[vincentcomet99]

Originally Posted by DKG

Is there anyone else in India who has stored 100 year old cars in better condition? Or are you assuming you know how to better?

Wasif Mukarramjah was offered a new RR way back when a certain British historian of repute first saw the car and carried the info back to RR, he had refused then. You assume too much, ask the palace staff about how particular he was about how the cars not be messed with and you will know that cars don't survive hundred years when owners don't care for them

The engines of all the five cars turned when I cleaned them and later the RR was started as well. Prettty good for a 100 year old car not cared for shall we say?

One point I must mention here is that unlike the cars of today, the oldies were fairly simple and very very easy to get them going, run and what have you provided you knew the ropes or the sequence to get the pre-start procedures correct. And having been built almost with an inscrutable eye to detail and mechanical tolerances, one could either be stupid and neglect them to fall to ruin or be understanding and store them in the right manner. I think the latter was what happened as far as the internals of the Nizams cars were concerned, a stark contrast to the shabby externals!

[V-16]

Well, it is obvious that some of us like unrestored cars and believe them to be a part of history, while others love them and because of that fact want them to be restored, so that they do not deteriorate and cease being part of history. While both have the same intention at heart, both differ in their means of achieving the goal. I belong to the second school of thought and believe that if these cars were cared for they would have been resurrected. Sorry to say the Kalahandi Rolls engine was a clattering, sputtering mess and that happens due to neglect and not preservation. I have seen many cars preserved beautifully by default. I bought two, one a 1966 Mercedes 220 S and another.a 1961 Dodge Dart 440 Police Special. Both of them were neglected and discarded for more than 35 years or so. They both survived beautifully only because of the fact that one was locked in a garage for the time due to a court case and the other because after the old man died, no one actually gave a damn about the car which was left to rot, in a basement, thank God.

Even after so many years of non use, a bit of tinkering and cleaning and oil changes, both started without a fuss. That's not because they were cared and loved for but due to the fact that the engines back then were simpler and made of more heavier and longer lasting material, not to mention devoid of electronics.

I have another theory for Royal cars surviving almost untouched and in great condition. This theory arises from the well known fact that almost all kings and royals were egoistic personalities who did not take kindly to their personal things being used by others. Many a times touching them also was not allowed. The same for their cars. See the Sultan of Brunei or even Saddam Hussien's car collection. Who has not heard of the famous Rajnish aka Osho's Rolls Royce collection. My point is that besides that one person, no one was allowed to use the vehicle because they just had so many.... or is someone trying to say that besides royals no one else was passionate enough to care for their cars? This is born from the fact that there was an excess of cars, which were hardly used thus they were in good preserved condition. Lets not over simplify this and say that every royal loved his cars..... Yes they loved owning therm, which is a fact evident from the handsome collection of cars which our royals owned back in their good days. I hope we can now move away from this debate as every one has their own opinion but the end result is that all are happy that a car was preserved and not junked.

[DKG]

How many 100 plus year old cars are you guys aware of from a tropical home which have been preserved in a better condition than what the Nizam's car's were in? None to my knowledge ! Can you think of one other 100 year old car in India in a better condition that what the Nizam's cars were seen in? Chances are most of you extolling the virtues of a restoration haven't another car in mind which is a classic example of how a 100 year old unrestored car should be like. You seem to be driven only by your personal preference for what cars should be like hence you miss the value of a 100 year old unrestored condition.

So your observation that the exterior was shabby due to neglect is not entirely borne of fact but assumption. The exterior looks so because that's what happens to a car in a 100 years and that's the whole point. That look which is shabby to you is a priceless window into what a 100 years of existence does to a car. The RR had only 396 miles on it, and was never left outside to weather in rain or sunshine, it's state was what happens to any 100 year old car when stored in garages for most part of its life. So also the Napiers and the Fiat. In fact the undamaged Napier was absolutely oriceless as it was the oldest with no damage. The Wolseley was the only car which seemed to have received a repaint and a reupholster and had already lost that magic and ofcourse while the RR was redone in 1936 it was a terrific example of the owner's attitude toward spending money for himself. Anyway I am glad I enjoyed the cars in that amazing condition and have documented them extensively. Restored they have now lost that magic which only a 100 years of existence can create.

100 years is a long long long ownership span. It's amazing the cars survived in that condition in one family. Truly amazing !

[wasif]

I am really not sure who actually has 100 year old cars in India and hwo they have fared in their journey thru time so cant really comment on this but some of the damage to teh Nizams cars can be attributed to thestorage conditions is what I am saying.

Check out the Daimler in the Gondol collection maybe not 100 years old but was stored and looked after while in storage.

[RollingArt]

A nice read on Preservation Class Cars

http://www.hagerty.com/classic-car-a...ion-Class-Cars


http://www.hemmings.com/hmn/stories/..._feature1.html

[DKG]

Originally Posted by wasif

I am really not sure who actually has 100 year old cars in India and hwo they have fared in their journey thru time so cant really comment on this but some of the damage to teh Nizams cars can be attributed to thestorage conditions is what I am saying.

Check out the Daimler in the Gondol collection maybe not 100 years old but was stored and looked after while in storage.

I don't think any other 100 year plus car in India survives in is original paint and upholstery. The Napier saloon may have been the last oldest car to have been so.

Had seen the Gondal collection some years ago and as far as I can remember don't think the Daimler is in its original paint and upholstery. That aside it's such a spectacular car though, really impressive beast ! They have some really nice cars. Love that Delage too.

[Faster789]

Originally Posted by DKG

How many 100 plus year old cars are you guys aware of from a tropical home which have been preserved in a better condition than what the Nizam's car's were in? None ... Truly amazing !

DKG, with respect I think there is very little that you would not applaud this particular group for.

Wasif makes a very good point about the state the cars were/are in. Frankly, with the resources available the cars should have been in much better condition.

There is merit is restoring a car in completely original condition, but in my view that is and should be restricted to important cars, and perhaps only those with racing patina or historical importance that is directly linked to the condition (bullet holes come to mind). The Throne Car may be a borderline argument for that treatment, but the others are not.

[DKG]

Originally Posted by Faster789

DKG, with respect I think there is very little that you would not applaud this particular group for.

Not for a moment am I suggesting that this was the very best a family could do to preserve their cars. Wasif may be right in saying a better job could have been done. Problem with that is we simply don't have any cars of this age left in India to compare notes with and say with certainty that a 100 year old car subject to the scorching heat of the Indian summer and moisture of the monsoon and reasonably cool temperatures of the winters can actually do better.

I am restoring a very lovely single owner car right now which has been garaged all its life and never neglected and I see so much of what appears to be the norm for cars aging in India, paint flaking off, leather turning hard and brittle, rubber losing its properties and cracking to mention a few problems. It's 72 years old and I see much of the wear that seemed to have plagued the Nizam's cars. Difference is this car was resprayed once before (but never worked on mechanically).

Maybe not nationally or even for the state but the Nizam of Hyderabad is part of our city's history and Mahbub Ali Khan was a much loved monarch. His cars that survived become for many of us part of the history of Hyderabad. Some may argue that these cars are of no historical significance but to me they are and reason enough to be retained and housed as museum exhibits, which they are.

As museum exhibits they were not only an amazing glimpse into a rich collection of cars but also of cars that have weathered over a 100 years. Since when has it become so important that a museum restore its artefacts to please the viewer?

The restoration of the three cars has undone something very precious, atleast according to me as I perceived the exhibit's value. To me the restoration adds nothing to the value of the exhibit. it has taken a huge chunk out of it. And that chunk is a 100 year old look.

