Patina.

Now here's a strange thing.
For years now I have been amazed at the way many Americans allow so many fine examples their automotive heritage to sit out rotting in fields. I have remarked upon the solid condition of many cars that have been abandoned to the Californian sun, those 'dry state' cars may be rusty, but they sure are worth saving.

Now here's where I'm a little confused. I know that among the VW bus and bug crowd there is a definite rat look vibe going on, and I can live with that because there are certain cars, (VW bugs included) that carry the distressed look off real well. Other products however don't.

Case in point the 1950 Buick fastback shown here. When I first saw it I was happy that this car had been saved, 'finally' I thought, someone has begun to appreciate those old heavy metal monsters enough to rescue them. But there was something about this car that just wasn't right.

I studied it before noticing that the chrome was new, and then I noticed the wheels. So okay the wheels are personal choice, but the chrome-work stands out as too new for the car. Rusty paint needs rusty chrome surely?

It was only after seeing this shot of the interior that I knew that the owner had blown it in my opinion. The car had been beautifully and carefully restored and re-trimmed - with the exception of the paint!

So that's why I have mixed emotions about this car. First of all I'd rather see it as it is now than sitting in a field someplace so that's good. I don't even mind original rust patina on those cars that can carry off the look either, but I think this car deserves better. No doubt the owner has spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours restoring this car, and the standard of work looks to be high, I just wish that on this occasion the car might have been returned to it's former glory, or left original but running.