Just picked up another Paragon last night.
I'm very happy with this one. This one works with only a few minor issues, bulbs, and a couple display problems. It needs the first Inline drop target repaired or replaced. 1 missing post by the target in the middle.

The owner, bought this in about 1989, and it sat in his climate controlled basement. It resided there since then, and it is in very good condition. It has some wear on the PF around the bonus lights. A couple of the P A R A G O N inserts are sunk in and loose, not sure what to do with that yet.

The cabinet still has sheen on it. The red and blue are not faded very much at all (if any in most spots) as evidenced after removing the legs (protected paint colors).

The Backglass is about a 9 out of 10. Some light corrosion on the lift rail, no paint missing, just a little dusty on the back.

He hired service done on it, as he is not a tinkerer, and said it may have only had a couple hudred games played since he got it. (he actually estimated 100 so I'm doubling).

I'm going to take my two playfields to Ron Kruzman and get a quote on a retouch and clearcoat. Oddly enough, I live about 8 miles from him. (how convenient hey? )
I'm really excited about this one, and I think it's a real gem.

BACKBOXBEST.JPG BACKGLASSresize.JPG BONUSRESIZE.JPG CABINETRESIZE.JPG CAB2RESIZE.JPG

Snaroff, yes your PF is very nice, if not nearly perfect.

I'm not looking for a museum piece, just a good everyday player.
of my two PF's the new one has more wear around the bonus inserts than my original wreck, however this new one has more vibrant color than the other.
I'm pretty happy with it, perhaps my standard is lower than some.

Thanks for your comments. I could hold out for a NOS I suppose, but I would still want to make it a more durable play surface, rather than end up with the same problem as most of the old PF's with typical wear marks. The original process was made to be as inexpensive as possible, so I suppose not many top coatings were used, plus the newer paints and polymers are exponentially better than in 1978.

The PF in the picture looks awful and needs a major restoration (not just a "touchup/clear").
Confused why you think this is a nice PF example. I've attached what a nice original PF should look like.
snaroff

If mine is awful, what is this one?
horrorshow.jpg

Thanks Jim,
I agree with your review of the machine. (thanks for helping him out on that).
Short of buying something already repaired/restored, this machine was about as good as you can find for the age out of the wild. It was a bit of a time capsule reopening.

His house is gorgeous, and I talked to him about it a bit. I only saw the basement area as I came in through the 4 car garage right by the machine. He gave me two bottles of homemade wine too. WOW. nice guy.

I played it a bit today, and found that as the ball traveled over the inserts, it jumped quite badly. I raised the inserts by removing, wrapping blue masking tape around them and sticking back in like a plug in the hole. (I chose this so it would be easy to remove for the proper repair, it was more of a test) This dramatically reduced the problem. I'm not going to play it much before I deal with the inserts. I don't mind it having some "patina" but I just don't want it to get worse.
The inserts are cupped badly, to the point that they should be completely replaced as compared to reused. Are such parts available? I would hope the new ones, especially if used with a restoration, are less prone to cupping. the cupping is the beginning of the issue, and the glue drying or the inserts shrinking are the kiss of death around those holes, the ball just machines the surface away as it pounds the edges of the holes.
Overall other than typical Bally light bulb socket issues, it is a great machine. I'm still very happy. Its a tough game to get any kind of a score on. Addictive though.

Great thanks
I think i'll give him a call tomorrow.