I can't argue with someone who points out the torn upholstery and the chipped paint and says its certainly not worth keeping that, when they obviously don't value what a car looks like after 100 years in a family's home.

As car enthusiasts perhaps many don't care about these cars being museum exhibits and the need to have retained them in an as is condition. I can fully relate to most enthusiasts desire to see them restored to like new.

Well your desire to see a bright and shiny Throne car and Napiers is fulfilled. And perhaps for a handful a precious artefact of Hyderabad's history has been ruined forever.

[Faster789]

Originally Posted by DKG

I can't argue with someone who points out the torn upholstery and the chipped paint and says its certainly not worth keeping that, when they obviously don't value what a car looks like after 100 years in a family's home.

...Well your desire to see a bright and shiny Throne car and Napiers is fulfilled. And perhaps for a handful a precious artefact of Hyderabad's history has been ruined forever.

You position is entirely your perogative and I am happy to respect it.

However, you do me a disservice by suggesting it was or is my desire to see a "bright and shiny" Throne Car and Napiers. If you would take a moment to read some of my posts, you would know that my position is that a "correct" restoration is the priority with proportionate "bright and shiny" being a composite (internationally) expected part of such a restoration. I have not examined these cars myself in person, but I understand that the restoration carried out is not "correct" per se but is in fact glorified TLC. If this is the case, these cars are in an unhappy vaccum. They are neither "preserved" nor "correctly" restored. My position is that if a car cannot be correctly restored, then it should be preserved till it can be.

In my view a proper restoration is always desirable as opposed to preservation, unless the car is of significant historical importance. Cars are meant to be run and used and generally, only a good restoration allows this.

I have also told you that the Throne Car is (to me) borderline signifcant enough to warrant preservation so I am not sure why would you say what you have. However, this is all of my course, my layman's opinion and you would be wise to give little importance to it.

I will avoid directing my views on the Hyderbad cars to you in future, as I would not want you to get upset, as sadly, I fear you may have.

[DKG]

Originally Posted by Faster789

I will avoid directing my views on the Hyderbad cars to you in future, as I would not want you to get upset, as sadly, I fear you may have.

My apologies for not structuring the post in a manner which clearly first answered your remark and then went on to clarify my views about the cars being museum exhibits. I didn't mean to suggest that you in particular wanted to see the cars bright and shiny and do please accept my apologies for coming through so.

I do agree wholeheartedly with your view that restoring such cars calls for a greater level of both understanding of what is needed and competence to deliver in greater detail.

Perhaps it's apt I share why I feel so strongly about this matter and come across as being upset about it.

In my lifetime I have seen such an immense quantum of treasures vanishing from Hyderabad, old palaces literally crumbling to dust, many cars either being broken down or sold away to people outside Hyderabad that I cannot help but feel strongly when someone carelessly tampers with what to me are the last vestiges of what was once Hyderabad's pride. Post independence the local government has made no bones about their disdain for the princely heritage of Hyderabad and in great measure made it impossible for any tourism to develop to help salvage some of that treasure. Saving Hyderabad's heritage has never been a priority and the situation remains grim.

There is a emotional connect many people like me have with Hyderabad and we tend to feel strongly when we see someone marginalise the rich heritage of this city.

I have personally not seen restorations anywhere else in the world which do justice to retaining the patina which age naturally bestows on a car. I feel it's something no one has achieved so far and it's too complex a matter on how to do it. Which is why, and am happy to note concours across the world share this concern, a greater significance to preservation is being accorded increasingly, only because when you restore you undo so much of a natural aging of the materials of a car.

I am not against the restoration of cars where the paint is flaking off, rust on fasteners and leather cracked or torn or mechanicals far from healthy. But can one really repaint a car to match a 100 year old patina? or install leather which looks the age? or refinish chassis and suspension parts that show use without damage to the paint surface? I am not sure anyone has achieved that. This should have been the objective of a restoration of these cars.

