TAC - Tiger/Alpine re-shelling discussion thread.

gtsmrt · Post by **gtsmrt** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:21 am

Hi Ash,

There are many restorers who have made that mistake which is unfortunate, but not much you can do once it has been done. My Tiger doesn't have the original rivet either.

Regards, Robin.

Bobbybutton · Post by **Bobbybutton** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:18 am

After listening to the various points of view trying hard to avoid continual repetition - I can actually see a consensus emerging and with that maybe a suggested way forward - which the club can administer as part of the register we keep today (maybe but I am sure Graham will be folding his arms at this point)

Please read on

Here is what from reading all of the subtext and summarizing - I think we agree

1) Restoring knackered old Tigers, bringing them back to life and maintaining our great marque is of paramount importance and should be encouraged and applauded

2) Racketeering and trying to profit excessively by passing something off which it isn't what it appears to be should be discouraged and frowned upon

3) A Tiger with a new shell *is not a bad thing* if it has been done correctly *its a good thing* - telling lies *is a bad thing* - avoiding the question *is not a helpful thing*. Those who have tried restoring any Rootes car know the cost of doing this is large irrespective of end value - therefore the end-value (though slightly affected by originality) should still remain high. We should accept this principle and this practice (as it clearly continues today) - a nice Tiger is a nice Tiger

4) Many other marques happily co-exist with reproductions, evocations, continuations, replica's and so on - all we need is a system!

So why don't we introduce a simple system of letters after the VIN in the Club register a bit like the way Rootes differentiated between LHD, RHD and export?

Here is a starter for 10 - bearing in mind the principle here is these are all Tigers (no mention of Alger anywhere other than last one)

Tiger (FC) - Factory car - Jenson built chassis, factory modified Tiger elements - VIN and JAL present
Tiger (FRB) - Factory re-bodied car - VIN and JAL present
Tiger (RBC) - re-bodied car, matching Tiger components - VIN and JAL present
Tiger (ARB) - re-bodied car, none matching Tiger components - VIN and JAL present
Tiger (RC) - replica Tiger - re-bodied, none matching Tiger components - no VIN and JAL present (may even have an Alpine VIN)

Now before people launch in with the line 'who decides what proper is' and all of the other subjective pre-text - what I am suggesting here is a system we can work toward defining.

If we all accept that FRB, RBC, ARB and even RC are *OK* then our market place can continue to grow in value - there is still huge monetary value if the end result is the right result.

I would argue if we can agree this we take a step forward in this debate.

The factory original cars (which very well likely will have had new panels, new sills and new paint may command a premium but that's OK

How about it?

[/list]

Ash · Post by **Ash** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:33 pm

gtsmrt wrote:Hi Ash,

There are many restorers who have made that mistake which is unfortunate, but not much you can do once it has been done. My Tiger doesn't have the original rivet either.

Regards, Robin.

Mine too Robin.

Bought my car as a basket case and the chassis and JAL plate are in an envelope somewhere! Now where did I put it

Red Race Tiger · Post by **Red Race Tiger** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:18 pm

Yes, what we have here IS a failure to communicate....

A British car, in Britian. We dont have to dance the TAC tango.

Top opinion's Mr Button, We can do our own thing and could addopt our own set of standard identifiers.

Seem's to me that we could have a "Rough" outline of something quite sensible starting here, except for those downunder who seem to live by this TAC thing, that's all very well if you live in the sun....we dont.

GTSMRT "Stop Kidding yourself" and "Let it go" that's all very well but if it was your own car that was accident damaged behond repair, or riddled with tin worm would that opinion still stand i wonder

meadowhog · Post by **meadowhog** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:11 pm

gtsmrt wrote:
meadowhog wrote: I think theres some compromise to be had on point 3 though.
For the life of me I really can't understand how an Alpine conversion can ever be a Tiger unless it was built at the Jensen factory. As previously stated, if the Tiger is in such a bad state let it go!! There will always be the Alger stigma and if the vin/id tags are swapped prepare for it to be on Norm's Alger list for the world to see. Stop kidding yourselves.

There was no mention of a conversion. What I am implying is there are different levels of restoration which could be defined as has been stated by others. As for letting a rusty Tiger go to car heaven, well that sounds like money talking-loose a few more cars and drive up the value of the rest. No, there will always be enthusiasts and engineers like my self who relished taking on the challenge. I want to save the cars.

I have mentioned several times we should have several definitions and that is what is forming. I believe there are limitations to the TAC and doing our own thing is a better representation of what the UK owners want and a better description of what they are.

Ive been asking the question of at what point does a car fall into a certain category and Mr.Button has a great list. The hard part for me determining at what point does one description stop and another start. You still havent answered my question of, at what level does a restoration become a reshell, which would help in our quest of a cars definition.

