Repair or Replace? [Was: Repairing Timex]

I'm curious to know how list members feel about the question of repairing versus replacing common computers. For example, in my area, Commodore 64s are extremely common. So if I received a bad one, after checking for obvious faults I probably wouldn't spend much time trying to troubleshoot it. It's easier to just find a working one. The bad machine would either become a static display, or a parts donor, or a very low priority rainy day project. that every classic computer (regardless of rarity) is worth saving. Many electronic hobbiests may find as much joy in repairing the broken 64 as in playing with a working one. These are completely valid viewpoints. However, I could also argue that the limited time I have to spend on this hobby would be better spent trying to document a rare find, or repair an unusual computer, than in repairing yet another C-64. How do list members (especially those with large collections) feel about this? Repair, replace, both? Other viewpoints welcomed. Regards, Mark Gregory