The finishes in the cars, be it the freshness of the paint or the leather is simply not in keeping with the age of the car and just doesn't cut it for me. If a restoration of the calibre I just mentioned above was not possible I hoped the cars would be left alone and am saddened someone decided to muck them up just because they wanted to tag their credentials with the cars.

Thank god we don't have such curators in the National Art Gallery in London or the Louvre in Paris. Who wants to see a touched up Mona Lisa?

[harit]

Originally Posted by harit

Just to make a point, we have lost a glimpse of what a car can look like AFTER 100 years, and not what it looked like 100 years ago. This after always depends upon the car's exposure to the elements and care taken. ..............Cheers harit

This post of mine was a well presented point of view, using pics taken from t-bhp itself. And apparently it was quite convincing. So my dear DKG, whose opinion differs, does not really argue his case. He talks of forest, trees, maybe even wood is implied. And I love the number of posts which say that we should get off the off-topic subject. His arguements may have sounded better if this line was posted first, not after the long harangue (a lengthy and aggressive speech). You would have taken photos when you shifted the cars, please do share what has been lost for ever. Maybe I will even change my mind.

Originally Posted by DKG

Harit the points you make are a classic case of missing the forest for the trees !! We are not talking about comparing a chipped door panel in comparison to a freshly painted one and asking which one looks more appealing. Quite obviously the painted one.

If you look at the vintage cars in India the vast majority are cars that have been repainted, reupholstered, ................. These are single owner cars still remaining in the original owner's family.

Which brings us to a tiny collection of cars that have never been overhauled or repainted or reupholstered and that interestingly still remain in some cases with the original owners. Now what attribute about these cars makes them special? Not comparing panel to panel and deciding the Kalahandi RR or the Darbhanga PIII look horrible hence they need to be stripped and restored. To a viewer it's an unbelievably precious experience to witness what a 70 or 100 year old car actually looks like showing all the weathering of time and use. If you say that experience has no value then I rest my case as you and I are not on the same plane. But if you can relate to the preciousness of an automobile in remaining untouched over the years and still reflecting a family's use of it or care of it over its lifetime then perhaps you can appreciate my point of view.

To me the Kalahandi RR is not important ................... The Kalahandi Rolls is precious because of the family and that it represents an automobile reflecting its entire lifetime's wear with no change affected to it ever. That to me is extremely precious ............................... We probably should end this debate here as this thread was about the Cartier show and not about whether certain cars deserve to be restored. ...........

Nizam, Kalahandi, is it really that the families held on to this precious heritage. I would dare say that these cars survived there by chance, and again sheer fate kept them there. Whether these cars are single family owner or have had multiple owners is immaterial. What is important is the condition of the car. The Nizams cars were not kept in great condition, their low mileage helped to keep mechanical wear and tear to the minimum, thats about it. The cars were not at all well kept and suffered in storage. Now they are spruced up. The maximum I would have done is taken a door out and kept in "as-found' condition, and put a replica door.

Originally Posted by DKG

Is there anyone else in India who has stored 100 year old cars in better condition? Or are you assuming you know how to better?

Wasif Mukarramjah was offered a new RR way back when a certain British historian of repute first saw the car and carried the info back to RR, he had refused then. You assume too much, ask the palace staff about how particular he was about how the cars not be messed with and you will know that cars don't survive hundred years when owners don't care for them

The engines of all the five cars turned when I cleaned them and later the RR was started as well. Prettty good for a 100 year old car not cared for shall we say?

I admit that I do not know anyone who has kept a 100 year old car in better condition, IN INDIA. So what! This country of ours, India, almost as large as the entire continent of Europe, has barely 50 pre 1910 cars surviving in any condition, good bad or scrap. So if someone has four 100 year old sad looking cars, well do them up. And thats what happened to them. If we had ahd 1000's of such cars, then we can think of preserving an example. But the owners would have to take the call. These cars are in long term ownership by chance, they were definitely offered for sale earlier, whether the owners were aware or not, and the owners lost countless artefacts anyway. Maybe these cars were just too big and delicate to spirit away.

