'69 vs '69 - was a Round-Tail question

[alfacybersite <acs@domain.elided>]

Okay I stole the new subject heading from one of the off-digest replies.

I also received another off-digest comment / comments, suggesting this
was basically a 'NAC' subject. I didn't fully understand the comments /
criticism, but will ask (off-digest).

First the voting was two definite (a)'s, four definite (b)'s, and one
probably (b) from NZ.

To many this was a silly exercise or they're not terribly concerned with
'69 Spiders. Fair enough.

I purposely made the 'mistake' of referring to them both as 'original'.
If I was sending a similar question to a Corvette or Porsche digest,
(b)'s specs would have been booed off the page.

A lot of my curiosity, admittedly coming from restoration as a
'business', was what does this group value most? Seven replies hardly
make any kind of consensus. It partially tells me a small majority value
a 'good driver' over originality. I threw in extra bells and whistles
for the (b) car, admittedly taking it somewhat out of the originality
designation. However, as one reply pointed out, there is no reason it
couldn't be returned to 'stock' if that was desired at a later time.

What is amusing, I'm quite sure some who highly value 'originality'
wouldn't mind a better than original paint job (as long as it remained
the original color), leather seats, and a canvas top. If I'm correct, at
what point does one stop and you still consider it stock? I'm sorry, but
they're not original and that is why I framed my question as essentially
'bone-stock' vs somewhat 'non-stock'. Purists might well question the
term 'somewhat'.

While I'd like to see these cars appreciate in value, I also feel it
would be a shame if they reached the 'too valuable to drive' point.
Yeah, I would have been a (b) if allowed to vote.

Thanks for your comments,

Biba
Irwindale, CA USA
--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided