Tiger/Alpine re-shelling discussion thread.

Post general questions relating to Tigers
Post Reply
alpine5gt
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:08 pm

Post by alpine5gt » Sat Dec 24, 2011 7:47 am

I have been wathing this thread with interest. I have a genuine Mk1 unrusted low milage car. The previous owner was an extremly bad driver and the car has bad body damage. Now I knew that when I bought it so I made sure I had replacement alpine body panels sent over in the same container as the car. I have been slowly restoring it and have spent some time dismantly it. The car after I removed the damaged front fender, door, rear fender. Is quite good. The left fender is a bit sad to, maybe willbe replaced.

So what you chaps are saying is my Tiger will not be genuine when I replace the damaged body panels. I say crap, it is a Tiger and it it genuine. What about all the owners on this site that fit 500HP after market engines with blowers, others that fit new front and back suspensions, brakes etc. Including Aussie owners with aftermarket gear. Are you less guilty of changing the Tiger?

Merry Christmas and kill this thread

gtsmrt
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Post by gtsmrt » Sat Dec 24, 2011 8:03 am

In my opinion, panel replacement is different to a full re-shell as it is basically still the original shell (not replacing the original body with an Alpine body). Other will disagree, but that is the general trend with this topic. :)
Robin O'Dell
Tiger MK 1a
ENJOYING THE EXPERIENCE AS DAD WOULD HAVE

martin172
Posts: 1022
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:14 pm

Post by martin172 » Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:06 pm

Steven, I don't recall anyone saying that replacing some panels makes a Tiger some sort of hybrid.
What people are saying is that a whole shell swap is in their opinion wrong.

An ideal example is Mal's car and his sterling work on it. A large part of the car has been replaced but the tub and most of the shell for that matter remained and so is still a Tiger.
I doubt that there are many tigers that haven't had some tin work at some point or other.

As for the 500hp blown Tigers and similar, I think the correct name for these is chimera. :D

Happy upsidedown christmas and hope that our NZ pals and families are ok after the latest quakes.

User avatar
gvickery
Site Admin
Posts: 904
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Surrey

Post by gvickery » Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:11 pm

Alpine5GT. No one is saying that!

Changing panels is NOT re-shelling. Have you had a moment to read this? http://www.stoa-tigerclub.com/tac/statement.html

The thread is good as it is drawing out views... provided we don't rant all over it!! It needs more contributions though!!!

When you can post some photos of your resto.

Happy Christmas

Graham
STOC Editor

michael-king
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:35 am
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Post by michael-king » Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:15 pm

alpine5gt wrote:I have been wathing this thread with interest.

So what you chaps are saying is my Tiger will not be genuine when I replace the damaged body panels. I say crap, it is a Tiger and it it genuine. Merry Christmas and kill this thread
Steven,

Very strong and broad brush sentiments without really reading the posts...

We are talking re-shells.. as in you buy an alpine body, cut the tunnel out of it, modify the inner guard make a few other tiger specifi mods, bettery box removal etc.. install the tiger driveline then switch the Tigers VIN and JAL tags onto the modified alpine body.

There is no need to kill a thread that you seem to have not read... humbug to that.
Michael King
63 Alpine SII - 65 Alpine SIVGT
65 Tiger MKI - 66 Tiger MKIA
Image

Red Race Tiger

Post by Red Race Tiger » Sat Dec 24, 2011 2:53 pm

Yes humbug indeed.

I guess the whole point of all this debate and discussion is this really, it's a question i have asked already but not one that's been answered or taken up.

What is "The" car? and in that question i'm asking is it the paperwork and vin (documents) or is it "THE" car itself.

To me the documents ARE the car as in the scam that happened with 295B

Because without a vin and a log book the car has no identity anyway, so armed with a rusted Tiger .....an Alpine body and the Tiger's doc's seems to me you have a Tiger.....


Obviously replacing panels is just bodywork and not really related to this thread.

The work that Mal's body man is doing is 100% superb, and all credit for going to that extent, looking at your posted images your on the back straight now but in reality had it had been much worse than it is could there have been a point where you would have said enough and considered a rustfree replacement body?

You can chase rust forever ya know.