Originally Posted by DKG

Wasif with all the resources and wealth of the Queen of England not a single car has survived in their garages.

While our LaSalle has remained, a whole slew of Edwardian cars and an amazing collection of carriages found its way out of our homes. ..................... left is photographs............... ............ all the engines turned so easily when I cleaned them.

......... the loads of problems someone with such an estate had to deal with that the cars were housed in covered garages and engines turned periodically was just about a fair way to keep them..........
It's easy for us to sit in judgement over how a family has cared for their possessions but I feel it's admirable that the Nizam's family looked after these automobiles and retained them all these years. .....................most families in Hyderabad saw their fortunes vanishing and their palaces and cars falling to dust or being sold a few have retained their possessions despite all odds. This is a remarkable achievement. (COMPLETLY IN AGREEMENT)

..............I am not saying that your or Harit's point of view is not appreciable. I am sure to many these cars spruced up is an amazing sight.

Just that there's something so fabulous about being in the presence of an unrestored vintage car. I can't describe it. I am sure some can relate to this.

Now before the mods cut this conversation down lets leave it at that. .................

The Queen had resources and wealth and so bought new cars when the need arose or she was advised. At no stage did anyone deem that the monarchy is to become a second London Museum. Sure, they have tons of artefacts and stuff, but automobiles were something you used and replaced when worn out. I know people who replace their perfect cars every 3 years for various reasons: bored, depreciation, upkeep with trend, wife did not like etc. Not every owner of an automobile becomes the custodian of heritage automobiles. You yourself say that the family only kept the LaSalle, got rid of everything else. Even if you deny, the LaSalle was on the block, always overpriced for its time (my opinion, but did not sell) and that maybe one reason why it is still there. But surely not because the family hung onto their heritage.

The Nizam's family had their own issues and could not hang on to so much of their heritage, the cars happened probably by default, not design. I am not sitting in judgement, the way the story unravelled is for all to see. So amny states all over India saw change of fortunes, up before independance, steady, down when purse was withdrawn, and up again with heritage hotels and what not. Many clever royal families invested in industry, business, others entered politics. They were busy, or had disputes, and so cars were locked up, and preserved, not clever planning but default.

I am used to being in the presence of an unrestored vintage car and always wish I could do more about my unrestored vintage cars.

Originally Posted by DKG

How many 100 plus year old cars are you guys aware of from a tropical home which have been preserved in a better condition than what the Nizam's car's were in? None to my knowledge ! Can you think of one other 100 year old car in India in a better condition that what the Nizam's cars were seen in? ..............
So your observation that the exterior was shabby due to neglect is not entirely borne of fact but assumption. The exterior looks so because that's what happens to a car in a 100 years ..............That look which is shabby to you is a priceless window into what a 100 years of existence does to a car. ........................................ the RR was redone in 1936 it was a terrific example of the owner's attitude toward spending money for himself.............

The Nizams cars were the best unrestored 100 year old cars in India, I fully agree. To restore these unrestored cars mad them stand out, appreciated by many. The fact that they were virtually unused, unmolested and had almost no parts stolen made the restoration easy. Yes, their survival is amazing, considering the upheavels the Nizam faced all round.

I am not sure that I like the personal reference, ""You seem to be driven only by your personal preference for what cars should be like hence you miss the value of a 100 year old unrestored condition"". Ofcourse this is my personal take, anything wrong with that? The way you go after anyone not sharing "a 100 year old worn look unique in India" is passion alright, but so many posts saying the same thing?

What happens to a car in 100 years is a good point, it gets worn, deteriorates and is then spruced up if not replaced. I only have to look at my Amby and can see what 2 years in Mumbai rains does to her. Why wait 100 years? I hope you get my drift.
Sure, the RR is an example of the owner's attitude toward spending money for himself as you put it, or the miser in him as many other see it.

