leaving them "modified" can be preferable to restoring. There are a number of engines around with interesting cylinder repairs following frost damage. It is interesting to see the number of different ways the local blacksmith/farmer could find to solve the problem, if everything was new and shiny and original there would be little or no "feel" left.

Back in the 80s we took a grubby 5hp Petter to a rally fitted with a car silencer. In a small row of Petters everyone seemed to be stood in front of us and walking past the others - they were all moaning about the lack of correct silencer, then wanted to know the history of the engine, most then walked down the line without stopping at the 100% correct "restored" engines.

Paul

-- ____________________________________

Internal Fire, Museum of Power, Wales

Hazel was commenting on this very point the other day - and I must admit it had not struck me that there is a sliding scale of restoration (or not) that is not found in the vehicular world.

With cheap engines - and the things they drive - you can buy any number of interesting things and restore them to a condition that suits you. Long may it stay that way! Repair rather than restoration is a growing view and "as found" has taken on a wholly different meaning now than it had ten years ago. As they are not rare, the addition of (say) a foreign silencer will only offend the eye of a few and may be easily discarded for an accurate replacement when the engine becomes rare, sought after or to assuage your conscience.

A Briggs and Stratton generator that needs a carb might well find itself wearing one from an Iron Horse if that's what it needed to make it go and a coat of paint of the wrong hue applied to restore the surface from red rust is always removable.

At the moment (and again, long may it last) it is easy and relatively cheap to acquire an interesting collection of engines.

Regards,

Kim Siddorn,

Gentlemen,

It could also be said that a repair will take it away from originality, do as you wish and can afford. Very few engines came out of the factory with polished castings but the owners will insist it is correct when it is obvious it is not, I could go on but it is to warm :-))

Martin P

Hi John,

Personally, I think originality is fairly important (one of my other lives is in restoring antique clocks where originality is paramount). However, there are limits.

One of the key rules is: do not do anything that is irreversible. If the original finish is in place and serviceable, don't touch it (you'll never replace it). Don't remove metal from castings to get the ultimate finish - they were never intended to be that way. If the paint finish is not original, it's yours to do as you wish. Being a traditionalist, I would still paint it in it's original colours, but that's not to say you have to.

On the other hand, if like me, you have an engine with a badly damaged or missing carburettor, you may find it necessary to replace the carburettor with a different make to get the thing running again. I think this is legitimate as long as you keep any original parts. Half of the fun of this game is finding those illusive parts that will (eventually) return your pride and joy to it's original form.

Many engines have non-standard parts fitted. Many actually left the factory like it - one of my Lister's has a BTH magneto which would not normally be regarded as standard, however at times of crisis the manufacturers often had to resort to fitting non-standard items - the challenge is to decide if you have an original odd-ball or a later non-original repair (personally I haven't a clue about mine, so whilst it works, it's staying as it is!).

There is a train of thought in the clock world that says that properly executed modifications are part of the clocks history (assuming they are not modern bodges) and should be left alone - this causes endless arguments amongst the conservationist versus restoration factions - I guess the same might apply to engines.

The arguments about originality will always rage on providing us with endless entertainment, but to reiterate, if you do nothing that is irreversible, you cannot be guilty of any crimes. If you buy an engine with non-standard parts, your challenge is to find the right parts one day and replace them. But it shouldn't stop you enjoying and rallying the engine (if that's what you want to do).

Amusingly, I was at a rally during the weekend where there was a beautifully restored but non-original 1926 Petter 1.5 HP driving a beautifully restored

Just a few rambling thoughts

MARK

Gentlemen, Thanks for all the advice. It seems that originality is far less important here than in other interests. It may become more so with time. I seem to remember that it was less important in classic cars many years ago. At least I can fit a non-original exhaust now without fear of being lynched next time I show the engine. For my own 2P. I tend to make my engines look as close to original as possible. I define original as the way the manufacturer would like it to look. As a result, I do repaint my engines but always in the original colour and using the original type of paint wherever possible. The finish may be slightly better than original but that's because I can spend the time on it that a manufacturer cannot justify. I don't polish castings to a mirror but the unavoidable improvement in surface finish due to years of cleaning is not offensive to me. The important thing is that the engine should work at least as well as when it was new. That's easy for me to say though as my engines are fairly new and full working order is fairly easy to achieve. Both of my show engines are used in anger when needed and will continue to fulfil their roles (I hope) for some time to come. Perhaps one day, we will have that get together and get to see the results of each others efforts. Thanks again