Red Race Tiger

Post by Red Race Tiger » Sat Dec 24, 2011 2:59 pm

Yes we need more contribution's....

Where's the specialist?

He's normally lurking around somewhere, and his opinions are always worth having :lol: :lol:

garyv8tiger
Posts: 650
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:57 am

Post by garyv8tiger » Sat Dec 24, 2011 4:54 pm

Red Race Tiger wrote:Where's the specialist?
theres lots of them but for some reason are keeping quiet :mrgreen:

meadowhog
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: South Bucks

Post by meadowhog » Sat Dec 24, 2011 9:35 pm

My cousin owns the company that restored Bentley old number 1. It was owned by a bank as an investment after they had paid £1m for it. They came sell it and lost a lot of money after prices fell. The bank then tried to sue the previous owner to get some money back. Their argument was it wasnt old no.1 because it had been restored many times after many near write off crashes. There was no proof that even one nut was left of the original car.

The court ruled that there was 'history' of the cars many changes and that was enough to say the car was old no. 1. This was even after there was rumour that while once restoring the car, a pile of bits became 2 piles and there are now 2 cars that could claim to be no.1.

I guess it depends on individual cars and in the case of the Tiger what would you say if it had bad rear end smash and to repair it a modified Alpine was grafted on. Still a Tiger? Then it had a front end smash and a modified Alpine grafted to the front. Still a Tiger?

Ive seen enough Tiger resorations where the front and rears have been removed repaired and replaced. Ive also seen new parts that have been made from scratch when a more authentic and probably cheaper repair would have been better made with Alpine panels. But as these changes are done bit by bit the perseption is that at any one time the body is 90% Tiger. If it was all done at once the perception would be different.

I dont quite have a opinion either way just yet. The current arguments seem to depend on how much the cars worth and as they are going up, this definition of originality, title, description also seems to be changing. What would we all be saying if the cars were worth £1m?

michael-king
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:35 am
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Post by michael-king » Sun Dec 25, 2011 1:32 am

Red Race Tiger wrote:Yes humbug indeed.

I guess the whole point of all this debate and discussion is this really, it's a question i have asked already but not one that's been answered or taken up.

What is "The" car? and in that question i'm asking is it the paperwork and vin (documents) or is it "THE" car itself.

To me the documents ARE the car as in the scam that happened with 295B

Because without a vin and a log book the car has no identity anyway, so armed with a rusted Tiger .....an Alpine body and the Tiger's doc's seems to me you have a Tiger.....
.
Paul, you really need to read the posts more carefully, several people have offered answers to your question as to what is THE car, but your personal bias and your experience with your fathers ex-car seem to sheild you from these.

In the case of a monocoque car like a Tiger or Alpine the monobody is THE car. Basically the centeral section is the most important part from scuttle/firewall back to the rear shock area.

Extenral panels can get replaced, a front or rear clip can be replaced but the main core of the car remains. Thats why swaping the tiger panels into an alpine body and then swapping vins doesnt make it a tiger. The Alpine body has a history and indentity, you are just swapping in mechanicals and some minor body mods... changing its numbers is just trying to hide its true identity.

As to the "documents" being the car.. this is purely coloured by your experience where people used the log books to recreate your fathers car. I think you miss the point.. they used those documnets to convince the authorities there that the car they presented was your fathers old car and that the numbers were correct. In the USA or Australia fronting up with a log book would not vct it.. they would look straight at the vehicle ID tags.. not a bit of paper. With all respect you have strongly implied that there is no issue with a reshell and then swapping the VIN,

if that is the case then had the people who gained 295B's log book goen to the scrap yard, managed to dig up some of the car got a VIN tag, maybe part of the original engine etc then they would have every right to suddenly claim they had that car... Had the car not been scrapped and someone bought it then swapped what was left into an alpine and changed the VIn saying it was your fathers car i am sure you would be the first to stand up and say it wwas not your fathers car, it was an alpine that parts of your fathers ex-racer had been transplanted into.
Michael King
63 Alpine SII - 65 Alpine SIVGT
65 Tiger MKI - 66 Tiger MKIA
Image

65beam
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:46 pm

tiger

Post by 65beam » Sun Dec 25, 2011 5:40 am

i still think michael needs to look at a bare metal alpine body and a bare metal tiger body side by side. then he would understand a little more about the jenson changes to the alpine shell. i wonder if he has compared the photos of the trans tunnel of my series 4 to the photos of a MK1 tiger trans tunnel that i have on my photobucket?

michael-king
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:35 am
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Post by michael-king » Sun Dec 25, 2011 6:56 am

Bob,

You dont seem to listen/get it.. whatever.. a car someone converts at home/the shop etc.. is still a conversion. Swapping tags is all about people trying to decieve others..