Originally Posted by DKG

I don't think any other 100 year plus car in India survives in is original paint and upholstery. The Napier saloon may have been the last oldest car to have been so.

Had seen the Gondal collection some years ago and as far as I can remember don't think the Daimler is in its original paint and upholstery. That aside it's such a spectacular car though, really impressive beast ! They have some really nice cars. Love that Delage too.

There is probably no 100 year old car like this. Gondal family also has a 500K, quite original with crumbling rubbers. I would replace the rubbers.

Originally Posted by DKG

................ Problem with that is we simply don't have any cars of this age left in India to compare notes with and say with certainty that a 100 year old car subject to the scorching heat of the Indian summer and moisture of the monsoon and reasonably cool temperatures of the winters can actually do better............. restoringring a very lovely single owner car right now which has been garaged all its life and never neglected and I see so much of what appears to be the norm for cars aging in India, paint flaking off, leather turning hard and brittle, rubber losing its properties and cracking to mention a few problems. It's 72 years old and I see much of the wear that seemed to have plagued the Nizam's cars. Difference is this car was resprayed once before (but never worked on mechanically).

................argue that these cars are of no historical significance ...................Since when has it become so important that a museum restore its artefacts to please the viewer?

The restoration of the three cars has undone something very precious, atleast according to me as I perceived the exhibit's value. To me the restoration adds nothing to the value of the exhibit. it has taken a huge chunk out of it. And that chunk is a 100 year old look.

I can't argue with someone who points out (THANKS) the torn upholstery and the chipped paint and says its certainly not worth keeping that, when they obviously don't value what a car looks like after 100 years in a family's home.

As car enthusiasts perhaps many don't care about these cars being museum exhibits and the need to have retained them in an as is condition. I can fully relate to most enthusiasts desire to see them restored to like new.

Well your desire to see a bright and shiny Throne car and Napiers is fulfilled. And perhaps for a handful a precious artefact of Hyderabad's history has been ruined forever.

Maybe we can find such old and original 100 year old cars abroad, if there is a need to compare notes.
The 72 year old car, what is it? Any pictures to comment on? Paint flaked, it got repainted. Maybe the leather was creamed, maybe the rubbers will be replaced? Just wondering why here and not for the Nizams cars.

I searched but could not find reference to any arguement that the Nizams cars have no historical significance. Where did that come from?
And these cars are not Museum exhibits as yet!
Again, the last 2 paras are personal, I never had any sort of desire for the Nizams cars. You are going gaga over the loss of a 100 year old look which I may not be mature enough to understand. But the result after restoration is something I don't mourn, I find the cars representing the Nizams grandeur. Why would Cartier promote his frugal ways in leaving the Silver Ghost with railway designed mudguards? Won't make sense to me.

Originally Posted by DKG

My apologies for not structuring the post in a manner which clearly first answered your remark and then went on to clarify my views about the cars being museum ......................

Thank god we don't have such curators in the National Art Gallery in London or the Louvre in Paris. Who wants to see a touched up Mona Lisa?

Well this post comes back to some rationale. Good grace!
Have you any idea how many grand master paintings have been touched up and /or restored? Its a speciality which involves huge skill. No art restoration can be like 100% like original, but when you see unrestored paintings damaged during robberies, bad storage, age etc, you appreciate to see a masterpiece. It would not be as attractive if a corner was a 500 year old soiled canvass.

Originally Posted by V-16

..................While both have the same intention at heart, both differ in their means of achieving the goal. ...................
I have another theory for Royal cars surviving almost untouched and in great condition. This theory arises from the well known fact that almost all kings and royals were egoistic personalities ......................I hope we can now move away from this debate as every one has their own opinion but the end result is that all are happy that a car was preserved and not junked.