Claiming vins and jals being swapped is just nut a definition. I believe we need to know what panels go where and how, what should be present and what should be missing etc. it would be great if you could use your experience in restoration to help.

As for your last comment, I agree in as far as, if a defining list is agreed upon, who or what give it the authority to be taken seriously. But maybe we do not need it to be law, just a guideline given by teh club?

Bobbybutton · Post by **Bobbybutton** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:40 pm

Actually I do suggest when a resto becomes a reshell

It's when a *chassis* is replaced - the original being complete with its factory modified Tiger elements

meadowhog · Post by **meadowhog** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:56 pm

Ive seen cars where the chasis has been cut out bit by bit and replaced after repair. It becomes very difficult if not impossible to distinguish between that car and one where an Alpine shell has been used and Tiger parts grafted in. Beside it couldnt really be classed as a complete if the spots are drilled out and replaced using mig.

I do admit this is extreme but an answer would give clarity to a grey area. Ive restored a couple of Alpines and a couple of Tigers so I'm not coming from a nieve point of view.

Were on the same lines but not quite sure what 'non matching Tiger components' means. Do you mean bolt ons or body/chasis parts?

Ash · Post by **Ash** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:33 pm

I thought TAC stood for... Tigers, Algers and Conversions!

gtsmrt · Post by **gtsmrt** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:20 am

Red Race Tiger wrote: 3 Re-shelled/ Re-bodied, declared as such without the ALGER stigma, a car that carries ALL the Jenson sheet metalwork mod's and done to a competent standard and is complete with ALL the Tiger items and allowed to carry over the TIGER Vin..... without finger pointing.

If this is not a conversion, then what is?? Why else would you mention ALGER. Last time I checked, Tiger bodies aren't being reproduced by an authorised agent. Money is definitely not talking when I say let it go as there is a point at which you must concede defeat in regards to rebuilding. I love my Tiger, but I would let it go if (god forbid) I crashed it or became heavily rusted (By the way car's do rust in Australia). Why continue to complicate the definition of what is and isn't a Tiger. If panels become rusted due to general road use, without effecting the core Tiger components it's still a Tiger. As Bobbybutton said, any major chassis work really needs to be questioned as you're changing major components of a Tiger. Re-shell/re-body is plainly not a Tiger any more. TACing is up to the individual, but hey it proves what you have or don't have in some peoples case.

Red Race Tiger · Post by **Red Race Tiger** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:01 am

I still dont get this,

C'mon guy's a core Alpine body and a core Tiger body are the same thing bar some very basic diy mods.

If we cant agree on that then it's a poor show, as iv'e said if we were all MG owners with Heritage shells there would be no need for this topic but we as owners we dont have that choice.

I cant see WHY there cannot be a recognised standard to allow a rebodied car carrying Tiger VIN and JAl over to save a car, using the same shell that the car de-rived from in the first place, it's not rocket science.

And as a further Question of note and one that Graham may like to answer.

If as he has pointed out the DVLA state that if a vehicle is rebodied it's core element has gone and therefore must carry a Q plate.....How do MG owners get away with it? British Leyland is long gone

lovejoy · Post by **lovejoy** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:18 pm

I wonder if this guy is reading this thread with interest ... ?
http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C273293
as far as I am concerned, this is STILL a Tiger, despite the reshell....
what do you all think ?

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:50 pm

Well, Tiger or not, it's certainly no longer 'ONE OF THE LAST 5 TIGERS TO LEAVE JENSON ON 27/6/1967 LAST DAY OF PRODUCTION' is it? It never saw the Jenson factory.

Red Race Tiger · Post by **Red Race Tiger** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:59 pm

No it isn't a factory Tiger, proberbly built with much more care and nicer for it, and better finished too....

One thing it isn't and that's an Alpine

Bobbybutton · Post by **Bobbybutton** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:08 pm

Would be an RBC or ARB using the *Button method*.

Red Race Tiger · Post by **Red Race Tiger** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:39 pm

Indeed it would Bobby....

Why so many catagories though? why couldn't it just be more straight forward and have just the three.

1 100% top line car

2 Restored/ Major restoration, and or Re-Bodied, all carrying matching Tiger Vin & Jal

3 As above but without matching numbers.

Nothing else applies, ie Alpines with V8's

That way whenever a Tiger is bought or sold here in the UK the seller/purchaser would know exactly where they are.
If a Tiger is known to have been re-shelled and has obtained a certificate as being so the buyer then he/she has a choice and know's exactly what they are buying and that it has been carried out to at least or better than the "Jenson" standard.

Maybe not a car that 100% all of it left Jenson's but the majority did.... and one that personally i would'nt turn my nose up at.

Nothing else applies ie Alpines fitted with V8's? 100% Non Jenson Tiger.

sunbeamtiger.co.uk

TAC - Tiger/Alpine re-shelling discussion thread.

How about this then...?