|
Whilst current market value - cost of restoration = value of project has some logic to the layman, if costed properly then you would end up giving money to people to take most cars away.
The car has an inherent value, as a project or heartlessly as parts.
People have to restore cars because they love that car and want to see it back on the road. Maybe that car has particular memories which is why someone is embarking on a costly or time consuming project, or they have wanted a car like that for many years - usually cars of your early teenage years are the ones many adults end up with as a classic later in life.
If you can do much of the work yourself, you may find it easier to sell the car with an MoT, so you may need to cost out what getting an MoT will need in terms of parts.
As soon as you have to employ specialists the costs start increasing. The number of man hours required to restore a car is quite immense.
If your ultimate intention is to sell the car, I would probably suggest selling as-is or with an MoT. I've seen plenty of 'restorations' where a car has been tarted up for sale, and a fresh coat of paint over substandard work underneath has left the new owner with a sour taste in their mouth.
If you plan to keep the car, then thats a different matter. A full blown restoration will cost a lot, and it can be difficult to contain a job as once you get started with bodywork for example and start taking panels off you may uncover things that no-one knew about the car based on what they could see before the paint was removed.
Honesty is the best way all round.
If by case B you can justify the expense and know that although you won't make anything on the car, but you won't loose either, but the car will be easier to sell, then that.
|