We are not discussing intentions but ideologies, which differ, we are oceans appart. Our philosophies differ, but we are colleagues and will still talk to each other, in person or on phone. And, we are debating with no scores to settle.
Many cars survived untouched because of lack of funds to fiddle with them, not much to do with ego. I can point out quite a few such survivors, put away in the garage and untouched, who wants to drive a fuel inefficient car completely out of sync with modern times. So the cars were left in palaces, and the Maharaja himself lives elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Faster789

........................ Wasif makes a very good point about the state the cars were/are in. Frankly, with the resources available the cars should have been in much better condition.

..................should be restricted to important cars, and perhaps only those with racing patina or historical importance that is directly linked to the condition (bullet holes come to mind). The Throne Car may be a borderline argument for that treatment, but the others are not.

Most royal cars fell into a terrible state when the kingdom fell apart. There were other priorities.
Patina is important irrespective of the importance of a given car, but as we have so few pre 1910 cars in India, I would like to see all survivors spruced up and restored.

Originally Posted by Faster789

You position is entirely your perogative and I am happy to respect it.

However, you do me a disservice by suggesting it was or is my desire to see a "bright and shiny" Throne Car and Napiers. .........................but I understand that the restoration carried out is not "correct" per se but is in fact glorified TLC. If this is the case, these cars are in an unhappy vaccum. They are neither "preserved" nor "correctly" restored. My position is that if a car cannot be correctly restored, then it should be preserved till it can be.

In my view a proper restoration is always desirable as opposed to preservation, unless the car is of significant historical importance. ............

Well said. DKG does get emotional, me too never said that my desire has been fullfilled. And yes, its a glorified TLC, but well done.

Originally Posted by vincentcomet99

The Rajkot rolls was meant to go to pebble beach but was discouraged, perhaps to give the RESTORED IN INDIA cars a chance. In return offered a place at Cartier. Rest is still hush hush, at least for us commoners.

............... no serious event of this kind anywhere in the world announces to one and sundry that it is inviting candidates from here there and everywhere. Of course if there is a discreet inquiry sent your way or mine then we feel fortunate but by the same yardstick if I or someone else doesn't get a call it shouldn't mean the organisers have wielded the axe and done a hatchet job on us non-entities!

Maybe a change of mindset from all concerned needs to be factored in and it begins and ends with every one of us individually.

Harit has certainly found an interesting bugbear for our movement and whether it has affected all of us or not I am sure that the subject of re-registering vehicles is one of incalculable harm...............

Well, the Rajkot RR (thanks for not referring to it as The Star) was to come to Cartier, and was discouraged to go to Pebble Beach. The curator wanted to unveil this newly aquired Indian ownership car at Cartier in India as she came back to Indian ownership. Then the curator messed up his entries for the Maharaja class at Pebble Beach 2012 and so the Rajkot RR was a late entry there. As many already know, the passage was paid for.
And as you see, this was not a serious event, so........... And yes, history is lost when cars are reregistered.

Originally Posted by wasif

.............. All the Nizam's Veteran cars were practically falling apart. Just covering them and storing thme may have contributed much to their pathetic condition................didnt care much for any of these cars except the Jeeps and the construction equipment and thats a known fact. ................ These particular cars would also have been sold if there was someone wanting to buy them at the prices the owner wanted and thats a fact................

So true, so what are the arguements?

Originally Posted by wasif

I am not assuming anything but stating a fact that the way they were stored contributed to their current sorry state. ...........
Had they been stored well, cleaned periodically and maybe even started / driven they would have been in a much better condition and would certainly have qualified for preservation instead of restoration.............

Oh so true.

Originally Posted by vincentcomet99

..............that unlike the cars of today, the oldies were fairly simple and very very easy to get them going, run and what have you provided you knew the ropes or the sequence to get the pre-start procedures correct.

