Edit History

I was never a " inspection consultant ", but rather a mechanic at two different quite specialized repair / restoration shops. One British cars, the other 1973 and earlier Mustangs / Shelby's , with a pretty strong emphasis on the factory high performance models.

 From time to time I would be asked { usually by existing customers looking to buy an additional car or upgrade their existing " collector " car } to evaluate a car that was for sale. Living up here in Canada the #1 concern was always rust and previously repaired rust. The cars were usually all at least 25 years old at the point I saw them and about 80% local cars , 20 % California or similar South Western imports. 

 The mechanical condition was a somewhat secondary concideration in most cases. Being a lot more straight forward and quite a bit less expensive to put right than rusted shells. Also a fair number with previous collision damage, once again the whole spectrum of repair quality. 

 Most had repair work that varied from top notch to quite poor " fix ups ". I would take a very good look underneath and note what I saw. Both work I felt was needed, and previously repaired areas.

At that point if the car was sound from a rust / previous repair point of view I would move on to the mechanicals. 

If the car had expensive sheet metal or frame repairs needed { Triumph TR 6's and MGA's for example } we would ask the customer to take a " guided tour " of the car up on a hoist. 99% of the time the customer once shown the problem areas would decide against the purchase. Only one time did the customer disregard what I showed them and bought the car anyway. A 67 Mustang convertible that looked great on the outside but was actually quite rusty in the front sub frames and torque boxes etc. Wife loved the car and it did run and drive very well. But in the medium future was going to need quite a bit of money spent. { floors and rear 1/4 's  had been quite well done at some point in the past. 

 Of the cars that I thought were reasonably sound a good number of them were purchased. 

I was never a " inspection consultant ", but rather a mechanic at two different quite specialized repair / restoration shops. One British cars, the other 1973 and earlier Mustangs / Shelby's , with a pretty strong emphasis on the factory high performance models.

 From time to time I would be asked { usually by existing customers looking to buy an additional car or upgrade their existing " collector " car } to evaluate a car that was for sale. Living up here in Canada the #1 concern was always rust and previously repaired rust. The cars were usually all at least 25 years old at the point I saw them and about 80% local cars , 20 % California or similar South Western imports. 

 The mechanical condition was a somewhat secondary concideration in most cases. Being a lot more straight forward and quite a bit less expensive to put right than rusted shells.

 Most had repair work that varied from top notch to quite poor " fix ups ". I would take a very good look underneath and note what I saw. Both work I felt was needed, and previously repaired areas.

At that point if the car was sound from a rust / previous repair point of view I would move on to the mechanicals. 

If the car had expensive sheet metal or frame repairs needed { Triumph TR 6's and MGA's for example } we would ask the customer to take a " guided tour " of the car up on a hoist. 99% of the time the customer once shown the problem areas would decide against the purchase. Only one time did the customer disregard what I showed them and bought the car anyway. A 67 Mustang convertible that looked great on the outside but was actually quite rusty in the front sub frames and torque boxes etc. Wife loved the car and it did run and drive very well. But in the medium future was going to need quite a bit of money spent. { floors and rear 1/4 's  had been quite well done at some point in the past. 

 Of the cars that I thought were reasonably sound a good number of them were purchased.