If you are doing a conversion because you want a V8 powered sunbeam, your tiger is to far gone to repair, or you just dont want to put the effort into saving a rusty/damaged tiger shell you have no need to swap the tags.. plain and simple.

I guess you are the perfect candidate to do aconversion, go buy the leftovers of a MKI and you can still cut and shut it into your SIV.. after all you are the one that has said several times you would like to do a tiger one day.. well here you go.. you have a nice shell.. go for it... merry christmas BHB.
Michael King
63 Alpine SII - 65 Alpine SIVGT
65 Tiger MKI - 66 Tiger MKIA
Image

meadowhog
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: South Bucks

Post by meadowhog » Sun Dec 25, 2011 4:48 pm

So, keeping the bulkhead and replacing everything else makes it a Tiger regardless of whether it has a 302, midget rack, bimbo brakes, stainless exhuast, alloy wheels, upgraded rad, carpets, soft top, rubbers, 5 stud hubs discs all round, IRS, respray, etc etc.

Im just trying to tease out what is acceptable to what is obviously a very subjective subject. Will it boil down who has the most money when going to court?

Sorry I may seem like a newby but Ive been an on off member of STOC and SAOC for nearly 30 years, and have owned all but a S1 and MK2. I do come from a point of experience and when it comes to bodywork, I have been quoted as being a authority in the past.

michael-king
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:35 am
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Post by michael-king » Mon Dec 26, 2011 12:28 am

meadowhog wrote:So, keeping the bulkhead and replacing everything else makes it a Tiger regardless of whether it has a 302, midget rack, bimbo brakes, stainless exhuast, alloy wheels, upgraded rad, carpets, soft top, rubbers, 5 stud hubs discs all round, IRS, respray, etc etc.

Im just trying to tease out what is acceptable to what is obviously a very subjective subject. Will it boil down who has the most money when going to court?

Sorry I may seem like a newby but Ive been an on off member of STOC and SAOC for nearly 30 years, and have owned all but a S1 and MK2. I do come from a point of experience and when it comes to bodywork, I have been quoted as being a authority in the past.
Meadowhog (name?)

No just keeping he bulkhead does not make it the car.. i would say its about maintaining the majority of the core of the monocoque. A front clip can be replaced, rear clip.. doors etc.. all of the above technically. Same goes for brake/suspension upgrades and block swaps (gearbox swaps of recent times) they are just peripherals and easily reversible. In many ways they could also be considered consumables.. For me the integrity of the car is in the core of the body.

Now that said there is the argument that over a period of 50 years, maybe 2 or 3 restos theer may be very little left of the original core. On a Tiger floors are often replaced, exhaust pass throughs, sills.. so much of the centeral section can vanish over time, but the base elements of it are still there.

Tony dron wrote an article a few years back when the FIA released the proposal for HTP's. HE wrote a very nice pecie on the "old hammer" as a metaphor for the historic racing cars... its wortha read and raises soe good points.

OK.. here we are:

selected part of Tony Drons article:

Avoiding names here, there’s a fair chance this column will get printed without my having to spend hours with the company’s legal department. I fear that will come next month, as the editor has asked me to write aspecial article, looking in detail at what’s really happening with reproduction cars in historic motor sport.

When the FIA first put that idea forward, I must say I thought it was a gigantic leg-pull, April Fool’s Day or something. But no, they meant it, it has happened and we must all accept that fact and work out what to do about it. In the long run I have come to believe, against my earlier expectations, it may well prove to be no bad thing.

Let’s look at it this way: we all know about the hammer that had three new shafts and two replacement heads, yet remained the same hammer all along. It’s a bit like that with historic competition cars, except that here you have to imagine a whole row of hammers.