Again true, but if used regularly, and parts wore out, then you had trouble. Many nice working cars were ruined when their tyres became unavailable and owners changed the wheels. That did not work always, and then the cars were scrapped. I know of a Star which met with this fate, probably the only Star car to come to India. A few Star lorries also came here.

Back to the Cartier event. This had three categories which I would not have again,
Preservation class
Shikar class
Indian Heritage class.

The preservation class has been discussed, the remaining two next time.

Cheers harit

[DKG]

Harit some gaping holes in your arguement with my replies

1 Cars are shabby

Assumption as you have no other 100 year old car as reference to claim in India that in 100 years a car can remain in more pristine condition as found on these cars

2. You attribute pure chance to the way the cars have survived.

I wonder how you concluded that. These cars were always garaged and if it weren't for the family's desire to preserve them they would have long fallen to dust. A great part of why these cars survived is because the family chose to retain them and store them in covered garages. You can debate about how best they could have stored but then that's pure conjecture as you have no other reference in India

3. Best lot of unmolested 100 year old cars

But they should be spruced up? Why because you like to see a museum exhibit shiny and bright? the cars were not falling apart for your information and would have survived another 100 years left so. What is the need to spruce up when you don't have the competence to replicate the patina?

4. Cars value as a exhibit only when spruced up

I wholeheartedly disagree. The cars offered a rare glimpse into what a 100 year old surviving car looks like. That has been undone. No excuses, least of all that sprucing up was priority number one for no justifiable reason.

You make a poor case for sprucing up and the only reason I can think of is because you like it so.

My argument is on the basis of the fact that these were the last of a priceless collection of unmolested 100 year old cars reflecting a century's life in India, turned into museum exhibits which offered the most unique perspective left untouched. Now they are generic Napiers and a Barker RR but not the cars which had a special story to tell as they were like a historical document of what happened in a 100 years. That's been undone for good and its sad

Come up with a more convincing argument for sprucing up Harit and I am open to change as honestly I tried to find one when I spent sometime looking over them post restoration and I couldn't find one. They simply have lost something that was priceless, that 100 year old weathered look.

[mbz180]

This really makes for very interesting reading! I've a simple reasoning how the Napier's had ended up as the oldest unrestored cars in India without totally falling apart (whereas other cars of the era owned by Indian royalty or otherwise aren't around). Here goes-The Nizam was the richest man in the world so one could expect atleast the Nizam's estate would still have such a car as he had such massive resources at his disposal

[kasli]

Everything in this picture is restored . Now when you look at it - it makes a great picture

Cheers

[V-16]

If DKG will consider not flogging me for quoting and disagreeing with him i will venture to make a few observations and comments, ....all my own.

Deepak firstly if you read my post it clearly says that we are all here for a common interest and are all at least happy that the car survived this far. That to me is more historical than how it did. I have also mentioned that there are two schools of thoughts and you and i belong to different schools which i think you and I MUST respect as it is not demeaning in any way. If there are no differences of opinions, whats the world worth living for. To suggest that your opinion is the right one is not right my friend. While i respect the school of thought you belong to, you MUST respect mine.

I say must because it is so. There is no fight just a difference of opinion. I dont want to start and quote your posts and reply to all of them because it is a futile and off topic effort but since you bought paintings up, it is common knowledge that masterpieces are touched up and spruced up under the watchful eyes of the curators and historians so to say that vintage paintings are all original to their brush strokes is ridiculous. Please just let it go. We know how you feel about the cars 50-80-or 100 years old. You like it raw, we like it done up.

Lastly this thread is to discuss the cars at the show so lets not thrust our opinions on another. I maintain that the Royals of India were Egotistical characters and thats why their cars were in storage and so very slightly run because they never wanted and probably never had anyone else to use them. You may think they were generous...fine....so what? I was not there 100 years ago to know how and why the cars were in that state and neither were you.

Chalo now forget this topic and share the older pics of these beautiful machines you have had the opportunity to see when they were in their unoriginal unrestored state.