John

Another issue with stationaries vs autos is that in the early years there were many makers who produced engines as casting sets, & you painted them to suit yourself. Common from the '90's until the 1930's. Many small foundries made engines, but much better known companies such as Stuart & Gardner also supplied part engines for own completion. Any contemporary colour can be reasonably used for these, although in practice most were painted rather conservatively.

customers. Most obvious with the military, but also civilian examples (eg OEM in cement mixers etc).

Most engine restorers tend to want to replicate the original state of their engine, or a known prototype. Some of the better known prototypes tend to be the well finished manufacturers engines exhibited at Agriculural or Engineering shows, & better finished than most production runs. Give us all an excuse for the Brasso.

I have seen 1930's open cranks in the US restored as bright pink, but I would prefer the habit doesn't cross the pond, but each person to his own ..... ideally as long as he doesn't irretrievably damage a historic industrial artefact.

Having said all that, it was open season when in use on the farm. We have all seen some amazing, innovative, & eye-boggling bodges perpetrated to keep engines running at minimum cost. Like Paul, I'm a great fan of these bodges being retained -- subject only to safety of life & limb .....

Common engines should be the low-cost launch pad for tyros, & the important thing is to convert initial curiosity into long term enthusiasm, so the pragmatic approach seems entirely sensible (aka "Let's get it running & have originality ulcers later")

Colin

Confession time - in over 25 years of playing around with old engines I have never actually 'restored' one. Conserved, emended, rebuilt, repaired, etc etc but never what I would call a restoration. Any shiny paint on my engines is down to the factory or previous owners. A degree of this is probably laziness, but my ideal is genuinely an engine returned to good mechanical condition with as much of the original finish as might survive preserved with the occasional wipe with an oily rag. Any replacement parts should at least be in keeping with the period if a reproduction of the original is not available eg. no pressed tin silencers on things which should have a nice lump of cast iron.

In the classic vehicle world there seems to be a sharp divide between the concours pot hunters and those who just want to enjoy owning and driving old vehicles Though when it comes down to it, most of the concours vehicles probably retain less parts that they left the factory with than the 'bangers'.

Although I am a comparative tyro (what a lovely and underused word BTW) at stationary engines, I have never owned any car which is less than 30 years old (older than me!). They all have been Minors, and each and every one of them are rough and ready. Don't get me wrong I would love to have a really good restored one (my GPO van will be ...one day) , but I can't justify spending what is going to be a huge amount on the 'fleet'. I regard them working motors, and they are worked (my van gets a good hammering every time I buy a new toy, and they are all bl**dy heavy toys). I modify them to keep them useable (I wouldn't drive one without it having disc brakes), and think nothing of giving them a coat of gloss paint with a brush. It can be stripped off later, and resprayed when I get the money, but it stops it rotting away.

My Cov Climax gen set is missing an exhaust, so I will be using a scrap minor box on it, and the old girl will only be getting a light repaint in the places that she has rusted. The set will be used (I loose my eleccy regularly) and I don't feel guilty about it.I have some spares which will come in useful, but I don't care too much if I have to subsitute a different make.

My other hobby is old telephone exchanges, and I have a few from the 1930's. Getting parts is nigh on impossible, so I don't mind using later parts, as this is what would have happened in service with the GPO/BT. Ok I like to keep them original, and do hunt for the parts, and they do turn up, but I make sure that any mods I make will be able to be undone later without damage. I don't repaint parts on the exchanges unless I really have to, but again I match the paint and they look like overhauled bits, and that's ok.

I've rattled too much here....

I really should work out what's wrong with the cov...

Andy G