The first hammer is original in every way and looks perfect because it has hardly ever been used. Whatever you do, don’t use it. It looks perfect but the shaft has shrunk and there is hidden rust inside the head. Try hitting a nail and it might fly apart, with the risk of serious injury. Put it in a museum of hammers.

Hammer number two is also original but it has had regular light use with proper maintenance. It is perfect. We all want this beautiful hammer. The third hammer is our classic, the one that has had three new shafts and two new heads but remains the ‘original’ hammer. All right, it is fine.

Now we come to a completely new hammer, which has been made exactly like the first hammer was all those years ago. We used to disapprove of this hammer but are beginning to wonder whether we shouldn’t accept it, so long as it’s correctly constructed and we always know what it is.

Hammer number five is described as being exactly like the last one but it has been badly made. It’s scrap but can we spot that? The next hammer in our row looks exactly like the first hammer but it
is made of materials that did not exist when that first hammer was made. The shaft is lighter and stronger, the head harder and denser. It drives in nails like you wouldn’t believe, outperforming the original even when swung by an average DIY enthusiast. We worry about this hammer.

The final hammer began as an original, was destroyed in a bad accident and has been rebuilt exactly like the new hammer in our last paragraph. According to the paperwork, however, it is simply the original hammer.

for the full article:
http://www.classicandperformancecar....pril_2008.html
Michael King
63 Alpine SII - 65 Alpine SIVGT
65 Tiger MKI - 66 Tiger MKIA
Image

Red Race Tiger

Post by Red Race Tiger » Mon Dec 26, 2011 9:51 pm

Blimey, how many Hammers does one man need...... :?:


Micheal, Happy Chrismas, and seasons greetings etc.


But i really wish that you could just pull back a little from infuring that i "Need to read what's been writen" or that Bob doesn't "Get It" and "Need's" to listen. Iv'e read all the post's and find them all intresting.

None of us here on this forum has the authority to speak down or over another, we're all here to have a constructive debate about "Rebodying" "Reshelling" of an iconic classic in order to save it, and what constitutes "THE" car. Your view's are no more valid than mine or others i would have thought.

In my humble opinion (And it is purely that) an opinion a rusted hulk of a Tiger as in "The Worst Tiger" thread along with a rustfree Alpine and the Tiger's Vin Plate and documents has the potential if done correcly another 40+ years of life in it AS A TIGER


And regardless of what happened to my fathers car is irrelivant, my opinion would still be the same. In fact because of what happened to my fathers car should allow me to have an opinion i would have thought.

AHP 295B when raced by my father never carried a road registration as it was no longer road legal and pointless, when the car was destroyed and scrapped it was scrapped as that "a racing car" with no registration. So unless someone would have been lurking there in the bushes at that exact time of it's scrapping with a big crystal ball thinking "Hang On", that may just be AHP 295B the ex works rally car :?: No of couse not, it went to the razor blade maker as an unknown worthless pile.

In 1971 when the accident happened 295 had no great value even as an "Ex Works" car, for sure it was an Ex Works car along with all the other Ex Works car's up and down the pit lane, E type's, Healey's Midgets etc but it didn't have any great value. As modified car's "Modsports" and "Mod saloons" were very popular formula's throughtout the 60's>80's it provided a championship where these car's could race.

Only 20+ years later when Histroric FIA racing started to take off in a big way did 295B suddenly have a value (as either a race or rally car) and the spiteful scam began based on an old log book that my father still held onto all that time after, and was coned out of.

What remained of that car was worthless, more than worthless....it was never offered for sale or dissmantled for parts, it was simply scrapped. And that is exactly why i personally wasn't prepared to see anyone gain from my fathers misfortune.


So after all that, the point that iv'e been trying to get across and still is....

Surely it's the vin and documents that form the basis of "The Car" and not the "Body"

Remove the Vin Plate and Jal from the Body what have you got? an Unidentifiable body, Remove the valve covers what have you got? an engine without an ID
Change the gearbox, the gearbox number is no longer valid, same with the rear axle also....

If a Tiger retain's it's original paperwork (Logbook) Vin Plate, and has been rebodied to a recognised standard how can it be anything other than a Tiger by name.....although one clearly not built by Jenson we'd all agree.


I should write a book..... :lol:

Post Reply